1932-04-05

AGRICULTURE COMMITTEE

Mr. M. C. SENN (Haldimand):: I beg to move that the third report of the select standing committee on agriculture and colonization, presented to the house on April 1, 1932, be now concurred in. I also wish to present the evidence on which that report was based.


[Stage Direction]
Motion agreed to.

[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. CAMERON R. McINTOSH (North Battleford): I rise to a question of privilege in connection with a report in this morning s Ottawa Citizen and Journal, dealing with my speech yesterday on the amendment of Mr. Heenan to the motion of Mr. Guthrie, to go into committee of supply. There was much confusion in the house at the time and it was almost impossible to catch the words that were exchanged between members participating in the debate. To prove this the report as found in Hansard is different from the report in the papers mentioned. The statement I wish to deal with is "an exhibition of ignorance." May I say, Mr. Speaker, these words are not found in Hansard and are therefore not officially correct.

[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. ROBERT McKENZIE (Assiniboia):: I wish to direct a question to the Minister of Finance (Mr. Rhodes) or to the Prime Minister (Mr. Bennett), based upon a news item which appears in the Regina Leader-Post of Tuesday, March 29, in which the hon. member for Regina is reported to have announced to the Regina Conservative Association that the Dominion of Canada will shortly be floating another internal loan to meet increasing demands made on the treasury.

Bankruptcy Act
Is that statement based on fact, and, if so, when will an announcement foe made to the house? Further, what is the amount of the loan and the rate of interest?


Hon. E. N. RHODES (Minister of Finance) :: The matter in question has not been considered. If and when it is the house will be communicated with in due course, in accordance with prescribed form.


Robert McKenzie: Where did he get his information?


Some hon. MEMBERS:: Ask him.



BANKRUPTCY ACT AMENDMENT

[Stage Direction]
Hon. HUGH GUTHRIE (Minister of Justice) moved that the house go into committee to consider the following proposed resolution.
Resolved, that it is expedient to bring in a measure to amend the Bankruptcy Act, and to provide for the administration of the act by the Minister of Finance, and for the appointment of a superintendent of bankruptcy and the payment of his expenses from a percentage of the gross receipts out of the sale of any property of the debtor; and to provide for such assistants as may be required, and for the licensing of trustees and payment of fees therefor.
Motion agreed to and the house went into committee, Mr. Hanson (York-Sunbury) in the chair.
Mr. GUTHRIE:: The Bankruptcy Act, as it appears on the statute books of Canada today, was originally passed in this house in the session of 1921, and we have now had ten or eleven years' experience of the operation of that legislation. As the years have passed, many suggestions have been made in regard to amendments to the act in very many respects, and from time to time certain amendments have been made with the idea of improving the machinery which is available under the Bankruptcy Act in respect to the estates of insolvent persons. Recently the whole subject of our bankruptcy legislation was considered at a meeting of the Canadian Bar Association, and a committee of the members of that association, who are considered to be experts on the subject of our bankruptcy law, was appointed for the purpose of considering whether certain further amendments should not be made to render the act more workable and less expensive in its operation. I have had submitted to me a recommendation of the committee which was appointed by the Canadian Bar Association, and that association also submitted a draft bill on the subject. That report and the bill then submitted have been very fully investigated by
the law officers of the Department of Justice, and it was decided that it would be in the interests of the whole community if certain of the proposals contained in that report were adopted as amendments to the present Bankruptcy Act. The whole draft bill as submitted has not been adopted, but in addition to that various suggestions have come to the department from every province in Canada in regard to amendments to very many of the clauses of the present act. These suggestions have come from very responsible bodies: from wholesale dealers' associations, from retail dealers' associations, from some farmers' organizations, from chartered accountants, from lawyers, from judges, and, in fact, from almost all classes of our community. I shall have placed at the disposal of a committee which I will propose shortly a very large number of these suggestions in order that they may be fully considered, because a great many of them have not been included in the measure which has been drafted pursuant to the resolution now under discussion.
Briefly, may I state that the most important provision in connection with the present resolution is the one for the appointment of a superintendent in bankruptcy. It is by reason of that proposed amendment that the matter is now brought before the house by way of resolution. It will involve some charge on the public fund, and for that reason it has to be introduced into this parliament by means of resolution.
The proposal to appoint a superintendent in bankruptcy is a new departure. It has been considered by many associations, including the Canadian Bar Association's committee, and has been very seriously recommended. It is thought that we should have some controlling power attached to the Department of Finance, as proposed in the bill, in order that all the machinery involved in the Bankruptcy Act may come within the purview of a superintendent who will have full power to deal with the trustees who are appointed in various parts of the Dominion of Canada in regard to the winding up of insolvent estates. The chief complaint which is made against the present law is the expense attendant upon its operation. Complaints come in from time to time that in many cases there is nothing left for the creditors because of the expenses of winding up, that the fees paid to trustees, to lawyers and to inspectors eat up the whole available estate so there is nothing left for the creditors.
That is a situation, of course, which we should remedy if it is possible to do so, and
Bankruptcy Act

it has been considered that if someone had a commanding position in control of the whole machinery, having jurisdiction throughout the whole of Canada, much of the expense now involved in the winding up of estates might be done away with. I believe that proposal has been very well received in all the trading communities of Canada. This resolution mentions the appointment of a superintendent, and the bill will provide for the appointment of a superintendent with very wide powers.
It is my intention, if this resolution passes and the bill is introduced, to submit the bill to a special committee of this house-I would suggest a fairly large committee-in order that not only the proposals contained in the bill may be considered but that other proposals from responsible bodies, corporations and individuals in every part of Canada who have submitted proposed amendments, may be considered as well. I think the time has come when we should have a very full discussion of the question of amending the Bankruptcy Act, and if the bill is given second reading I will ask that it be referred to a special committee in order that these proposals may receive the fullest study and consideration and that an effective amending bill may be submitted to the house as a result. I submit the present bill more as a basis for discussion. The government is not wedded to all the proposals it contains, though we have gone over the bill very carefully and we think the proposals contained in it will considerably improve the present measure. It may be, however, that there are other amendments just as necessary as those we have suggested in the bill, and we will welcome those suggestions from any quarter whatever.


Mr. BOURASSA:: Would the minister
state if it is his intention also to submit to that committee Bill No. 36?


Hugh Guthrie: No, I had not thought
of doing that, but the proposal contained in Bill No. 36, which is a private bill and which has been on the order paper for some time, certainly can be submitted to the committee. That is one question that is almost sure to be brought up.


Joseph Henri Napoléon Bourassa: The committee will consider that?


Hugh Guthrie: Yes, it will have a free
hand.


Mr. LAPOINTE:: Would my hon. friend
indicate some of the reasons which operate in favour of the transfer of the administration

of the act from the Department of Justice to the Department of Finance?


Hugh Guthrie: That was the question that struck me in the first instance. This is really a financial matter; it has to do with the winding up of estates and the distribution of assets. It is not strictly a legal matter at all, and it was thought that if a superintendent were appointed he would occupy somewhat the same position as that occupied by the superintendent of insurance, for instance, who has charge of all the insurance over which the Dominion government has control, and who is an official of the Department of Finance. I believe this matter was thoroughly considered by the Canadian Bar Association committee, and they thought it would be appropriate to attach such an official, if one were appointed, to the Department of Finance rather than to the Department of Justice.


Ernest Lapointe: Mr. Chairman, it is
utterly impossible to discuss this matter until we have before us the bill which is to be introduced by my hon. friend, so I would suggest that the committee report the resolution, and that the discussion take place either on second reading or after the committee has considered the matter.
Resolution reported, read the second time and concurred in. Mr. Guthrie thereupon moved for leave to introduce Bill No. 41, to amend the Bankruptcy Act.
Motion agreed to and bill read the first time.


Mr. SPEAKER:: When shall said bill be
read the second time?


Hugh Guthrie: If it is agreeable to the house I would ask unanimous consent to have the bill read the second time now, in order to set up the committee and have the matter considered. Therefore I move that the bill be now read a second time.


Ernest Lapointe: In consenting we are not committing ourselves to the principle or to anything else.
Motion agreed to and bill read the second time.


Hugh Guthrie: Mr. Speaker, I now move that the bill be referred to a select committee of the house, to consist of seventeen members to be hereafter named, to consider and report upon this bill.


[Stage Direction]
Motion agreed to.

Canadian Currency-Mr. Coote

[Stage Direction]
Hon. E. N. RHODES (Minister of Finance) moved that the house go into committee of supply.
['I would ask the\nchairman to call item 201.\nTo provide for expenses connected with the administration of Indian affairs, including salaries, supplies, relief, medical attendance, hospitalization, dwellings, agricultural activities, surveys, roads, bridges, irrigation, dyking, education, etc., and a grant of $100,000 approved by parliament in the session of 1926-27, $3,873,000.\nItem stands.\nProgress reported.']
Mr. G. G. COOTE (Macleod):: Before you leave the chair, Mr. Speaker, there is a matter I should like to bring to your attention. I have been handed a copy of the Montreal Daily Star of March 1, in which there is an editorial headed "Bennett, the Vancouver Sun, and Money." In part the editorial states:
Mr. Coote, Progressive member for Macleod, deserves the thanks of the people of Canada for introducing his resolution calling for an inquiry into Canadian money because it elicited from the Prime Minister, not only a dear exposition of the character of money, but a very definite and emphatic assurance that his government proposes to keep Canadian money firmly founded on a gold basis.
In other respects Mr. Coote is not so much entitled to gratitude; for, while Mr. Bennett's analysis of the existing situation steadies public confidence in our money, Mr. Coote's figures and surmises tend to unsettle it.
This is not because Mr. Coote is right and Mr. Bennett wrong. It is wholly because money is a mysterious thing to most people, and they do not know for certain that rash figures flung out by glib theorists as well as visionary theories flung out by glib figures may be most misleading in their deductions.
I think the inference is that I have been quoting rash figures, but I want now to challenge the Star to show where my figures were wrong. Rash figures were flung out glibly enough in this debate, but not by me; they were used by the Prime Minister. Some of his figures were so far from the facts as to make one wonder whether he was really serious or knew what he was talking about on that occasion.


Mr. BENNETT:: Since the hon. gentleman has challenged the newspaper and I am here, while the newspaper representatives are not, will he be good enough to particularize?


George Gibson Coote: Yes, I shall particularize.
First of all, I should like to say that this speech was broadcast all over Canada through the newspapers, and as Will Rogers says, the people know only what they see in the papers. I hope the newspapers of Canada will be good enough to publish the correct figures. On the occasion of which I speak the Prime Minister was discussing the causes which led to the abandonment of the gold standard by Great Britain. I should like to refer to the remarks which he made then and, if I may, I shall be glad to quote his figures. He
stated that the great excess of imports over exports by Great Britain was responsible for forcing the old country off the gold standard, and he gave the figures. On page 647 of Hansard he is reported as saying:
I think if my hon. friend will now do me the honour of thinking for a moment as to what I said he will recall it was this: The great excess of imports over exports brought about the situation. Once more I come back to my illustration. England had continuously increased her imports and they were swelling up by hundreds of millions of pounds so that at one time they had reached the colossal figure in one week of two billion pounds more imports than exports-


Richard Bedford Bennett: The hon. gentleman
knows perfectly well, as does everyone of the public press, that the word "million" and not "billion" was meant. The Free Press, in referring to the fact, mentioned that it believed it was "million" that was meant, and I made the correction in Hansard.


George Gibson Coote: 
Richard Bedford Bennett: 
Pierre Édouard Blondin: Under the heading of
public bills and orders there is in the name of the hon. member who has been addressing the house a motion on the subject on which he is at present speaking. Under the rules prohibiting the anticipation of an item on the order paper he is not in order in endeavouring to discuss it on a motion to go into supply.


George Gibson Coote: Mr. Speaker, before you rule me out of order, may I say I am trying only

Canadian Currency-Mr. Coote
to correct some figures broadcast in the press. I am not attempting to renew the discussion on the resolution which is on the order paper.


Richard Bedford Bennett: 
George Gibson Coote: With all due deference, I did not raise a question of privilege. I thought on a motion to go into supply it was the privilege of every member to correct statements that are as far wrong as the figures in question. There are other figures which I think should be corrected, which were used in the same debate. Of course, if the Prime Minister wishes to prevent me from correcting those figures, I am in your hands, Mr. Speaker, as to whether I shall be permitted to proceed.


Pierre Édouard Blondin: It is true on a motion to go into supply the widest latitude is allowed in debate, but at the same time the rule is explicit that a subject on the order paper cannot be anticipated either in that or in any other way, and I would ask the hon. member to refrain from debating his resolution on the order paper until it is called.


George Gibson Coote: I am not attempting to debate that resolution; at the present time I am endeavouring simply to correct some figures which have been placed upon Hansard and from which I think a wrong inference has been drawn by certain people and is liable to be drawn iby others. I should like the opportunity to correct those figures. I always understood that a motion for supply was debatable on Mondays, Tuesdays and Wednesdays, so that any member who had a grievance could air it before the house, and that is all I am trying to do to-day. I shall be as brief as possible-


Hugh Guthrie: Mr. Speaker, have you made a ruling on this? If so, I think the hon. member should be asked to obey it.
I Mr. Coote.]


Pierre Édouard Blondin: I think the hon. member understood my ruling and in his continuing remarks he will not undertake to disobey it. The ruling was plain enough.


George Gibson Coote: All I say is that on that occasion the Prime Minister stated that the gold withdrawals from the Bank of England-


Hugh Guthrie: Order!


George Gibson Coote: -amounted in two days, Friday and Saturday, to ten billion pounds, which, of course, is more gold than there is in existence.


Hugh Guthrie: I should like to have this matter settled one way or the other. I submit the hon. member is in open defiance of your ruling, Mr. Speaker, and I ask that you enforce it.


George Gibson Coote: I would like simply, if I may, to correct those figures.


Hugh Guthrie: The hon. member has
done so half a dozen times.


George Gibson Coote: 
Hugh Guthrie: I would ask for your
ruling, Mr. Speaker.


Pierre Édouard Blondin: Would the hon. Minister
of Justice please state his point?


Hugh Guthrie: I make the point, Mr. Speaker, that you ruled that this subject was a discussion of a motion already on the order paper and that the hon. member was out of order. He is also quoting from a previous debate in this house this session, which makes him equally out of order; and the debate has not yet concluded.


Pierre Édouard Blondin: It is quite out of order
to refer to a previous debate in the same session on a different subject and I hope the hon. member will not transgress that rule. My ruling is that he cannot now discuss the resolution standing on the order paper in his name.


George Gibson Coote: I would be one of the last
men in this house, Mr. Speaker, to dispute your ruling, but I submit that I have not discussed the motion standing in my name. I have simply attempted to correct some figures which have been placed on Hansard and which appear in the Montreal Star of the

Supply-M iscellaneous
first of March. I think that is a privilege which should be accorded any hon. member on a motion to go into supply. I thank you, Mr. Speaker, for the opportunity for correcting those figures. I have not done it as completely as I should like to have done, but I do not wish to run the risk of even seeming to challenge your ruling, Mr. Speaker.
Motion agreed to and the house went into committee of supply, Mr. Hanson (York-Sun-bury) in the chair.


Richard Bedford Bennett: We propose to take the departments which were mentioned last evening before the adjournment of the house, and then to take up the departments which the right hon. gentleman stated they were prepared to discuss in detail. That is, we will call an item in each of the remaining departments, and then take up Mines, Interior, Immigration and Colonization, Pensions and National Health.


Mr. WOODSWORTH:: Mr. Chairman, at this end of the chamber we have no idea of the business that is being transacted.


Some hon. MEMBERS:: Come on up to this end.


An hon. MEMBER:: Join the Tories.


James Shaver Woodsworth: I would ask hon. members to bear in mind that there are some of us who are trying to follow the business of this house, and we cannot possibly do it.


Mr. MACKENZIE KING:: May f say to the Prime Minister before we proceed to take up an item in each department-


James Shaver Woodsworth: Mr. Chairman-
The	CHAIRMAN	(Mr.	Hanson,	York-
Sunbury): The leader of the opposition has the floor. What is the matter?


James Shaver Woodsworth: We do not know what is before the house at	all.
The	CHAIRMAN	(Mr.	Hanson,	York-
Sunbury): That is not my fault, it is yours.


James Shaver Woodsworth: Mr. Chairman, I do not think that we ought to submit to impudence from the Chairman.
The	CHAIRMAN	(Mr.	Hanson,	York-
Sunbury): I would ask the hon. member to take his seat.


James Shaver Woodsworth: Mr. Chairman-


The CHAIRMAN (Mr. Hanson, York-Sunbury):: The hon. gentleman will please take his seat. I would ask that the business of the house proceed, and that hon. members speak audibly, and that other hon. members preserve order so that other hon. members may hear what is going on.


William Lyon Mackenzie King: I imagine the reason my hon. friend (Mr. Woodsworth) was unable to decide what was before the house was that there was nothing before the house at the moment. The Prime Minister has indicated that it is the desire of the government to call an item in each of the departments.
I see no objection to that being done if it is going to facilitate the business of the house in permitting the government to take up on Thursday or Friday whatever particular department they may wish to take up. I should like to point out, however, to my right hon. friend that I assume the reason the rule calls for items of individual departments being taken up on the first three days of the week before they can be taken up on the other two days of the week is that it is only on the first three days of the week that there is an opportunity for bon. members, if they so desire, on going into committee of supply, to move an amendment. I assume that my right hon. friend has not in mind depriving the house in any way of its fullest opportunity to take up grievances or to move any amendment on going into supply. I do not think he has; if I thought he had I would oppose this particular course being adopted. However, I take it that his purpose is simply to facilitate the work of the government in taking up any department on a Thursday or a Friday. I imagine that other business will progress far enough to necessitate the taking up of supply on one or other of the first three days as well as on the last two of the week, so I imagine that our rights will be fully secured.


Richard Bedford Bennett: Mr. Chairman, the purpose of the motion was that we might be seized of all the estimates so that the convenience of members might be suited as to what departments would be considered on given days. So far as having any object in mind such as has been suggested for Mondays, Tuesdays and Wednesdays, it would mean that we would not go into supply at all on these days. It is hardly possible to conduct the business of the house and not go into supply.


Mr. STEWART (Edmonton):: Unless all departments had been called.
Supply-M iscellaneous


Richard Bedford Bennett: No, because on Mondays, Tuesdays and Wednesdays we still have to make the motion to get the Speaker out of the chair, and then the only two days left for supply would ibe Thursday and Friday. When I suggested last evening that we should do it as I now indicate, it was to bring all the departments before the committee, and I went further and said that the government would consider the convenience of hon. gentlemen opposite who might desire to consider particular departments on given days. This morning the secretary of the right hon. leader of the opposition telephoned to my office and said they would be ready to take up to-day Mines, Interior, Immigration, Pensions and National Health in the order named. I am simply saying at the moment that we will call an item in each of the remaining departments, if that is acceptable, in order that all the departments will be before the committee. Certainly there is no intention of depriving this house of the widest possible latitude in discussing the shortdoings and shortcomings of the administration, and I trust that when next a vote is recorded hon. gentlemen opposite may be able to muster more than twenty-six objecting to the conduct of the government.



[Stage Direction]
Hudson Bay railway and terminals; construction and betterments, including E. B. Jost at $2,250 (revote $630,000), $1,937,700.
, ^r.' POULIOT: May I ask the minister if .his item will be considered by the railways and shipping committee?
Mr. MANION:: No.
Mr, BEAUBIEN: Will there be plenty of opportunity to discuss this later on?


DEPARTMENT OF LABOUR
[Stage Direction]
Conciliation and Labour Act, $39,000.
Mr. HEENAN:: I presume the minister
is going to let this item stand. I should like to ask the Minister of Labour if it is the intention of the government at this session to bring in a bill to provide for unemployment insurance?
Mr. MoINTOSH: That is a poser.


Mr. GORDON:: We shall proceed to page


Peter Heenan: Just a minute; I do not
think the minister heard my question. I am asking whether the government is going to introduce a measure at this session providing for an unemployment insurance scheme for Canada?


Wesley Ashton Gordon: Mr. Chairman, the answer is no.


James Shaver Woodsworth: I should like to
ask the minister regarding an application for a conciliation board which has been made by the federation of civic employees of the city of Winnipeg. Would the minister tell us the situation in regard to that?


Wesley Ashton Gordon: I shall be very glad to
look into the matter. Of course I have not the details before me but at the earliest opportunity I shall give the hon. member the information he desires.


James Shaver Woodsworth: May we ask that
the item stand?


Richard Bedford Bennett: Surely.
Item stands.


DEPARTMENT OF IMMIGRATION AND COLONIZATION
Robert James Manion: Yes, we wish only to get
into the items. I shall be ready to give a complete statement when we return to this item. I was going to suggest that we pass on to another, and not consider the present one passed.
Item stands.


MINES AND GEOLOGICAL SURVEY
[Stage Direction]
For organization and equipment of the explosives division under the Explosives Act (Chap. 62, R.S. 1927), $10,000.
Mr. POULIOT:: I cannot say much about
this item, but we will show our good will by allowing the minister to proceed with it to-day.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.

Relief of distressed Canadians outside of Canada, $3,000.
Wesley Ashton Gordon: Mr. Chairman, this vote has been carried in the estimates for many years, and the money is used for the relief of Canadians outside of Canada who find themselves in distress. During the coming year I hope we will not have to use the whole of the sum voted.


Mr. SPENCER:: How was the amount
used last year?


Wesley Ashton Gordon: I have not the figures
before me, but if the hon. member wishes the vote to stand I will supply them.


Jean-François Pouliot: What is the exact meaning of the word "distressed" in the vote?

Supply-Immigration


Wesley Ashton Gordon: It is the condition a person is in when he is in the condition the hon. member is often in.


Jean-François Pouliot: Mr. Chairman, we have
here-


Some hon. MEMBERS:: Order.


Jean-François Pouliot: -a dumb Minister of
Labour-


Some hon. MEMBERS:: Order.


Jean-François Pouliot: -so much so that when-


William Lyon Mackenzie King: Mr. Chairman, I ask that order be maintained. The minister has made a remark which all hon. members have heard, and the committee is entitled to hear the reply.


Ernest Lapointe: The remark by the minister was most uncalled for.


Jean-François Pouliot: Mr. Chairman, I will speak very candidly. A man like tihe Minister of Labour, who gave us such an exhibition of humbug last week-


Some hon. MEMBERS:: Order.


Jean-François Pouliot: -could not answer a
pertinent question about white-collared unemployed asked by a member of parliament. I do not wish to lodge any personal attack against any 'hon. member in this house, but when I address a question to a minister, however big 'he might be, I think 'he should answer decently.


Some hon. MEMBERS:: Hear, hear.


Jean-François Pouliot: It is pretty hard to redress an old tree, but I will try out his education. I have succeeded in connection with some hon. members, and I will begin on him. People suffering in this country had hoped for unemployment relief from this man but he is good only for making bold replies to hon. members and showing his gross ignorance in the House of Commons of Canada. It is time to put a stop to that, and I think the Prime Minister should tell his colleague to go away, to leave the cabinet, so that he may be replaced by a decent man who knows something about the troubles of the people. He should be replaced by a working man, and not by one who sneers at the troubles and miseries of the unemployed. He should be replaced by a man who understands the sufferings of others, and who is ready to come to their rescue in a decent way, a man who uses decent language and has decent thoughts. Decent thoughts are expressed by decent language, but we cannot expect decent
language from a minister who answered so boldly my hon. friends from Shelburne-Yar-mouth (Mr. Ralston) and Rimouski (Sir Eugene Fiseit) and other hon. members on this side of the house who have tried to obtain from him an answer which might at least to some degree be intelligent. We are here, Mr. Chairman, to exercise our rights and privileges as members of parliament, and I do not mind what the dumb minister may say to me. He can tell me' that Jean Francois Pouliot is a crazy fellow, that he is too curious, but he cannot say that the member for Temiscouata county, in the province of Quebec

a county composed of fifty thousand souls and over twenty thousand electors-is not entitled to receive a courteous answer from any one on the treasury benches. If the minister's manners can be tolerated in the mining districts, if the miners there are to be treated discourteously by men of his calibre, I protest at any attempt to treat members of parliament in the same way. I say once for all-


Some hon. MEMBERS:: Oh, oh.


Jean-François Pouliot: I should like those members who are jeering at me to be just as independent as I am to speak their will freely instead of making such silly jokes when a man is upholding his own views, and also the views of the Canadian electorate, the views of those who are weak, the views of those who are in distress, because they are not properly taken care of. I have been sent here to exercise my rights and privileges as a member of parliament. I am afraid of no man. If the minister was as thin as a consumptive I would have some regard for him, but he is a big, stout, strong fellow, and I like to fight such men. If he were as big and solid as the rock of Gibraltar-and he has some of the characteristics of rock when he treats the troubles of the unemployed so unsympathetically-if his heart is as hard as the rock of Gibraltar, I warn him-and my words are definite and final-we will teach him manners, so that when he goes into the far north the miners will say: "Oh, well, he is a gentleman! What did you do to him, did you give him a shave, a hair-cut, a massage-7"


Some hon. MEMBERS:: Order.


Jean-François Pouliot: "-He has been polished
by His Majesty's loyal opposition in the House of Commons." That is all I have to say for the present, Mr. Chairman.


Olof Hanson: Carried.
Supply-Interior


Jean-François Pouliot: Before the item is carried I should like to have an explanation from the minister as to the meaning of the word "distress."


Ernest Lapointe: May I ask the minister what situation a man has to be in to take advantage of that vote? There is nothing so extraordinary in the question asked by the ion. member for Teaniscouata.


Wesley Ashton Gordon: If the hon. member would like to have particulars how this vote has been spent in the past I would ask that it stand so that I may get the information for him. I do not wish, Mr. Chairman, to complain too bitterly of the remarks made by the hon. member for Temiscouata (Mr. Pouliiot), which during this session have been directed towards myself without any provocation, because I think on all occasions I have endeavoured to give any member, irrespective of where he stands, all information that may have been asked for. However, it has been implied that at times I suffered in silence while such remarks were directed towards me. I thought when the hon. member asked for the definition of the word "distress" he did so facetiously-if I may go that far without again arousing his wrath. I should be very regretful indeed if he took my reply as being anything more than an indulgence in the repartee in which he is so skilful himself.


Jean-François Pouliot: That is all right; the
thing is over now.


Peter Heenan: Is the government actively engaged with any other bodies in bringing young boys and men to Canada at the present time?


Wesley Ashton Gordon: I presume the hon. member will have an opportunity to discuss that subject on some other item, but if the committee prefer that I make the answer now I shall be quite willing to do so.


Olof Hanson: Shall item 58 carry?


Some hon. MEMBERS:: Stand.


Some hon. MEMBERS:: Carried.


Olof Hanson: Item 58 stands.


DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
[Stage Direction]
Scientific institutions - expenses connected with the Dominion observatory at Ottawa, $50,000.
Expenses connected with the Dominion astrophysical observatory at Victoria. B.C., $20,600.
[The Chairman.]
Charles A. Stewart: Would the
minister explain the decrease?


Hon. T. G. MURPHY (Minister of the Interior):: There have been the following
reductions: Salaries, 815,362; astrophysical and geophysical research, $450; general scientific maintenance, $880; general expenses, $188; total, $16,880.


Charles A. Stewart: That includes the ten per cent contribution; there is no reduction of the staff?


Thomas Gerow Murphy: The reduction has been
made on the basis of the present staff, eliminating seasonal and vacant positions, deleting statutory increases, and reducing all salaries by ten per cent.


Mr. DUFF:: Stands.


Richard Bedford Bennett: Do you want it to stand? There is nothing in it.


Mr. VENIOT:: All items involving salary
reductions are to stand.


Richard Bedford Bennett: That was dealt with in
the bill last night when it was given second reading.


Charles A. Stewart: I am not
asking that it stand.


Olof Hanson: Carried.


Thomas Gerow Murphy: I have not yet completed my answer, Mr. Chairman, to the hon. member's question. I should have added: Also providing for the following changes in staff- char service, to be provided by the Department of Public Works; watchman, to be replaced by a constable from the Royal Canadian Mounted Police; one-half the salary of W. A. Dyer, junior electrical engineer, to be paid by the Department of Public Works; W. E. Jacques, astronomer, his salary to be transferred to the branch vote. That does not mean a reduction. The following are to be retired as from April 1: C. R. Westland, astronomer, grade 2; W. E. Jacques, astronomer, grade 3; G. P. Hatton, assistant, grade 1, and A; W. Grant, head clerk. These men whose names I have read have received notice of their retirement but the actual separation from the service has not occurred, and it may be that in further reorganization other changes may be made. This is not to be taken as a final readjustment.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.

Supply-Mines Branch
Mines branch, for investigation of mineral resources and deposits; of the mining and metallurgical industries, and of mineral technology; wages, expenses of testing and research laboratories, investigations by Dominion Fuel Board, including salaries and all other expenses, $238,500.
Charles A. Stewart: Will the minister give us a brief outline of the changes in staff that bring about the reduction?


Wesley Ashton Gordon: The reduction is made up partly of the ten per cent reduction and partly of the lesser amount being purchased in the way of supplies and things of that character which we think we can get along without during this year.


Peter Heenan: Are there any men who are not on the permanent staff but are on t'hc prevailing rate of wages who are covered by this item?


Wesley Ashton Gordon: Yes, there are some.


Peter Heenan: When the Minister of Finance was discussing his resolution some time ago it was pointed out to him that there were some prevailing rate men on the canals who had already had a reduction in wages, and I gathered from him that when his bill was in committee he might take those men into consideration. I am wondering what effect it will have if some of these men whom we are now dealing with in this item have already had a reduction in wages, and if it is proposed now that they shall suffer a further ten per cent reduction.


Wesley Ashton Gordon: There has been no reduction prior to this; this is the only one.


Mr. MACKENZIE (Vancouver):: Is any assistance being provided for gold mining under this particular vote?


Wesley Ashton Gordon: There is no direct monetary assistance but there is the usual assistance by way of investigation which is carried on in the mines laboratory.


Charles A. Stewart: There is a reduction in this vote of $61,500, which is rather a respectable amount. Is it intended to reduce the staff there as well? Then ten per cent mentioned by the minister would not account for this $61,000.


Wesley Ashton Gordon: There are altogether about ninety employees, fifty being on prevailing rates, and the reduction in salaries there, together with the saving made in the purchase of supplies, accounts entirely for the total reduction.


Charles A. Stewart: There is no intention to reduce the activities of the Fuel Board?


Wesley Ashton Gordon: No.


Peter Heenan: Do any of these men who are on prevailing rates earn less than $1,200 a year?


Wesley Ashton Gordon: This applies in its entirety to the labourers whose rate of pay was 50 cents an hour, less ten per cent.


Peter Heenan: If there are any men on prevailing rates who are earning less than $1,200 a year-and I assume there are-then unless t'he five per cent reduction which is to apply to the permanent service applies to them also it will not be in keeping with what apparently the minister has in mind at present. In other words, the permanent civil servants earning less than $1,200 are now being reduced, practically speaking, by five per cent instead of ten per -cent, whereas, the -men on prevailing rates who are probably earning much less than $1,200 will be getting a ten per cent cut. I was wondering whether the minister would consider this point. These men ought not to be given the full ten per cent reduction but should be reduced in line with those earning less than $1,200 in the permanent service.


Wesley Ashton Gordon: I shall be glad to look into the matter when the act is -being applied, although the hon. gentleman will note that the prevailing rate has been established at 50 cents an hour, which probably is more than the actually -prevailing rate. I am not complaining about that, however. I shall look into the question.


Mr. CAYLEY:: At first glance this would appear to be a neglect of the great mining industry,, because there is a reduction of $61,500 for investigation of mineral resources, deposits, and so on, and other kindred activities. I should like the minister to tell us whether this is the purpose, or whether we have been spending too much in previous years. Will he promise to give this matter further attention and provide some further encouragement later on? It seems to me a poor policy indeed to neglect this great mining industry which every year has grown to greater and greater proportions.


Wesley Ashton Gordon: I have been personally
interested in the Mines department for many years, and any curtailment of the activities of that branch would receive my very reluctant consent. But in this connection I do not think
Supply-Mines Branch

we need fear that the activities of the department will be interfered with in any way. The natural resources have been all turned over to the provinces, and of necessity that transfer included some of the activities formerly carried on in the Mines department. I have gone into the question of the operation of the department with the heads of the various branches, and I can assure the hon. member that the mining industry will not suffer by reason of what at first glance would seem to be a substantial reduction.


Thomas Merritt Cayley: What branch of the mining industry is under the control of the federal department? If we have no control in the provinces where is our activity carried on?


Wesley Ashton Gordon: The federal department
of mines at no time exercised control over the mining industry in the various provinces, but for many years, either through the Geological Survey, or, by itself, the department has exercised a sort of jurisdiction over mining in general, by way of advice and research, either alone or in cooperation with those provinces having mining departments of their own. The mines branch is the only place in Canada where research work, such as they carry on, can be accomplished; none of the provinces have the equipment or men trained and equipped to carry on these investigations. For instance, any mine in any province having a problem can request the assistance of the mines branch and can obtain the benefit of their experience and advice in dealing with a metallurgical or other problem.


Thomas Merritt Cayley: Where is this research work carried on, here in Ottawa?


Wesley Ashton Gordon: Yes.


Thomas Merritt Cayley: Could the minister say
what results have been obtained from the tests which have been made with regard to the coal deposits in northern Ontario?


Wesley Ashton Gordon: Investigations have been
carried on in connection with the northern Ontario lignite field. These investigations and tests are still proceeding, and I am advised that there has been no certain conclusion drawn as to the possible commercial value of these deposits, or as to whether they may serve any certain locality in the near vicinity. I presume that information will come only when the tests have been completed.


Charles A. Stewart: I presume
the laboratories are not as busy as they were formerly, but I should like to ask the min-

ister if he thinks he will have sufficient funds to meet all the demands for investigations and tests in connection with minerals generally, now that he has very well equipped laboratories for the purpose.


Wesley Ashton Gordon: I know the hon. member,
who was formerly Minister of Mines, takes a deep interest in this subject, and I can assure him that the vote will take care of any investigations that may be reasonably expected. One reason why the vote remains about the same, or is slightly reduced, while the laboratories are capable of taking care of the greater activity of the mining industry, is the excellence of the laboratories themselves, which were started some years ago and which were brought up-to-date quite recently. I can assure the hon. member that the laboratories are probably as good as will be found on this continent.


Mr. NEILL:: Would the minister be kind
enough to advise the committee whether any investigations were made by the fuel board during the past year, or whether any are in contemplation for the coming year, in connection with extending the experiments which were made in order to demonstrate the economic possibilities of pulverized coal? I recall that the late government installed a pulverized coal unit in the furnaces which heat this building. Last spring I inspected that unit, and from my conversation with the employees I gathered that it had been very successful both in reducing the amount of fuel used and in the saving of money. There was a good opportunity for comparison because some of the units used ordinary coal which was shovelled in by hand.
The third point on which I would like information is this: Having gone to considerable expense to demonstrate the usefulness of that system, the minister might give it more publicity by publishing a pamphlet which would be available to the trade generally, because after all, while a good purpose was served by demonstrating the commercial possibilities of this system, it must be given publicity in order to encourage people to install these pulverized coal units, which will help to provide a market for our coal.


Wesley Ashton Gordon: At the request of the
British Columbia government quite elaborate tests were made in connection with pulverized fuel, and a report was prepared and forwarded to the British Columbia government. I have looked over the report but I frankly confess that it is so highly technical that I was unable to follow it beyond the narrative descriptions it contained. The results were not

Supply-Mines Branch
altogether disappointing, but they were not as hopeful as they might have been with respect to the coal sent here for test. I assume that the British Columbia government will publish the report if they believe the tests show that the use of that sort of coal is practicable. I do not believe the department has under consideration, and certainly the officials have not discussed the matter with me, the publication of the report here.


Alan Webster Neill: That was not quite what I
had in mind. I am aware of that exceedingly technical report which I think no one but a highly trained engineer could understand. That report was sent to the British Columbia government, and I understand they forwarded it to the various mine owners who had furnished the coal, so that if they wished they could make use of the information obtained. That report had more to do with the heat units, the amount of moisture and matters of that kind. What I had in mind was the demonstration which the department put into effect in the plant by which these buildings are heated, where they installed a pulverized coal unit whereby the fuel is pulverized and fed to the boiler in the usual pulverized coal method which I think is called the screw method. The results were highly satisfactory. While I obtained them personally, so to speak, I was not able to give them that publicity which I think they deserve. It was a practical demonstration, which was very important to people interested and which should have been made public throughout Canada, that it was highly successful to use pulverized coal in a heating unit of that description. If the minister would authorize the preparation of a brief pamphlet giving information such as I obtained from that demonstration, it would not cost very much; it would be very interesting; no doubt the press would publish it and it would be of great benefit to the coal industry as a whole. That is what I had in mind.


Wesley Ashton Gordon: I believe that was a test
made here for the Department of Public Works.


Alan Webster Neill: And it is still in operation.


Wesley Ashton Gordon: Yes. I would be glad
to take up the question of putting the result in pamphlet form for the benefit of others who want to use that type of fuel.


Charles A. Stewart: In the item for publications I notice a reduction of $25,000. Can the department afford to make this reduction? When I was in the depart-11761-108
ment we found at the end of the year we were invariably short of reports and had to increase the amount in order to meet the demand. Has the demand fallen off?


Wesley Ashton Gordon: Last year we recovered
part of the deficit that had accumulated in previous years. I am well aware of the difficulty that my predecessor had in procuring money for this vote. Hon. members sometimes do not realize the importance of it; I know I do, but I believe this appropriation will be sufficient for this year. Some of the publications that are not so important, I admit with some reluctance, will have to be held back until next year, but those reports which are very important to the mineral industry will be taken care of under this appropriation.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Dominion of Canada assay office-for maintenance of assay office, Vancouver, B.C., $16,000.
Ian Alistair Mackenzie: What are the details of the reduction in the amount for the Vancouver assay office?


Wesley Ashton Gordon: The Vancouver assay office, in case some hon. members are not familiar with its history, was established some years ago, in fact after the opening up of the Yukon, for the purpose of being able to purchase at Vancouver, Yukon and coast gold, thereby keeping the gold in Vancouver instead of having it shipped to Seattle. Beginning late last year, I think, the larger depositors, the mines up on the coast like the Pioneer and the Premier, found it more convenient to ship their gold to the Mint. I am not just sure by what method these shipments would be made, but they would be either by registered mail or more probably by express. At any rate, I inquired as to the reason for the falling off in the work of the assay office. There was no necessity for making four assay tests of shipments and in this way the expense was greatly reduced because each assay is expensive. That accounts in the main for the difference in cost.


Mr. REID:: Is a charge made for any assaying done?


Wesley Ashton Gordon: Yes; it is a very nominal charge. It is covered by an old order in council and it has always been handled in that way. The assay office, I may say, does not lose very much, but it does not break even. It exists for the convenience of the small operator.

Supply-Geological Survey


Thomas Merritt Cayley: Where is the gold now produced in Canada marketed? Is it marketed only in Ottawa?


Wesley Ashton Gordon: I am afraid I shall have to refer the member to the Minister of Finance. The gold, of course, comes from the Canadian gold mines to the Canadian Mint. I am afraid I am unable to give the hon. member the information he desires as to what occurs after it reaches there.	[DOT]


Ian Alistair Mackenzie: It all comes here?


Wesley Ashton Gordon: Yes.


Ian Alistair Mackenzie: Is any special ipremium given now for gold production?


Wesley Ashton Gordon: If the hon. member means the difference in exchange, I think he will agree with me the word "premium" is a misnomer with respect to that. The same practice is being followed as was inaugurated when the licence system in connection with the export of gold was adopted, namely, the three day average.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.	[DOT]
Geological Survey-For explorations, surveys and investigations, wages of explorers, topographers and others, $142,500.
For publication of English and French $42 000* °f reports' map8>
illustrations, etc.,
For maintenance of offices and museum, expenses of special exhibitions pertaining to natural resources, purchase of instruments, chemicals, books of reference, miscellaneous assistance and contingencies, $42,500.
For museum equipment, $8,000.
®oS>ormPurcbase of specimens, $1,000.-Total, $230,000.
Charles A. Stewart: I see a reduction of $47,500 under the item of explorations, surveys and investigations, wages of explorers, topographers and others. Does that mean that certain of the parties will be cut down this year?


Wesley Ashton Gordon: Yes, the parties will be cut down this year. That again I recommended with a good deal of reluctance, but I think with the rearrangement in the field, the projects of the Geological Survey will not be seriously interfered with. The officials of the department have, I believe, rearranged the survey parties in such a way that the mining industry will be served, I admit not as well as it might otherwise have been, but for this year I think there is a justification for cutting down the survey parties.


Charles A. Stewart: How many parties is my hon. friend sending into the Northwest Territories?


Wesley Ashton Gordon: I presume the hon. member has reference mainly to Great Bear lake?


Charles A. Stewart: Yes.


Wesley Ashton Gordon: Six. So that I may not be misunderstood when I say the Great Bear Lake district, that would cover Dismal lake, Coppermine and East and West.


Charles A. Stewart: I frankly confess I do not like to see that reduction in the item for the publication of English and French editions of reports, maps, illustrations and so forth, I know there is a tremendous demand for that sort of thing. I question very much whether the minister can meet the demand if this appropriation is reduced by $28,000 which is rather a substantial reduction in an item of that nature.


Wesley Ashton Gordon: I cannot agree with what the hon. member has said. I recognize that the department will have to look after every dollar, and to cover the requirements we may have to mimeograph some of the reports in order to make them available to the industry. The money is simply not available this year, and we have to do the best we can.


William Lyon Mackenzie King: Good training for the whole lot.


Charles A. Stewart: This is, after all, a species of advertising. The mines branch of the federal government is engaged chiefly in research and in mapping the results of the geological parties that go out. I know how important a work it is, and in the past I have had some little controversy with my leader in order to squeeze a little more money out of the government than they were sometimes prepared to give me. I know that every dollar voted for this purpose was used up, and frequently we were unable to meet the demand for maps and publications from parties interested, from people who were going to invest money in the mining enterprises of Canada. That is the reason I lodge this protest now. I think it is false economy to cut this vote because, after all, this is the method by which the activities of the department are brought to the knowledge of the public, who thereby become interested in the mineral possibilities of Canada.


Thomas Merritt Cayley: There is an item for purchase of specimens; what are those specimens?

Supply-Geological Survey


Wesley Ashton Gordon: That vote is provided for the purchase of mineral specimens, unique specimens of ores for museums, an educational exhibit for those interested in the mineral industry.


Thomas Merritt Cayley: Is it possible to -get collections of these specimens from the department?


Wesley Ashton Gordon: We have departmental publications giving details of the contents of the cabinets of mineral specimens, and the price of the cabinet. These cabinets are sold to various public institutions for the purpose of disclosing the mineral resources of Canada The cabinets are accompanied by an index showing where the mineral samples were found and what they are. The cabinets are provided at a cost of about $35 or $40 for the most expensive.


Thomas Merritt Cayley: Containing about how many specimens?


Wesley Ashton Gordon: Over 140.


Thomas Merritt Cayley: All named and classified?


Wesley Ashton Gordon: Yes. Before I resume my seat may I say with respect to publications that last year we were able to overtake some, in fact almost all, of the delayed publications. While there may be a few publications that may be delayed this year by reason of the lack of money, I feel certain that by getting out some cheaper publications for the time being and dropping probably some of the more expensive maps and pictures of rocks and occurrences, we shall be able to get through this year without the industry suffering.


Mr. ELLIOTT:: What organization does the work of geting out these publications?


Wesley Ashton Gordon: The material for the mines publications is prepared in the mines branch by the engineers, mineralogists and chemists and others interested in the subject in hand. So far as the geological survey publications are concerned, the material is the result of the work of the exploratory parties that go out each year into known areas. When they come in with their field books the data is reviewed and ultimately the material appears in the publications.


John Campbell Elliott: But what organization does the actual printing?


Wesley Ashton Gordon: The printing of all these
reports is done at the printing bureau.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
41761-108J
Mines - salaries, $541,224; contingencies, $15,000.
William Lyon Mackenzie King: Mr. Chairman, I do not want to object to the passing of this item, but there may be some members of the house who may be under the impression that the salary items will not be touched at this stage, and perhaps the item should stand.


Wesley Ashton Gordon: I am quite agreeable to that.
Item stands.
Grant to the Imperial Institute, $9,733.33.


Ian Alistair Mackenzie: Would
the minister explain this item?


Wesley Ashton Gordon: This is a yearly grant
made to the Imperial Institute under an agreement with the British government. It followed as a result of the Imperial conference of 1923. Great Britain and a number of the dominions make a contribution to this institute.


Mr. IRVINE:: Would the minister say
what the institute does?


Wesley Ashton Gordon: It carries on the work of
investigation of the minerals of the empire, gathering and coordinating and disclosing to all units of the empire information as to the minerals found in different parts of the empire.


Mr. CASGRAIN:: Have there been any
benefits to Canada from this expenditure?


Wesley Ashton Gordon: I cannot answer that
categorically. It is an investigation which in my view is highly important. The boundaries of no country are run according to the minerals enclosed within it, and I think the Imperial Institute is doing a highly important work in letting all parts of the empire know where within the empire they can get the minerals which they have not within their own borders.


Charles A. Stewart: It is doing
a very fine work.


Wesley Ashton Gordon: That is my view.


Joseph Philippe Baby Casgrain: It is a lot of money
to spend if we are not getting any benefit.


Thomas Merritt Cayley: Does each dominion vote
a specific sum for this purpose?


Wesley Ashton Gordon: Yes. Those who subscribed varying amounts in the year 1923, when the agreement was reached were the Imperial government, the Canadian government, the Australian government, the Indian
Supply-Geological Survey

government and the governments of other parts of the empire. If hon. members do not agree that it is a worthy cause, I am afraid we are bound to go ahead, anyway.


Thomas Merritt Cayley: What is the total amount
under the agreement?


Wesley Ashton Gordon: 
Thomas Merritt Cayley: Those collections are kept in London, England?


Wesley Ashton Gordon: Yes, they are forwarded
to London, England, so that the work may be carried on.


Thomas Merritt Cayley: To Canada House?


Wesley Ashton Gordon: To the Imperial Institute
building in London. I am afraid I do not know the exact location of it.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
To provide for payments in connection with movements of coal under conditions prescribed by the governor in council and for the cost of administration thereof, $1,100,000.
Charles A. Stewart: I notice
that this year there is a considerable reduction in that item. Where does the minister purpose to curtail the expenditure? We understand of course that this money is spent for subventions for moving coal.


Wesley Ashton Gordon: As a result of the falling
off in the consumption of coal throughout Canada-and I presume the same applies to the United States and other countries-the Dominion Fuel Board have come to the conclusion they will not require any more money than named in this vote.


Charles A. Stewart: There is no reduction in the subventions?


Wesley Ashton Gordon: No, there is an increase.


Charles A. Stewart: The subventions are identical with those of last year, both east and west?


Wesley Ashton Gordon: Yes.


Mr. GARDINER:: How much of the vote was used last year?


Wesley Ashton Gordon: I do not appear to have the total amount before me, but I will be very pleased to supply the information to the hon. member.


Robert Gardiner: Has the minister the
different services for which the amounts were spent? Are they under separate headings?


Wesley Ashton Gordon: I have the figures for nine months of the last fiscal year. Alberta coal to Ontario cost $50,247.48; Alberta and Crows-nest pass coal to Manitoba, and to some extent to western Ontario, cost $211,764.80; Saskatchewan coal to Manitoba and western Ontario cost $26,943.70; British Columbia export and bunker coal cost $17,795; rail and water borne coal from Nova Scotia to Ontario and Quebec cost $96,208.60. Then, all rail coal from Nova Scotia, including a small portion from New Brunswick, cost $140,000.


Charles A. Stewart: What is the last item?


Wesley Ashton Gordon: The amount was $96,208.60. New Brunswick coal moved for the three years from 1928 to 1930 inclusive amounted to only 595 tons, a comparatively small amount.


Charles A. Stewart: The minister mentioned the sum of $140,000. Was that straight movement by rail from Nova Scotia?


Wesley Ashton Gordon: I think the hon. member
is referring to the all rail movement from Nova Scotia.


Charles A. Stewart: Yes.


Wesley Ashton Gordon: The sum of $140,000 is
not quite accurate. That estimate is made, because the figures were not in when the information was prepared for me.


Peter Heenan: It strikes me that the reduction mentioned by the minister is not encouraging to the miners; it would seem that the government is anticipating less business in the coming year than there was in the last. True, the minister has said the fuel board has come to the conclusion that a smaller quantity of coal will be moved in the coming year. In view of that, and in view of the promises made by the Prime Minister during the election campaign of 1930 to the effect that he would bring into operation a national fuel policy which would increase the sale and the use of Canadian coal, I must say there is a very poor outlook. This year in the discussion of estimates we hear the government say that they do not anticipate as much coal will be sold during the coming year as in the last. I was wondering if the minister could tell us whether or not the government has a national fuel policy which will give some encouragement to the miners.


Wesley Ashton Gordon: This item is not reduced
because the government anticipates the use of less coal during the coming year than was used in the last, but because of the experience gained from our operations last year. The

Supply-Geological Survey
movement of coal east and west from the Canadian fields into the central part of Canada is something of a very difficult and intricate nature. Anyone who has given the matter consideration-and I presume the hon. member has-is familiar with that fact. It is not because we do not anticipate using more coal next year than we did last that this item is reduced, but because of the experience gained last year after the subventions were increased. We found last year that we did not need the appropriation we anticipated we would need. I can say however that the use of Canadian coal is increasing. The western coal operators, after the adjustment had been made early in 1931, fully anticipated they would be able to displace foreign fuels in their natural market, which of course, extends as far east as Manitoba. Their anticipations were in large measure realized. But in common with all of us, they did not anticipate the falling off that took place in the consumption of coal. With the added assistance by way of subvention, if the normal consumption had taken place, the western coal operators and the miners would not be facing their present difficulties. That is the problem presently under discussion. It applies with almost equal force to Nova Scotia. The problem, I assume, confronted my predecessor as it confronts me to-day, of getting coal as far as the central zone in order that nobody shall bear a greater burden than he should be called upon to bear with respect to the marketing of our coal. The whole subject is again under review in the light of present conditions, and I hope we shall be able to find a solution to enable our coal mines to carry on until the consumption of coal becomes normal again.


John Campbell Elliott: Did the minister give the total amount expended under this item last year?	.


Wesley Ashton Gordon: No, the figures I quoted were to the end of December last year. The figures from December onward I have not before me, but if any hon. member would like those figures I shall be glad to make them available as soon as I get them.


John Campbell Elliott: I take it that the figures given relate to the amount expended on the actual moving of coal up to December 31?


Wesley Ashton Gordon: So far as the Dominion government is concerned, the subvention, but not the total cost of the movement.


John Campbell Elliott: Quite so. That was $628,000 approximately?


Wesley Ashton Gordon: That is approximately
correct. It is an estimate and may be subject to some slight revision. I shall be very glad to have the statement audited and compared and furnish the hon. member with a copy.


John Campbell Elliott: What other items make up the expenditure?


Wesley Ashton Gordon: It will be noticed that the figures I read from this compilation cover just the nine-month period. To complete the statement the figures for the winter period from December until the end of this fiscal year would have to be added. Those figures I have not got, but if they were added to those I have given they would disclose that the amount asked for now probably will about meet the requirements.


John Campbell Elliott: All the $628,000 was expended up to December 31?


Wesley Ashton Gordon: There is one large item estimated, but the other figures are accurate.


Peter Heenan: In view of the fact that there is a strike in progress in the Alberta coal fields, may I ask if the minister is making any effort to bring the conflicting parties together?


Wesley Ashton Gordon: Just so soon as I heard of the impending labour trouble in some of the mines of southern Alberta and the Crowsnest pas I got in touch with the premier of Alberta and asked him to keep me advised as to what was going on. I assured him that the services of the federal Labour department were at his disposal, and that we would gladly cooperate with him to have the dispute amicably adjusted. A number of communications have passed between the premier of Alberta and myself, and as late as yesterday I wired him with respect to a suggestion that he had made a week or ten days ago for the appointment of a commission to study the coal industry generally in his province. With that suggestion I have no quarrel; his judgment may be the best in that regard. I can assure the hon. member that I am keeping in close touch with the situation, and that the department is quite willing and ready to offer its services in order to bring about an amicable arrangement.


Mr. YOUNG:: The minister told us that $628,000 was paid on account of this subvention. How many tons of coal was that paid on?


Wesley Ashton Gordon: I have not added up the figures, and I trust I shall not be held too strictly to account if they are not absolutely
171S
Supply-Geological Survey

accurate. These are the figures for the nine months to t'he end of 1931: Alberta to Ontario 22,634 tons; Alberta and British Columbia- that is Crowsnest .pass-to Manitoba and western Ontario, 180,248 tons; Saskatchewan to Manitoba and western Ontario, 60,221 tons; British Columbia, export and bunker coal, 53,561 tons; Nova Scotia and New Brunswick to Quebec and Ontario by rail and water, 332,159 tons; all rail-this is an estimate-
95,000	tons. If I might revert to the question asked by the hon. member for Edmonton (Mr. Stewart) the estimated item was $140,000. Those figures will give the amount of coal moved under the subvention.


Edward James Young: That makes less than
1,000,000 tons, and a portion of that coal would be moved anyway. How much of it is new business to Canadian mines?


Wesley Ashton Gordon: I have not those figures before me, but as regards the territory served I think I should be safe in saying that all coal moved into western Ontario would be new business for the mines.


Edward James Young: That would be 180,000 tons.


Wesley Ashton Gordon: I know that in the Manitoba market the western mines have captured the major portion of the trade. I do not want to be extravagant in my figures, but I should say they have now eighty per cent of that market.


Charles A. Stewart: When the
subsidy was increased it was estimated that the mountain mines in British Columbia and Alberta would supply 200,000 tons which came in from the United States to the Winnipeg market and as far west as Portage. I do not know whether that hope has been realized. I am referring to bituminous coal.


Edward James Young: What I wish to find out is what this policy is costing us. As nearly as I can gather from the minister's statement, we have displaced a quarter of a million tons }f American coal at a cost of two-thirds of i million dollars. That involves the loss of a jertain amount of revenue which was derived from the coal that came in from the United States. How much is that?


Wesley Ashton Gordon: I have not the figures.


Edward James Young: There are several things which it is necessary for us to know before we can arrive at a conclusion, and I suggest that the item be allowed to stand until the minister can tell us how much we have paid out in subventions, how much new business has been brought to Canadian mines, how many men 
have been employed, what wages they have received, what revenue we have lost through the non-importation of American coal, together with all other factors that might help to throw some light on the question. We want to know definitely what the policy is costing us.


Mr. RALSTON:: What rates of subvention are used in estimating the amount that will be necessary for next year? I have endeavoured to look up the rates but I have not had an opportunity to verify them. As I recollect however, last year there was a two dollar maximum on all coal railed from Nova Scotia to Montreal. There was a two dollar maximum contribution to Montreal, and the forwarding rate into Quebec points was one-fifth of a cent per ton mile with a maximum of seventy-five cents, and a one-third cent ton mile with a maximum of $1.50 into Ontario. Is there any increase in these rates of subvention included in the amount for which the minister is now asking the committee?


Wesley Ashton Gordon: No; these estimates are based on the subventions as indicated by the hon. member.


James Layton Ralston: 
Wesley Ashton Gordon: The plight in which the
miners of Nova Scotia at present find themselves, through various contributing causes and factors, with which I have no doubt the hon. member is conversant, was brought to the attention of the government by the premier of that province. The seriousness of the situation would impress itself upon anybody, and the matter was immediately taken into consideration. The railways and large consumers of American coal were interviewed, and others were interviewed without delay in an endeavour to find additional markets for Nova Scotia coal in order to relieve the situation of the miners there. I think I can safely say to the hon. member that the negotiations will very shortly, in fact I hope within the course of a very few days, come to a successful conclusion. The matter is under the careful consideration of the government, who are acting in harmony with the railroads and keeping in touch with those interested in Nova Scotia, and we hope that these newspaper reports will be fully justified in fact. That is my hope, and I believe that the hon. member will join with me in that hope.


James Layton Ralston: I can assure the hon.
gentleman that I most heartily join him in that hope, but I want facts on which to base the hope. I understand my hon. friend to say that so far as subventions are concerned there is no increase proposed in the vote here which would justify the hope that any more coal will be moved under these subventions. Is that so or not?


Wesley Ashton Gordon: That is quite true; this
vote does not take care of extra subventions
If, however, arrangements can be made to find a market for the coal, and if the government feels that it is wise and desirable to see that the coal is moved into the consuming market-and I think my hon. friend will agree with me that the government will do everything in its power to have this done -then ways and means can be found to bring about that end.


James Layton Ralston: The market is there. The railways will use the coal; there is no doubt about that: the railways will be a market for the coal. The question is to get sufficient subvention to induce the railways to take it.


Wesley Ashton Gordon: How much subvention
would the hon. gentleman suggest would be necessary for the railways to use an extra million tons of coal?


James Layton Ralston: I should think my hon.
friend would know that better than I would; he has the benefit of the assistance of the fuel board, which is doing the figuring. I say the railways provide a very substantial market; I know they will not use one million tons, but apparently my hon. friend has adopted that figure. Then I ask him what markets he proposes to utilize in order to reach that figure, because I want to impress upon him that it is no use to provide for one million tons on the one hand and take away half a million tons on the other because of the falling off in consumption. The Nova Scotia coal fields need to sell a million tons more, and that cannot be done if on one hand you provide for a million tons and, on the other, you have to meet a falling off in consumption.
I want to ask my hon. friend, who says that the government is exploring the matter now, what markets he expects to find for a million tons of Nova Scotia coal.


Wesley Ashton Gordon: Every effort is being made to find markets for a million tons or more of Nova Scotia coal. I trust my hon. friend will not blame this government if the consumption of coal falls off; that is something we cannot control, but we do recognize that it is desirable to find a market for that much Nova Scotia coal. That effort is being made by the government, and I hope it will be successful very shortly.


Charles A. Stewart: Does the subvention now extend to railway coal?


Wesley Ashton Gordon: I think railway coal is all moved on the o.c.s. rate.


Charles A. Stewart: The subvention has not heretofore applied to the movement of railway coal?


Wesley Ashton Gordon: No.
Supply-Geological Survey


Robert McKenzie: I should
like to ask the minister a question with regard to the subvention on lignite coal from Saskatchewan destined for the Manitoba market. Last year the original rate of fifty cents per ton was changed to a mileage rate of one-seventh cent per mile. That, we felt, rather worked against the coal of that area reaching the Manitoba market, because the difference amounted to ten cents a ton. I think possibly that had a little to do with the trouble in the Estevan coal fields last September. I pointed out the unfairness of this change on two or three occasions last year, and I should like to know if the minister has any intention of giving that coal area a little better treatment by way of subvention than was given last year.


Wesley Ashton Gordon: I am told that mines such as the Truax-Traer can compete in the Manitoba market against coal from Alberta and the Crowsnest. However, I will go into the matter again, and if we are able to discover a discrepancy that will be taken into consideration.


Robert McKenzie: The minister seems to gauge the activities of that coal field by the activities of the Truax-Traer mine. That is only one company, though it is a large one. They do surface mining, a stripping process, which is not really coal mining as we know it. Most of the mines do deep seam mining, and of course that is a little more expensive. We do feel that something of an injustice was done that area last year by reducing the subvention ten cents a ton, which gave the Alberta fields that much of a preference in the Manitoba market. I hope the minister will take this into his serious consideration and see if we cannot have the subvention restored to where it was before last year.


Mr. SPEAKMAN:: I had intended to ask one or two questions somewhat along the lines asked by the hon. member for Weyburn, but I understand that the item is to stand so that this information may be brought down, so I will let my questions stand also. I hope the minister will realize that the matter is very important, because after all this item embodies the fuel policy of the government, which is a matter of very great interest to everyone, particularly to those who represent coal areas. We desire to find out not only the coal policy itself but also the increased business that has been brought about by the application of this policy. We realize that coal consumption may fall off, so that perhaps it is not an absolutely fair criterion of the success 
of the policy, but surely it would be fair to judge it by the increased percentage of business handled by Canadian mines in preference to mines in other countries. Keeping that in mind, I hope the minister will bring down all the information necessary to enable us to find out very definitely just how successful the policy has been, what increased business has been brought about by it, and what has been the cost to the country.


Wesley Ashton Gordon: I shall be very glad to get that information and bring it down, and to let this item stand in the meantime. Of course I am not unmindful of the importance of having the cost of these coal movements made clear; it is an important and intricate subject, on which I should like to have a full, free and frank discussion in order to have the benefit of the views of all hon. members.


James Layton Ralston: I know the minister appreciates what my hon. friend just said, that this is a most important matter in the east and the west, and I am sure the minister will welcome anything which will afford the slightest possibility of the solution of a problem which has proved extremely vexing for quite a long time. The policy of subventions was inaugurated three or four years ago, and I should like to ask my hon. friend if his department has explored the market which could be opened to Nova Scotia coal if a subvention were granted which would be sufficient to justify the Canadian Pacific Railway using Nova Scotia coal as far west as Belleville, let us say, and the Canadian National Railways using it as far west as Prescott. I understand that is within what my hon. friend calls the central fuel area, which is called by other people the acute fuel area.


Wesley Ashton Gordon: My hon. friend means the amount of coal that would be used if Canadian coal entirely displaced United States coal on the railways? That has been investigated with respect to both railways as far west as Trenton, Prescott, Belleville, Brockville and other towns; in fact, the Dominion Fuel Board has investigated the differentials in laid down costs as far as North Bay and Cochrane. They have considered this question just as far as there was any possible hope of projecting the use of Nova Scotia coal westward, with a view to collecting all the information possible as to where the breaking point would come, beyond which no government could go in making up the differential in the laid down costs. I am sure anyone who has given study to this matter will conclude that there is" a point beyond which the difference in cost is so great as to preclude the use of eastern c.oal. That applies to both western and eastern coal, but that information is at present under

Supply-Geological Survey
review by the Dominion Fuel Board, and of course what their investigations will disclose will determine 'how much this government may have to pay as between the laid down costs in order that a million tons more or less may be given in new business to the Nova Scotia mines. I am hopeful that it will be a million tons and probably more.


James Layton Ralston: My hon. friend cannot
tell us the amount just on those two items for railways alone?


Wesley Ashton Gordon: I should like to be able
to satisfy the hon. member in that regard, but I have not the figures before me. They are very intricate and I did not come prepared with that information.


Alfred Speakman: While that point is
under consideration, and in order to suggest another line which the minister might have in mind when this item again comes before the committee, it may be remembered that when last year we were discussing another matter, that of unemployment relief, I brought up the same question in connection with the Brazeau collieries in Alberta, whose sole market is the Canadian National Railways. We realized then that no financial assistance is given in respect to coal used by the railways themselves, and in this particular area and others of a similar type the railways are the sole market. On that occasion I made the suggestion that if we were spending money for the relief of unemployment, there was probably no other way in which we would furnish a greater amount of employment for as small an expenditure than by paying, within a reasonable area, the difference to the railways between the cost of using Canadian coal and that of using United States coal. That has not been tried out, so far as I understand, and I know in my own area-and I will discuss this question further when the item comes up again-the issue is a live one, because the coal contracts are small and a great number of men are out of work. Therefore, as regards coal from the Brazeau and other collieries in Alberta and eastern Canada where the different mines have for their market railway lines exclusively or partially, but particularly such railways as favour steam coal alone, where the railway itself is the sole market and where at the present time coal from the United States is largely used, I hope the minister will keep in mind the question of the possibility of paying the difference in cost between the two classes of coal, Canadian and United States, to those railways in order to increase the area within which Canadian coal is used, thus supplying work to our own mines.


James Layton Ralston: Has the minister had any computation made as to the approximate amount it would cost to provide a market for another million tons of coal in the area that he has in mind as being possibly feasible?


Wesley Ashton Gordon: Not a computation that
I would care to disclose, because my research into the matter has not gone far enough for me to make any pronouncement. I think it would not be wise at the moment for me to make one, because I might have to change my viewpoint, and to give out a statement of that kind at the present time, when the matter is under consideration, might lead only to false hopes on the one hand or agreeable hopes on the other. I prefer to have the matter stand until the situation has been further investigated, and as I said a few moments ago, I hope a conclusion that will in a large measure go towards correcting the acute situation in Nova Scotia will be reached.


Charles A. Stewart: I should like to join with the hon. member for Red Deer in pressing upon the attention of the minister the necessity, if the railways are to be included, of considering the movement in western Canada. If this is to be considered, it is a new departure. In the past we have been able to persuade the railways to use western coal further east on their lines than was economical from their standpoint. They could have purchased coal cheaper for the use of trains running out of Winnipeg and yet they used our western coal as far east as Minaki and Kenora. If a subvention is to be applied to the movement of eastern coal for railway use, my hon. friend will of necessity have to take into consideration tihe movement of western coal. I just want to warn him that from my past experience he is stepping into a pretty expensive undertaking if he attempts to move coal for railway uses. I am frank in saying that so far I do not believe we can justify, from the standpoint of the amount of new coal that has been consumed in the Canadian market, the expenditure in which we have been engaged for some years past in using our own coal for domestic purposes. I always felt and still feel it was a gesture in the right direction to encourage the use of Canadian coal in fields which it might not reach under existing rate schedules. But when one begins to talk about coal for railway use, one must consider seriously whether the expenditure is warranted. If, however, this is to be done by the government for the eastern movement, then of necessity the same must apply as well to the western movement.
Supply-Geological Survey


George Gibson Coote: Did I understand the minister correctly when he said that the Premier of Alberta had suggested the desirability of having a commission investigate the coal industry in that province?


Wesley Ashton Gordon: Yes. As the hon. member probably knows, some six or seven years ago there was in Alberta a commission that made an exhaustive report on the coal industry there generally. I do not know whether that report has come under his eye, but I have had occasion to look into it. That suggestion was made by the premier of Alberta, and I take it that he deemed the appointment of a commissioner would be helpful. I am not questioning his judgment in that regard.


George Gibson Coote: I should like to urge upon the minister the desirability of appointing such a commission; in fact, I have already advocated it in the house three or four times. In order to interest the minister in the need of a thorough investigation into the industry, I should like to point out the situation as it was brought to my attention when I was in that district shortly before coming to Ottawa. Most of the mines in the Crowsnest pass district operated about 117 or 120 days last year, so that a few men got that number of days' work. The majority of the men received only ninety to one hundred days' work.


Wesley Ashton Gordon: To what mines does the hon. member refer?


George Gibson Coote: Mines at Blairmore and Bellevue; and possibly Coleman is about in the same position. Some of the men got only sixty days' work. They would be mostly the day men who would receive $4.50 a day. The total wages of a man who got sixty days' work would be $270, and he must have some relief in addition to that. The man who got ninety days' work at $4.50 a day would receive only $405. Further, all those men have as the minister knows, certain deductions from their day's pay for locker fee, union fee, doctor's fee, coal and rent. Their condition is really very -bad. Some of the contract men, of course, are doing better, but even they in many cases are not making enough to keep themselves and their families, and perhaps the majority of them are family men. I am not blaming the minister for this condition, which is a difficult one, but if he had a royal commission investigate carefully the situation there, it might help the government to formulate some policy that would lead to better
"Mr. C. A. Stewart.]
conditions in that area. I hope the minister will view this proposal of the premier of Alberta in a very sympathetic manner, because I am sure that there is great need for it.


Wesley Ashton Gordon: I can assure the hon. member that I replied to the Premier of Alberta and assured him that if he set up such a commission the department and the Dominion Fuel Board would facilitate the inquiry and give him all the data at our disposal. I do not know what is in the mind of the Premier of Alberta at the present moment, whether he intends to pursue that course or not.
Item stands.


* DEPARTMENT OP THE INTERIOR
[Stage Direction]
Topographical Surveys [DOT]- Topographical and aerial surveys and maps for the general development and administration of the country, including hydroelectric, forested, mineralized, agricultural and industrial areas; expenses of Geographic Board of Canada; centralization of all aerial photographic operations in cooperation with the Royal Canadian Air Force; traverse of northern rivers and lakes for administration of _ Northwest Territories; legal surveys of all remaining Dominion lands; surveys for administration of Dominion parks; certifying of standard measures; plotting and printing of maps and plans, etc., $133,500.
Amount required to pay the fees of the board of examiners for D.L.S. of the secretary and of the sub-examiners and for travelling expenses, stationery, printing, rent of room and furniture, etc. (the fees of Messrs. F. H. Peters, W. M. Tobey and Harry Parry, members of the board, and J. A. Cote, secretary, are to be paid out of this sum), $1,800.
Charles A. Stewart: Would the minister give us a short statement with respect to the services that are being discontinued, permitting a reduction of $116,500?
Hon. T. G. MURPHY (Minister of the Interior); In a general way no services under this vote are being discontinued. The reduction simply means that the work in general is being curtailed in this branch of the service.
Mr. COOTE; How many men are being kept on in this branch of topographical surveys?


Thomas Gerow Murphy: The number is 102.


George Gibson Coote: Are the salaries of these men covered by this vote?


Thomas Gerow Murphy: The salaries of fifty,
amounting to $115,128, are covered by the civil government vote, and the salaries of the other 52 are payable under the other vote. They amount to $117,517-50.

Supply-Interior-Surveys


Mr. BROWN:: I notice that this item
covers surveys for administration of Dominion parks. If it is in order to discuss under this vote the Riding Mountain park, I would ask what is the minister's policy with regard to that park. I understand that it has been suggested that the west end of the area that is now reserved for a park should be taken out of the park area. I know that that was the desire of many people in the west. What is the minister's attitude in regard to that?


Thomas Gerow Murphy: I think that question
would more properly come up under the item of parks;


Mr. BEAUBIEN:: What number is that
item in the estimates?


Thomas Gerow Murphy: It will be found on page
52, Dominion lands, and so forth.


John Livingstone Brown: I will take it up then.


George Gibson Coote: I should like to know the
reduction in the personnel of this department.


Thomas Gerow Murphy: In the topographical surveys branch?


George Gibson Coote: The reduction covered by
this vote.


Thomas Gerow Murphy: The number is sixteen.


George Gibson Coote: Under this vote?


Thomas Gerow Murphy: Yes.


George Gibson Coote: Are any survey parties being sent out this year?


Thomas Gerow Murphy: In reply to my hon.
friend's previous question, I should have said that the total reduction is sixteen. Part of the salaries will be paid out of this vote and part out of the civil government vote. But the total number I gave is correct, sixteen, as far as that particular branch is concerned. Arrangements have been made to send out some survey parties this year.


George Gibson Coote: Under the topographical
surveys or land surveys? I see that they are both mentioned in this vote.


Thomas Gerow Murphy: There will be parties sent out by the topographical surveys branch.
That is the item we are now discussing. There may also be parties sent out by geodetif surveys.


Charles-Philippe Beaubien: Now that the natural
resources have been transferred to the western provinces, is this department doing any topographical work in Manitoba and Saskatchewan ?


Thomas Gerow Murphy: The topographical surveys branch makes surveys all over the dominion. Possibly the hon. member has reference to subdivisional surveys. That work was formerly done by this branch, but it is now a function of the provincial governments and is carried on by them.


Thomas Merritt Cayley: I see that vote 186 provides $142,500 for geological surveys, and it includes the wages of explorers, topographers and others. Do these overlap in any way, or are they two different branches altogether?


Thomas Gerow Murphy: These surveys do not in any degree conflict with one another. The geological survey, which the hon. member mentioned, is a function of the Department of Mines, and is carried out by that department for the purpose of discovering minerals. That is entirely different from the survey made by this branch, which concerns itself mainly with the mapping of various areas, showing the physical characteristics of the country, such as forestry, water powers and general contours.


Thomas Merritt Cayley: But the maps used are just the same, are they not?


Thomas Gerow Murphy: Certain maps are made by the Department of Mines of areas in which a special survey has been carried on. The work of that department however in no way conflicts with or overlaps the work carried on by the topographical branch of the Department of the Interior.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Geodetic Survey of Canada-control operations-triangulation, geodetic astronomy, base lines, precise levelling and investigations-for the charting of sea coasts, water areas and forming a basis for the production of all survey maps and for pursuing investigations of the earth's crust, $139,000.
To recoup the Temiskaming and Northern Ontario Railway Commission in connection with their claim for injury to John Hedin, $240.
Charles A. Stewart: Is there some reduction in the Staff of geodetic survey parties in the field?


Thomas Gerow Murphy: There has been a reduction of two in this branch of the department.


Charles A. Stewart: A reduction of two in the staff?


Thomas Gerow Murphy: Yes.


Charles A. Stewart: Has there
been any reduction in the parties engaged in the field service?


Thomas Gerow Murphy: Yes. There is provision for a survey party in northern Quebec which will be engaged on the completion of the final
Supply-Interior

link of fundamental control in one of the large circuits of triangulation. There will also be a party in eastern Quebec. This operation consists of the inspection of the permanent ground marks with identification of the intersected works, and so on.


Mr. TOTZKE:: Quite clear.


An hon. MEMBER:: As mud.


Thomas Gerow Murphy: There is a party in Ontario carrying out levelling operations in the area extending between lake Ontario and Algonquin park, in Northumberland, Peterborough, Haliburton and Hastings counties. Also another party in Ontario will establish fundamental bench marks in certain cities and towns.


Mr. BRADETTE:: Is there any money to be spent on the geodetic survey of the coastal lines of James bay?


Thomas Gerow Murphy: Not this year.


Charles A. Stewart: Is the St.
Lawrence river basin near completion?


Thomas Gerow Murphy: I am informed that considerable work is to be done in the St. Lawrence basin near the strait of Belle Isle, but no provision has been made to carry on this work this year.


Alfred Speakman: Under this item I
believe we must consider aerial photographic work carried on by the Royal Canadian Air Force. From the diminution in the item I would judge the work has been largely reduced. Is it the intention in the coming year to carry on much aerial photographic work?


Thomas Gerow Murphy: There will be a certain
amount of aerial photographic work done this year, but not as much as in previous years. I think the hon. member has in mind the making of maps from aerial photography.


Alfred Speakman: I am informed by an hon. member that the item to which I am directing my remarks was passed while I was not in the chamber.


Thomas Gerow Murphy: Yes, the question would
more properly have been asked under the previous item.


Alfred Speakman: I was called from the chamber for a moment.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
International Boundaries-expenses connected with the survey and demarcation of international boundaries, $28,000.
John Livingstone Brown: What part of the boundary lines remains to be marked?


Thomas Gerow Murphy: The marking of boundary lines is practically completed, but those markings must be maintained. To use a colloquial expression, the lines must be kept in shape.


Charles A. Stewart: This is a
matter in connection with which both the United States and Canada are interested, and in the past each country has voted similar amounts for this work. Has any arrangement been made for a reduction in the vote to be passed by the American congress?


Thomas Gerow Murphy: I have no information on that point.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Government of the Yukon Territory-salaries and expenses connected with the administration of the territory, including surveys, $57,500.
Grant to Yukon council for local purposes, the construction and maintenance of roads, and to provide for the payment of bounty on wolves and coyotes under the provisions of an ordinance enacted by the commissioner in council, the sum to be paid not to exceed $20 each for wolves and $10 each for coyotes, the pelts of the animals on which bounty is paid to be surrendered to the government. The proceeds of the sale of such pelts is to be placed to the credit of the consolidated revenue fund of Canada, $105,000.
, Mr. REID:	Is the bounty on coyotes
payable only to the Yukon territory?
Thomas Gerow Murphy: On this particular item
the bounty is paid only on wolves destroyed in that territory.


Thomas Reid: Is that the only place where
a bounty is paid?


Thomas Gerow Murphy: No. A bounty is also
paid on wolves destroyed in the Northwest Territories, Mackenzie and Reewatin.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Government of the Northwest Territories- salaries and expenses connected with the administration of the territories, including investigation work, schools, hospitals, relief to destitute, maintenance of prisoners and insane patients, administration of the Northwest Game Act and the Wood buffalo park, et*., $127,560.
Arctic explorations and administration of Eskimo affairs, salaries and contingencies, equipment and supplies; relief to destitute; schools; hospitals and medical services; maintenance of prisoners and insane patients; education; travelling expenses, etc., $82,560.
Expenses connected with the maintenance of reindeer station at Kittigazuit, N.W.T., $20,000.
Charles A. Stewart: In what
services does the minister propose to save $35,000? The population of that part of the country is growing all the time.

Supply-Interior


Thomas Gerow Murphy: Possibly I can best answer the hon. member's question by giving'a comparative statement of expenditures in 1932-33 and 1931-32 as follows:
1932-33 1931-32
Schools	$ 3,200 $ 3,200
Relief to destitute, maintenance of insane patients and prisoners, orphan and destitute
children	 10,540	10,540
Hospital and medical services.. 22,058	21,530
Printing, stationery and contingencies	 4,500	4,500
Mackenzie district administration and Northwest Game
Act	
70,656	98,200Salaries, Ottawa	
12,636	21,225Administration of vital statistics ordinance	
400	500
Administration of the fur
export tax ordinance	
800	1,000Unforeseen expenses	
2,770	2,770
The totals are: 1932-33, $127,560; 1931-32, $163,465. There is an increase in one item of $528, with total decreases of $36,433, or a net decrease of $35,905.


Charles A. Stewart: The decreases are on the administration largely, $8,000 Ottawa and $27,000 in the general vote.


Thomas Gerow Murphy: In the Mackenzie district administration, yes.
At six o'clock the Speaker resumed the chair and the house took recess.
Salaries, living allowances and retiring leave..
Medical officers, field expenses, etc	
Travelling expenses, doctors, nurses and
investigators	
Hospital grants, Eskimo	
Eskimo provincial and municipal hospital.. ..
Dispensers	
Eskimo schools	
Annual Arctic expedition	
Relief to destitute and sick Eskimos	
Unforeseen expenses	
After Recess
The house resumed at eight o'clock. SUPPLY


DEPARTMENT OP THE INTERIOR
[Stage Direction]
The house in .committee of supply, Mr. MacNicol in the chair.
Government of the Northwest Territories- salaries and expenses connected with the administration of the territories, including investigation work, schools, hospitals, relief to destitute, maintenance of prisoners and insane patients, administration of the Northwest Game Act and the Wood buffalo park, etc., $127,560.
Arctic explorations and administration of Eskimo affairs, salaries and contingencies, equipment and supplies; relief to destitute; schools; hospitals and medical services; maintenance of prisoners and insane patients; education, travelling expenses, etc., $82,560.
Expenses connected with the maintenance of reindeer station at Kittigazuit, Northwest Territories, $20,000.
, Mr. STEWART (Edmonton): Will the minister explain the reduction in the vote as it affects arctic explorations and administration of Eskimo affairs?
Thomas Gerow Murphy: I will itemize the vote under the different headings, giving the estimates for 1932-33 with those of 1932. These are the items:
1932-33	1931-32
$20,146	$46,510
8,500	13,150
2,500	3,000
3,000	3,000
1,000	1,000 360
7,250	5,250
23,300	47.100
15,000	23,000
1,864	2,110
Decrease Increase
$26,364	

4,650	

500	

360	


23,800	

8,000 

246	

Summarized, this shows for the year 193233, $82,560, and for the year 1931-32, $144,480, there being one increase of $2,000 with a total decrease of $63,920, or a net decrease of $61,920.


Charles A. Stewart: I did not hear what the minister said as to grants to schools. Is there any reduction in school grants?


Thomas Gerow Murphy: There is an increase in the grant to Eskimo schools of $2,000.


Charles A. Stewart: Hospitals remain the same?


Thomas Gerow Murphy: Yes.


Mr. DONNELLY:: Do I understand the minister to say that last year there was a
grant of $23,000 for the care of Indians as compared with a grant this year of $15,000? If so, there will be $8,000 less to take care of the sick and destitute amongst the Eskimos.


Thomas Gerow Murphy: Yes.


James J. Donnelly: Why does the minister assume that none of them will be sick this year?


Thomas Gerow Murphy: I am informed that fortunately the health of the Eskimos this year is much better, and we estimate that we shall require that amount less than we spent last year.


Charles A. Stewart: In the first item the minister gave there is a decrease of
Supply-Interior

$26,000. Has there been any reduction in staff to account for that decrease?


Thomas Gerow Murphy: Eight officials have been retired. These are the details:
Living
Salary allowance One exploration and development officer	$5,120	$3,000
One investigator, grade 3.. 3,305	

One investigator, grade 1.. 2,400	

One botanist transferred to
Reindeer vote	 2,520	

One assistant botanist transferred to Reindeer vote.. 2,040	

One medical officer, grade 1 at Chesterfield, not required 2,520	

(Proportion of salary not required, $760.)
One assistant engineer transferred to Geodetic survey.. 2,700	

This gives a total of $24,365, from which there will be deducted ten per cent, leaving a net amount of $26,529, from which should be subtracted the adjustment of Doctor Livingstone's statutory increase of $30, making a net reduction of $26,499.


Charles A. Stewart: Is it intended to send a ship up to the north this year?


Thomas Gerow Murphy: Yes. Supplies will be sent, but the expedition that has been sent in previous years will not go out this year. In other words, we are not chartering a steamship but have made arrangements with the Hudson Bay Company to carry our supplies. That explains the difference.


Charles A. Stewart: Is it estimated that $20,000 will establish the reindeer quarters? Have the reindeer arrived at permanent quarters yet?


Thomas Gerow Murphy: No. Last year when this item was under discussion it was expected that the reindeer would arrive during this present fiscal year but the progress has been much slower than was anticipated, and it is doubtful if they will reach their home on the Kittigazuit peninsula during the coming fiscal year 1932-33. Provision has not been made in this item for the upkeep of the herd; the $20,000 is simply to prepare the quarters.


Charles A. Stewart: The minister can give no estimate of what the total number of reindeer will be when they do arrive?


Thomas Gerow Murphy: No.


Mr. LUCAS:: I understand some time ago the department shipped a number of buffalo from Wainwright park up into the northern 
areas. Has the minister any information as to how these buffalo are doing in that northern territory ?


Thomas Gerow Murphy: A number of buffalo were sent from W'ainwright park to Wood Buffalo park, which is situated partly in northern Alberta and partly in the territories. I think the total number sent out amounts to between six and seven thousand head. These animals are looked after by permanent wardens but I have no definite information as to the increase which has taken place. Recently a man was sent up into this territory to make a special report on the condition of the herd. A certain number of old bulls and barren cows are slaughtered each year for the relief of destitute in the Northwest Territories.


Albert Frederick Totzke: The amount of the vote last year was $106,400; was all that expended?


Thomas Gerow Murphy: There remains unexpended some $82,500.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Dominion lands, parks, etc. - Dominion lands, seed grain, mining lands and ordnance, admiralty and public lands, salaries and expenses, etc., $90,600.
John Livingstone Brown: Will the minister now answer the question I asked when the previous item was before the committee?


Thomas Gerow Murphy: That particular item will be reached a little later on, when it can be discussed.


Charles A. Stewart: Has the hydrometric survey and other work of the kind been turned over to the provincial government?


Thomas Gerow Murphy: These services are still
being carried on by the bureau.


Albert Frederick Totzke: What expenditures were
made last year in connection with Dominion lands?


Thomas Gerow Murphy: The expenditures under this item were incurred in the administration of Dominion lands, seed grain, mining lands and ordnance, admiralty and public lands and salaries and expenses.


Albert Frederick Totzke: Will the minister specify the expenditures in connection with Dominion lands?


Thomas Gerow Murphy: The estimates for 1932-33 are made up as follows: Winnipeg, salary of J. F. Drew, $1,920, and of stenographer, $1,380; Regina, salary of J. A. Reed, $3,360 and salary

Supply-Interior-Dominion Lands
of stenographer SI ,380; Edmonton, salary of A. Norguay, 83,360 and of stenographer, 81,620; Revelstolce, salary of T. J. Wadman, 82,880; Calgary, salary of Colonel F. M. Steele, $3,780; Fort Smith, salary of Joseph Milner, 84,260 and of M. Meikle, $4,560. This makes a total of 828,500, which with the ten per cent decrease leaves a net total of $25,650.


Albert Frederick Totzke: What are the present duties of these men?


Thomas Gerow Murphy: These officers are retained for 'the purpose of making adjustments on seed grain and fodder relief loans which were made, I believe in 1914 and 1915, many of which still remain outstanding.


Albert Frederick Totzke: They have really nothing
to do with Dominion lands?


Thomas Gerow Murphy: The item is simply listed under this vote.


James J. Donnelly: Is this seed grain a
former loan?


Thomas Gerow Murphy: As I explained a moment
ago, adjustments are being made of loans made in 1914 and 1915, many of which have not been repaid.


James J. Donnelly: What has been the
average collection each year for the last five years as compared with the cost of administration?


Thomas Gerow Murphy: I am sorry I have not the detailed figures before me. I am informed that the total amount advanced in the years mentioned was between 814,000,000 and $15,000,000, of which something under $5,000,000 remains unpaid. We have only one man in each province to deal with these loans.


James J. Donnelly: Are sufficient collections being made to cover the administration expenses?


Thomas Gerow Murphy: Two or three years ago
the collections more than covered the cost of administration, but at the present time I doubt if we are doing much more than to collect enough to pay these costs.


John Livingstone Brown: Is any of that money outstanding in Manitoba?


Thomas Gerow Murphy: Yes.


Joseph-Arthur Bradette: Mr. Chairman, I should like to take up a matter which although it does not come within any of these votes is one within the jurisdiction of the Department of the Interior-I refer to the islands in James bay. The people in my section of the country do not seem to understand that these islands belong to the federal government, and I ask the minister if he has received any requests from the Ontario government to have these islands come under provincial jurisdiction. Only two years ago the natural resources were returned to the western provinces and the people in my section of the country are firmly convinced that any lands within the boundaries of James bay should come within the jurisdiction of either the government of Ontario or of Quebec. Has the minister received any correspondence, or has anything been done by the provincial governments or the federal government in the matter of giving these islands to Quebec and Ontario?


Thomas Gerow Murphy: If my memory serves me
correctly, I have had only one communication in regard to the jurisdiction under which these islands would come, and that is concerning one situated in Hudson bay, not in James bay. Inquiries were instituted and it was ascertained that that particular island came under the jurisdiction of Ontario rather than that of the dominion. But at the moment I recall no communication being received by the department in regard to the general question of jurisdiction and administration of those islands in James bay.


Joseph-Arthur Bradette: I would infer from
the reply of the minister that any islands in the Hudson bay inland sea come under the jurisdiction of Ontario. This will naturally imply that all the islands in James bay belong to the provinces of Quebec and Ontario. I have in mind at the present time the Belcher islands, part of which, some people from Quebec contend, belong to that province. Naturally we in Ontario contend that the whole of them belong to our province. I bring up this question to emphasize the importance of knowing definitely as soon as possible under whose jurisdiction these islands come, so that there may be no delay in any improvements or work, whether mineral development or otherwise, that may be done there. The federal government and the authorities of the provinces interested, that is, Manitoba, Ontario and Quebec, should get together in the near future so as to decide the question of jurisdiction. Since the beginning of the session I have received several letters of application for certain rights, whether mining or otherwise, in some of the islands in James bay, and so far I have not been able to get any satisfactory reply from the provincial authorities. I believe at one time the minister was good enough to grant me a personal interview in which he told me the applications came under his jurisdiction. If, according to what he said a few moments ago,
!728 ^	COMMONS
Supply-Interior-Dominion Lands
the islands in Hudson, bay are really under the jurisdiction of the province of Ontario, I believe in my section of the country and even in Toronto they are unacquainted with that fact, and the government owes it to the country to make a definite statement in the matter. Their natural resources have all been given to the western provinces, and I maintain that all those islands in that great inland sea should be given to the three provinces I have mentioned. I am making this plea very earnestly on account of certain conflicts over mining and colonization laws and so forth, because if we have complication of jurisdiction, it is bound to hurt the development of that section of the country.


Thomas Gerow Murphy: I speak subject to correction, and I have not in my possession the legal opinion in respect to this matter, but as I understand it, the islands in James bay and Hudson bay proper are under the jurisdiction of the dominion parliament; that is, they belong to the crown in the right of the dominion. When I spoke about an island in Hudson bay being under the jurisdiction of the province of Ontario, I had reference to an island which is situated in the mouth of. one of the rivers. An island so situated comes under the jurisdiction of the province if the shore line on either side of the mouth of the river would, if extended, include that island in the province. I do not wish the hon. member to understand that in illustrating my point a moment ago by mentioning this particular island, I was saying that all islands in Hudson bay were under the jurisdiction of the provinces. My understanding is exactly the opposite. Any island which is situated within the bay proper, either James or Hudson bay, would belong to the crown in the right of the dominion. As I say, I speak subject to correction.


Joseph-Arthur Bradette: I am indeed thankful
to the minister for the useful information he has given, but again I ask that in the near future a conference be held between the provinces interested and the federal government to decide the matter. I know from actual fact that thousands, yes, hundreds of thousands of dollars would be invested to-day in some of those James bay islands if the exact jurisdiction were known. The fact, as the minister has mentioned, that islands in the estuaries of some of the rivers are under the jurisdiction of the provinces, while islands in the Hudson and James bays are under the jurisdiction of the federal government, is the reason that people contemplating development work are afraid to go ahead with it, being in a state of uncertainty as to the matter

of jurisdiction. In making this plea I have the support of the Minister of Labour, who comes from my section of the country and is familiar with the situation. I ask the government very earnestly to band over at the earliest possible moment to the jurisdiction of the provincial governments interested1, namely, Quebec, Ontario and Manitoba, all islands within Hudson and James bays. As I have pointed out before as regards Belcher islands alone, some people maintain that part of them should belong to Quebec and part to Ontario, while naturally, as a northern Ontario man, I maintain that the whole of them should belong to Ontario. I want to impress upon the committee the fact that there are complications of this nature, and as it was an easy matter for the federal government to return the natural resources to the three western provinces, it should be easy for them to give to the provinces I have mentioned, those islands within certain degrees of latitude within Hudson and James bays. This would help wonderfully in the development of the mineral and other natural resources that require capital for development; I shall not include agriculture at the present time. This question should be settled satisfactorily so that the people may know exactly where to file their applications. When there are legal complications between the provincial and the federal authorities people naturally are not willing to spend their money. The mining laws of the dominion differ in some respects from those of Ontario, and on that score alone I would urge upon the minister the necessity of calling such a conference. I know the government in the near future will receive communications from people interested in the development of northern Ontario, strongly urging that this matter be settled at an early date.


Thomas Gerow Murphy: I shall be very glad to
give consideration to the representations made by the hon. member.


Alfred Speakman: In respect of the first item dealing with seed grain relief, I understand in those cases the liens are taken on the land itself. I have two or three questions to ask in that regard and I think I can put them together. The minister can consider and answer them after I have finished. First, do those seed grain liens, nominally at least, still carry interest? Second, is there any large number of these old seed grain liens within that part of Saskatchewan which has suffered from crop failures for some years and is now receiving one hundred per cent relief? Third,

Supply-Interior-Dominion Lands
if so, which of these two liens-the old seed grain lien upon the land or the new lien upon the crop in connection with which notes have been given payable to the Saskatchewan Relief Commission-has priority? Perhaps I need not ask the fourth question, for an estimate by the minister as to the value of either the old liens in that district or of the new notes recently signed. But the first three questions are serious.


Thomas Gerow Murphy: In reply to the first question, interest is being charged on the old liens. In reply to the second, whether some of these liens are still existent in the southern part of Saskatchewan in the dried out areas, although I cannot answer categorically, but speaking from my experience in dealing with the matter I would say that these liens are attached to lands in all parts of Saskatchewan as well as to lands in Manitoba and Alberta. As to the question which lien would have priority, the old seed grain which was put on the land or the new lien in Saskatchewan which was put on the crop, I would say, although I am not a lawyer, that the old lien would come first because it was put on the land. That lien would have priority over all other charges against that land, especially in those cases where relief was granted fifty per cent by the dominion and fifty per cent by the province. Although the legal members of the house may be in a better position to answer that question than I am, my own opinion is that the first lien would have priority.


Charles-Philippe Beaubien: May I ask the minister if he is right in his contention that - there is still some money owing by the farmers of Manitoba to the federal government on account of seed grain advances in 1914-15? I am under the impression that Manitoba does not owe anything to the federal government for that advance of seed grain. Am I right in that or not?


Thomas Gerow Murphy: I think the hon. member is quite correct when he states that there is nothing owing to the Dominion government for seed grain advances in the year 1914-15. But I did not understand him to refer particularly to 1914-15 when he asked his first question. There is money owing to the Dominion government for seed grain and fodder relief in the province of Manitoba, but not for 1914-15. It goes back as far as the year 1876, when there was a grasshopper plague in Manitoba, and some of the liens given at that time have not yet been discharged.


Charles-Philippe Beaubien: I cannot believe that the minister is serious in saying that the farmers of Manitoba-I am speaking of the farmers -owe anything to the federal government on account of seed grain relief in 1876. Was not that all wiped out some years ago?


Thomas Gerow Murphy: No, it was not.


Charles-Philippe Beaubien: Does the government intend to try to collect that money?


John Livingstone Brown: Is that what Mr. Drew is doing, trying to collect money advanced in 1876?


Thomas Gerow Murphy: He is trying not only to collect but also to adjust.


John Livingstone Brown: I think this is a most ridiculous situation which has been presented to the house. Imagine keeping a man in Winnipeg to collect money advanced to settlers back in the year 1876, most of whom are probably dead by this time. Before this item passes we ought to get details of these advances; the committee should be told just how much of this money has been collected in recent years and What Mr. Drew is doing in Manitoba in that regard. Really it is a most ridiculous situation.


Thomas Gerow Murphy: It is a situation which
has been before this house practically every year since then.


John Livingstone Brown: But it has not been presented as plainly as now.


Thomas Gerow Murphy: I was not minister in
previous years. As I said, Mr. Drew is not simply endeavouring to collect, because I am quite as well aware as the hon. member of the inability of the farmers of Manitoba to pay under present conditions. Mr. Drew is endeavouring to adjust these matters. Recommendations come forward at frequent intervals from Mr. Drew, with whom is associated an official of the provincial government, and in a great many instances his recommendations have been that these seed grain liens be cancelled. But they are not cancelled until the matter has been investigated and the recommendation forwarded by the commissioner.


Charles-Philippe Beaubien: What commissioner?


Thomas Gerow Murphy: Mr. Drew, with whom is
associated an official of the provincial government, by the name, I think, of Mr. Gyles.


Charles-Philippe Beaubien: They adjust these seed advances?


Thomas Gerow Murphy: Yes, seed grain and fodder relief.



Supply-Interior-Dominion Lands


John Livingstone Brown: The only seed grain involved in this discussion goes back as far as 1876. Am I not right in that?


Thomas Gerow Murphy: I do not think that is
quite correct.


John Livingstone Brown: That was the statement
we got from the minister.


Thomas Gerow Murphy: No, some go back as far
as 1876, but advances for seed grain and fodder relief have also been made in the intervening years. I cannot give the hon. member the details, as I have not got them here.


John Livingstone Brown: I think we had better have the details. The very fact that the minister has mentioned 1876 indicates that it is a situation that needs to be investigated. Those old liens, of course, should be cancelled at once. The item had better stand until we get the details.


Thomas Gerow Murphy: If it will suit the purpose of the hon. member I shall be very glad to furnish him with a statement showing the advances that have been made over the different years and the amount collected.


Mr. VALLANCE:: For the information of the hon. member for Red Deer, who asked the minister which of the two liens would have priority, may I say that the liens that are being taken to-day for seed grain advanced in Saskatchewan are not being placed against the land, but against the crop, due on August 14, 1932.


Alfred Speakman: I am quite familiar
with that fact, but I wondered whether a lien against the land itself might also include a lien on the crop grown on the land, in which case, of course, it would take priority.


Charles-Philippe Beaubien: Do I understand that
if we allow this item to pass the minister will bring down the information we desire to have about Manitoba?


Thomas Gerow Murphy: Certainly, I shall be very
glad to do so.


Charles-Philippe Beaubien: We would like to know when these advances for seed grain and fodder were made to the farmers of Manitoba, the amount advanced and the amount repaid, together with the amount of the interest.


John Livingstone Brown: I would like to know the
amount repaid year by year.


Charles-Philippe Beaubien: And how much damage the grasshoppers did in 1876, if the minister has that information.


James J. Donnelly: I notice that this item
speaks of admiralty and public lands. What is that?


Thomas Gerow Murphy: The Department of the
Interior, as the hon. member is aware, has for many years administered the dominion lands. From time to time ordnance lands have been turned over to the Department of the Interior from the Department of National Defence, when that department no longer had use for the lands for their particular purposes.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
To assist in publishing the transactions of the Association of Dominion Land Surveyors, $125.
Mr. SANDERSON:: What is this amount
voted for?


James J. Donnelly: Will the minister explain the term "publishing the transactions"?


Thomas Gerow Murphy: The sum of $125 is asked
for the purpose of assisting the Association of Dominion Land Surveyors in the publishing of their annual report. Not only will this grant aid the association in the publication of papers read at their annual meeting, but it will enable them to employ the services of a shorthand reporter so that the discussion following the reading of papers may be available. The report contains information of great value to the general public, as well as to officers in the government whose duties are connected with surveying and engineering.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Advancement of forest conservation in Canada, $254,000.
William Thomas Lucas: Does the administration of
the nursery at Indian Head come under this vote?


Thomas Gerow Murphy: The nurseries at Indian
Head and Sutherland are now administered by the Department of Agriculture.


John Vallance: Owing to the fact that
this is an item involving an expenditure of $254,000 I should like to know in what provinces and to what extent the advancement of forest conservation is being carried out?


Thomas Gerow Murphy: This item covers not only the advancement of forest conservation but also the total contribution made by the Dominion government towards the technical research into forest products. The description of this vote is hardly accurate; it covers the total amount set aside by parliament for the purpose of carrying on technical investigations into forestry matters throughout the dominion.

Supply-Interior-Forestry


John Vallance: Does reforestation come under this item?


Thomas Gerow Murphy: No.


Albert Frederick Totzke: Why is there such a large
decrease in the vote?


Thomas Gerow Murphy: The decrease comes about simply through the general policy of economy.


Albert Frederick Totzke: In what way have decreases been made?


Thomas Gerow Murphy: The forestry department
maintain three laboratories, one at Ottawa, one at Montreal, and one at Vancouver. The services carried on in Ottawa are of a purely technical nature, dealing with such subjects as wood utilization, the study of the application of fire retardants to wood or wood material, and the increasing uses to which wood may be put. In the Montreal laboratory the work is solely for the purpose of assisting Canadian pulp and paper industries. The one in Vancouver concerns itself with the utilization of British Columbia woods. In addition to that the general services rendered by the forestry department are made available so that cooperative action may be taken with the provinces in compiling information as to the forest resources of Canada.


Albert Frederick Totzke: Is there a decrease in all
these services?


Thomas Gerow Murphy: There is a decrease in all these activities. Although the services are being maintained, less service is being given in the department.


Alfred Speakman: I understood the minister to say that the work of reforestation, the management of forestry branches at different points and the practice of providing seedlings and young trees to farmers had been taken over by the Department of Agriculture?


Thomas Gerow Murphy: I said that the nursery stations at Indian Head and Sutherland were being administered by the Department of Agriculture. There are other stations, however, of a different nature, where different problems in forestry are studied, and which are still administered by the forestry department.


Alfred Speakman: That was my understanding. I understand that the practice of distributing seedlings and young trees is now carried on by the Department of Agriculture, but the nurseries of another type where technical work is carried on and where a study is made of the utilization of different woods are still under the jurisdiction of the Department of the Interior.


Thomas Gerow Murphy: That is correct.
41761-109J


Alfred Speakman: I think I am voicing the opinion of all farmers when I say we were greatly relieved when we learned that the work of reforestation and of handling nurseries and the distribution of seedlings and young trees throughout the farms on the bald prairies had not been done away with. About a year ago we were shocked to learn that there was a possibility of this service being discontinued, and we are now delighted to know that it is still being carried on. Coming from a prairie province, the minister will be as familiar as the rest of us with the splendid work done in the past by the department he now heads, and the great loss which would be suffered if that work were discontinued.


James J. Donnelly: I understood the minister to say that this grant covers several activities, such as forestry research, fire protection and so on. How is the money allocated to each activity?


Thomas Gerow Murphy: The estimates for 1932-33 are as follows: Head office administration, $25,290; research and investigation, $29,352; Petawawa experimental station, $20,033; research and investigations, $15,532; prairie district, main and suboffices, $8,893; research and investigations, $21,374; British Columbia, district offices, research and investigations, $15,353; forest product laboratories at Ottawa, $60,080; Montreal, $32,589; Vancouver, $25,504; giving a total as shown in the item of $254,000.


John Vallance: Does not the aerial forest patrol come under this item, or has the service been discontinued?


Thomas Gerow Murphy: Now that each province has control of its own resources the forest patrol and fire protection service is a provincial activity.


John Vallance: Did the forest patrol come under this item before, and would it represent the $146,000 decrease?


Thomas Gerow Murphy: Before the natural resources passed to the western provinces the Dominion government did maintain the patrol service under this item. But I do not desire the hon. member to be under any misunderstanding, for of course he realizes that the natural resources were transferred in 1930, and therefore there was nothing included in the estimates last session for fire patrol work.


James J. Donnelly: Does this grant include an appropriation for advertising of fire protection?
Supply-Interior


Thomas Gerow Murphy: No, there is nothing in this item for that purpose.


Charles A. Stewart: I am doubtful, Mr. Chairman, of the advisability of the government making the change they did with respect to the forestry stations at Indian Head and Sutherland. In the opinion of the minister will this service be performed more cheaply than it was done under the forestry department by men who were especially trained for that kind of work? Everyone knows that the forestry patrol stations under the Department of the Interior had the approbation of every individual interested in tree planting. Now that this work is relegated to a secondary position I have very grave doubts as to the wisdom of the transfer. I am bound to say that I think the tree planting stations would be much better administered under the Department of the Interior.


Thomas Gerow Murphy: I aim sorry I have no actual figures to give the committee as to the savings which it was hoped might be made by the transfer of these stations from the Department of the Interior to the Department of Agriculture; but doubtless the Minister of Agriculture (Mr. Weir) will be able to give the information, or I shall be pleased to obtain it for the hon. member.


Charles A. Stewart: How many inspectors were dispensed with by reason of the transfer?


Thomas Gerow Murphy: Speaking from memory, I think we had nine inspectors doing this in-speotional work.


Charles A. Stewart: Not continuously?


Thomas Gerow Murphy: No; at periods of the year some of their work was carried on at the forestry stations. I think I am correct in stating that three of those men have been retained by the Department of Agriculture for inspectional purposes.


John Vallance: In reply to the last
question I asked him the minister stated that his department did not now maintain an aerial forestry patrol service. In what manner are the national parks patrolled?


Thomas Gerow Murphy: The patrolling is done for us by the national defence department.


Mr. NICHOLSON:: With regard to the
forests products laboratory, I note $60,000 is provided for Ottawa; $32,000 for Montreal; and $25,000 for Vancouver. Would it not be better to have one central forest products

laboratory so that effective work might be done in testing woods and finding new uses to which they can be put? One of the serious handicaps that the forest products business of this country labours under is that through lack of such research work we find it difficult to meet world competition. For example, in the British market we cannot meet competition from Norway and Sweden and other European countries because up to the present time we have not gone far enough in practical tests of different classes of Canadian woods to be able to say to the British importers just what purpose any particular class of wood will serve. Up to date the whole scheme of laboratory work so far as forest products are concerned has been wholly inadequate. I understand this vote has been reduced, and when it is spread over three laboratories it seems to me that we are simply maintaining a skeleton organization that serves no useful purpose. Instead, we should be furthering the interests of the forest products business of this country by more intensive research work. I believe that if the laboratory experts were brought here they would tell us that, were their work concentrated in one place, they could carry on more efficiently than when they are spread out as they are now.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Administration of the Migratory Birds Convention Act, $50,000.
Albert Frederick Totzke: Is there an item in this vote for Jack Miner's bird sanctuary?


Thomas Gerow Murphy: There is nothing in these items.


Albert Frederick Totzke: Then there is to be no grant this year.


Thomas Gerow Murphy: I do not say that. It may be among the miscellaneous items, but it is not in this vote.


Mr. GRAY:: This matter is of vital interest not only to the members of western Ontario but to Canadians generally. It is true that Jack Miner's bird sanctuary does not come directly under this item, but I do not know where else we could discuss it better. In view of the fact that there is a saving this year of $6,750 under this particular item, I would ask the minister to urge upon his colleagues that they include in the supplementary estimates at least $2,500, the grant that was given last year, and if possible $5,000. Under the late administration a grant to this sanctuary was $5,000, and last year it was reduced to $2,500. I do not need to urge upon the committee the importance of this grant, not only from the standpoint of bird conservation but also from the point of

Supply-Interior-Water Power
view of the American tourist traffic. Each year some 20,000 cars bring in American tourists who visit the sanctuary, and when you consider the work that Jack Miner and his friends have been doing towards the conservation of birds, I think it will be generally agreed in the house that this grant is one that should be perpetuated. I am sorry that the hon. member for South Essex (Mr. Gott), whose proximity to the bird sanctuary has been frequently referred to in this house, is not in his place. I understand, however, that he and other members from Essex whose personal knowledge of this matter is greater than mine are heartily in accord with the grant, and I urge upon them, as well as upon the minister and the government, to see to it that a grant of at least $2,000, and if possible $5,000, is included in the supplementary estimates for this sanctuary. It costs Mr. Miner the sum of $10,000 a year to conduct it. I do not think it is in the interests of economy that the grant should be deleted from the estimates, and I again urge that the minister speak to his colleagues, pointing out that there is a saving of $6,750 this year in the vote for the administration of the Migratory Birds Convention Act, which ought to enable them to include an amount in the supplement-aries for this bird sanctuary.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Investigations of water and power resources and of International Waterway problems, the Dominion hydrometric survey, the Western Provinces Water Board, and for the administration of the Dominion Water Power and Irrigation Acts, etc., $175,000.
Charles A. Stewart: There is a reduction of $75,000 under this item; what accounts for it?


Thomas Gerow Murphy: There are the following
reductions and increases:
Head office administration	 $35,109	96
British Columbia, Yukon and
Northwest Territories	
7,182	15Saskatchewan and Alberta	
26,308	11Manitoba	
9.580	65Ontario (Increase)	
2.254	40Quebec (Increase)	
1,124	97New Brunswick	
15	00Nova Scotia	
137	00Prince Edward Island	
46	50
This makes a total of $75,000.


John Vallance: This item includes the Western Provinces Water Board. What are the functions of this board, and how much of the item is intended for it?


Thomas Gerow Murphy: I regret to say that the wording of the item is not correct, and that this should not have been included in the printed estimate. There is no such board.


John Vallance: That is what I wanted to know. Had you not better amend the item accordingly? This is mentioned for a specific purpose and the minister says there is no such board in existence. Why, then, do you need the money? Was this Western Provinces Water Board ever in existence, and if so, what were its functions? I have never known anything about it, and I should like to know.


Thomas Gerow Murphy: The reference to the Western Provinces Water Board is purely a typographical error; it should never have been in the printed estimate. I am quite willing to have it struck out.


Hugh Guthrie: I move that the item be amended by striking out the words "the Western Provinces Water Board", appearing in the sixth and seventh lines.


John Livingstone Brown: Does that affect the amount of money?


John Vallance: Will the Minister of Justice also move for a reduction in the amount of the estimate? This must have been considered by whoever prepared the estimate.


Thomas Gerow Murphy: Nothing was provided for that purpose.


John Vallance: I notice some of these
items are being passed rather speedily, and we now find that we are voting money for purposes which do not exist. We had better examine each item in order to avoid a repetition of 'this instance of the Western Provinces Water Board.


Peter Heenan: How is the government
coming along with respect to the payments to be made to the settlers on shores of the Winnipeg river whose lands were flooded by the wafers from the lake of .the Woods?


Thomas Gerow Murphy: Nothing is included in
this vote for that purpose. I think the hon. member is aware that this is a matter which concerns both the province of Ontario and the Dominion government. No satisfactory arrangement has as yet been arrived at in regard to the matter.


Peter Heenan: In either 1928 or 1929 am amount of between $25,000 and $50,000 was included in the estimates for the purpose of commencing negotiations with the settlers. I do not blame the minister for the delay which has taken place in this matter, but surely, when practically all the rest of the international obligations have been adjusted in that neck of the woods, as we call it, the settlers should not be the only ones not taken care of. Settlement has been made of the

Supply-Interior-National Parks
question as to what height of water shall be maintained in the lake of the Woods, and, if I remember rightly, the International Joint Commission recommended in 1916 that compensation should be made for lands destroyed or flooded. I have personal knowledge of many settlers who have been flooded out by the Winnipeg river. I understand that the province of Ontario says that it has nothing to do with this matter. I have not before me a copy of the votes and proceedings of the Ontario legislature, but mj' information is that the Minister of Mines gave an answer to a question on the floor of the provincial house to the effect that the legal authorities had said that the province was not legally bound to pay. I am not sure whether our Department of Justice has made a similar ruling, but if these payments are to be based on the elimination of technicalities, the settlers will never be compensated. The Naims are based not upon technicalities but upon the findings and recommendations of the International Joint Commission. Lands have been flooded and homes destroyed, and in view of the fact that this government has more to do with the International Joint Commission than the provincial government, I think it Should see that these settlers are taken care of at as early a date as possible.


John Vallance: The estimates for 1932 contained the following item:
For investigations of water and power resources and of international waterway problems, the Dominion Hydrometrie Survey, the Western Provinces Water Board, and for the administration of the Dominion Water Power and Irrigation Acts, etc., $250,000.
This was a decrease of S225,000 over the vote of the year before. It would appear as though a vote had been made last year for this Western Provinces Water Board, and I should like to know how much money was spent last year on this board.


Thomas Gerow Murphy: As I explained a few moments ago, it is simply a typographical error.


John Vallance: Last year too?


Thomas Gerow Murphy: Evidently the wording
for this year has simply followed that of the year before, and possibly the year before that.


Charles A. Stewart: And the
year before that.


Thomas Gerow Murphy: It is beyond my power
to give any other explanation to ifche hom. member than that already given.
Item, as amended, agreed to.
[Mr. He^nanJ
To provide for the expenses connected with the national parks of Canada, historic sites, care of indigents in the parks, the appointment of stipendiary magistrates in the parks and the payment of their remuneration, etc., $1,100,000.


Ian Alistair Mackenzie: Have
any new areas been taken over since last year?


Thomas Gerow Murphy: No.


Ian Alistair Mackenzie: Have
any recommendations been forwarded by the province of British Columbia for new park sites?


Thomas Gerow Murphy: Communications have
been received at various times in regard to the matter.


Ian Alistair Mackenzie: No action has been taken?


Thomas Gerow Murphy: No.


Peter John Veniot: Have any been received
from the province of New Brunswick?


Thomas Gerow Murphy: Yes.


Peter John Veniot: What action has been taken?


Thomas Gerow Murphy: No action has been taken?


John Vallance: How much money was
spent last year in Prince Albert national park, and was the golf course developed to the extent anticipated, having in mind the fact that the work was to be done for relief purposes?


Thomas Gerow Murphy: The expenditure last year for Prince Albert park amounted to $143,149.92. I do not know the expectations of my hon. friend in regard to the work to be done on the golf course, but very little progress has been made.


John Vallance: Has a recommendation been received from the member for Prince Albert (Mr. Mackenzie King) that something be done?	.


Ross Wilfred Gray: I should like to refer to the
grant made to the Historic Sites and Monuments Board of Canada. There has been considerable agitation for an historic site to be erected in memory of the late Indian chieftain, Tecumseh, who fell in the battle of Moraviantown during the war of 1812. This matter has been brought to the attention of the board from year to year and last year a resolution was passed favouring the erection of an historic monument. Large public subscriptions have been made for the purpose,

Supply-Interior-National Parks
but the reason given by the board for mot proceeding with the work is that it was unable to obtain a sufficient grant from the government. Whait portion of this vote will be allotted to this board, and how much money was expended during 1931?


Thomas Gerow Murphy: I am sorry I cannot give the hon. member the detailed information for which he asks, but last year there was spent altogether the sum of $49,981.42 for the erection of cairns and other monuments in various parts of the dominion. I am sorry I am unable to give him the details or the geographical locations of the sites. I shall be glad later to give him that information, which can readily be furnished.


Ross Wilfred Gray: I shall appreciate that. Can
the minister say what amount is allotted to this commission for the year 1932-33?


Thomas Gerow Murphy: 


John Livingstone Brown: What is the cost of the monuments that are being erected? They seem to be all of a standard pattern.


Thomas Gerow Murphy: From $250 to $350, depending upon the geographical location of the site.


Thomas Merritt Cayley: The minister will remember that last year I asked him a question regarding a cairn that had been decided upon to mark the site of the first cheese factory in Canada, and which the historic sites commission decided was coming to the township of North Norwich on the road known as Quaker street. The minister assured me that the site had been decided upon. I should like to know if the work will be done this year and the cairn erected.


Mr. WILLIS:: What kind of cheese?


Thomas Merritt Cayley: Headcheese.


Thomas Gerow Murphy: It is not proposed during the coming year to erect any historic monument at the site mentioned by the hon. member.


John Vallance: I think the minister has the information in regard to the matter about which I ask, although the work was done in the last year of the previous administration. It will be remembered that during the rebellion there was a battle known as Cut Knife Hill. The Department of the Interior raised a monument there on which they placed an inscription which was obnoxious to the Indians of that Indian reserve. Has the inscription ever been changed, and if so, what is now the inscription on that monument?


Thomas Gerow Murphy: I understand a change has been made in the inscription, and the one which it is proposed to put on the tablet has received the sanction of the historic sites board who are members of the commission.


Albert Frederick Totzke: The historic sites committee has for some time been trying to get a roadway to the Fish Creek cemetery which is a site of the rebellion of 1885. Has anything been done in that regard?


Thomas Gerow Murphy: I am informed that negotiations in regard to this matter are still in progress.


Thomas Reid: Is it the minister's intention this year to acquire any further areas for park purposes in British Columbia?


Thomas Gerow Murphy: No.


Thomas Merritt Cayley: Coming back to the matter I have mentioned, do I understand the committee have given up the idea of marking the site of the first cheese factory, or is it just postponed?


Thomas Gerow Murphy: The matter has simply been postponed. I am also told that on information received from Doctor Ruddick, the dairy commissioner, there exists some doubt as to the proper location, and until the Historic Sites and Monuments Board are fully convinced that they have located the proper place on which this monument should be erected, the matter will remain in abeyance.


Thomas Merritt Cayley: I was under the impression in the first place that Doctor Ruddick was emphatic that this was the true site. I do not know what has changed his mind.


Thomas Gerow Murphy: Like other men, possibly Doctor Ruddick has changed his mind.


Alfred Speakman: Might I inquire as to whether the work of delimitation of park areas carried on in connection with the transfer of the natural resources to the provinces has yet been completed?


Thomas Gerow Murphy: I understand the delimitation of the park boundaries was completed before the transfer of the resources to the provinces.


Alfred Speakman: I understand at the
time of the transfer, in respect of one or two of the parks, there was still a question as to the inclusion of certain items of land, particularly in connection with Banff park. I refer to the question of the inclusion of certain coal and mineral areas within the park. The minister assures me that work has been completed.

Supply-Interior-National Parks


Thomas Gerow Murphy: Everything in regard to
the delimiting of the park boundaries was settled before the transfer, and to date no areas have been added to or subtracted from the park.


John Livingstone Brown: Perhaps at this point the minister will answer a question I have put to him twice regarding the boundaries of Riding Mountain park.


Thomas Gerow Murphy: Will the hon. member
kindly repeat his question so that I may be able to answer it correctly?


John Livingstone Brown: It has been suggested in many quarters-and I believe the suggestion has received the approval of many people in Manitoba-that the western area of Riding Mountain should be excluded from the park. All I am asking the minister is what his policy is in regard to the matter. These representations have been made to me.
Mr. MURPflY:	Certain representations
have been made to me and, I think, also to the department, advocating the taking from Riding Mountain park as presently constituted a certain area to the west thereof, but up to the present no policy has been decided upon with regard to the matter. It is still under consideration.


Charles A. Stewart: I notice a
reduction of 8219,000 in the appropriation proper for national parks. This is certainly not a service that the federal government can afford to curtail, because it has nothing to do with the transfer of the natural resources. The federal government has taken upon itself the obligation of maintaining those national parks. They have been a splendid advertisement for Canada. Moreover, from year to year, we have been adding to the areas, the last occasion being the park set apart in Manitoba. Knowing fairly well the difficulty that the minister and his staff will have in administering and providing the necessary funds for carrying on this work, because some improvements must certainly be made, I feel it is rather a poor policy to begin to curtail this particular service, which is one of interest to everyone in Canada. I regret very much to see that the minister, no doubt having listened to other members of the government urging him to practise economy, has decided to cut this amount out of the parks appropriation. Rather I would judge that the parks will require greater and greater amounts to be spent on them each year. I should like to know what particular service and what branches of the service will be cut. It is a very substantial cut-$219,000. I think I am 
safe in saying that the minister himself did not agree to this cut very willingly, because I quite appreciate that he realizes as well as any member of the house, the necessity for keeping up these parks. I am sorry to see the vote for the national parks reduced in any particular, because I know full well the necessity for maintaining and improving our national playgrounds. What particular items will be cut as compared with last year?


Thomas Gerow Murphy: With the general remarks
as expressed by the hon. member for West Edmonton I am disposed to agree, because I feel that our national parks are a wonderful asset to the people of Canada, not only from the standpoint of the enjoyment they give as scenic beauty spots, but as a potential source of revenue because of the tourist traffic they attract to this country. The reduction in the vote this year is accounted for mainly by the fact that there will be practically no new construction carried on in any of the parks this year. There is also a slight decrease in maintenance costs. In other years the vote included a considerable sum for the construction of new buildings, bridges, roads, and so forth, but this year we are carrying out practically no work of that nature, for reasons of economy pure and simple.


John Livingstone Brown: Has the minister any jurisdiction over the Peace park established in Turtle mountains?


Thomas Gerow Murphy: None whatever.


John Livingstone Brown: It is purely provincial?


Thomas Gerow Murphy: Yes.


Thomas Reid: Is there any limit to the area
which the dominion government will accept as a site for a dominion park?


Thomas Gerow Murphy: There is no limit as to
area.


Thomas Reid: Neither minimum nor maximum?


Thomas Gerow Murphy: No.


Thomas Reid: Has the department taken,
over Garibaldi park from British Columbia?


Thomas Gerow Murphy: No. When I said that
there was no limitation as to area, I should have qualified that by saying that the department would not willingly accept an area which might be so limited in size as to be unsuitable for a national park. Outside of that, there is no minimum or maximum limit as to area or boundaries.

Supply-Interior-National Parks


Mr. STITT (Nelson):: Is any portion of this amount for historic sites earmarked for repairing Port Prince of Wales at the mouth of the Churchill river in northern Manitoba? The minister paid a visit to that fort along with myself and several others last year, and as I stated to him at that time there is more history and more tragedy woven around that fort than any other historic site in Canada. It was built by the Hudson's Bay Company from 1733 to 1741 at the time the English and French were at grips in the bay for the fur trade. The fort is about three hundred feet square, built of solid stone masonry, with walls from thirty t6 forty feet thick, and there are about forty very large guns scattered around the ramparts and now lying buried in the mud. The fort is rapidly falling apart. The arch of the main door is falling down and is held up only by a stick of timber placed there through the kindness of some official of the Department of Railways and Canals. This year a great many people will be visiting Churchill because the eyes of the whole world are focussed upon this new port, and it certainly is a disgrace that this historic fort should be allowed to remain in its present state. I hope that the minister will use his best endeavours to have at least a small amount of money spent this year to set up and reinforce the main gateway, dig the guns out of the mud, and generally make this historic site a little more presentable.


Thomas Gerow Murphy: As the hon. member has stated, it was my privilege last year to visit the site of Fort Prince of Wales at the mouth of the Churchill river on Hudson bay. Originally it was my intention to have an amount included in this vote for at least a partial rehabilitation of this historic fortress, but again owing to the general need for economy and the fact that it would take a considerable sum to do any work of importance on the fort, no provision has been made for that purpose this year. I assure the hon. member, however, that I am as anxious as he is that this work should be done at the earliest possible moment.


George Gibson Coote: Has a new bathhouse been built at the upper hot springs in Banff park?


Thomas Gerow Murphy: Yes, it is now in process of erection.


George Gibson Coote: It will be completed under this vote?


Thomas Gerow Murphy: No, the bathhouse is being built from the unemployment relief fund.


Charles A. Stewart: May I ask the minister if he has supervision and control
of the projected highway from Lake Louise to Jasper over the summit? I am quite aware that this work is being done under the unemployment relief scheme. Who has charge of it?


Thomas Gerow Murphy: The work is being carried on by the parks branch under the direction of our chief engineer, Mr. Wardle.


Charles A. Stewart: Is there any estimate of the total cost?


Thomas Gerow Murphy: The estimate is not very definite. Speaking subject to correction I think it amounts to about $20,000 per mile.


Mr. MacINNIS:: In further reference to Garibaldi park, I understand that it has been offered to the dominion by the provincial government. Has that offer been rejected, or is it still under advisement?


Thomas Gerow Murphy: No official offer has been made to the department, but in correspondence possibly with myself, although I am not certain about it at the present moment, the matter has been mentioned.


Alan Webster Neill: I had some correspondence
with the minister last year. I think he sent one of his officials out to the province of British Columbia to look into certain projected parks on Vancouver island, and when I asked for the report I was advised it was not for publication but for the minister's private information. I suggest an investigation of that kind, dealing with a public matter, should be made available to hon. members. If it is not for public use, of what use can it be? One of the minister's well known officials made an inspection of proposed sites on Vancouver island and the people are anxious to know whether there is any prospect of the government taking action. I do not see why we should not have the information contained in the report, but if we cannot have it perhaps the minister would give us some information as to the steps contemplated1 by the government regarding those sites, two or three of which are on the west coast of Vancouver island, and one including what is known as Strathcona park and adjacent territory, which belongs to the British Columbia government. Can the minister give us any information on those points?


Thomas Gerow Murphy: Certain communications
were sent to me with regard to areas in British Columbia which, in the opinion of the writers, might be suitable for a national park. Our chief engineer, Mr. Wardle, was sent to investigate these different areas. His
Supply-Interior

investigation was not thorough or complete. After some weeks or months he submitted a partial or preliminary report of his investigation. The fact that no policy has been decided upon by the government as to whether or not an additional park will be established in any of the suggested areas explains why the report has not as yet been laid upon the table or made public. Mr. Wardle's report was simply for the information of the minister. However, if and when a decision is made to establish another park in British Columbia, and a full and complete report is made by our officers, there is absolutely no reason why such information should not be tabled.


Alan Webster Neill: That is satisfactory, so far
as it goes, but the matter has been hanging fire longer than the minister suggests. Mr. Wardle was out in British Columbia not last year but the year before, and these proposals were first initiated perhaps eighteen months before that. Could the minister give me some idea as to when a policy will be formulated in that regard, or is the matter to be held in suspension owing to the present economic conditions?


Thomas Gerow Murphy: In all probability, until
economic conditions improve it is barely possible that any further parks will be established in Canada.


Ian Alistair Mackenzie: Did the chief engineer also investigate regarding the Garibaldi park area when he was in British Columbia?


Thomas Gerow Murphy: No, that area was not
investigated on that occasion.


George Gibson Coote: I noticed the minister told
the hon. member for West Edmonton that the reduction in this estimate was due to the fact that very little road work was being done in the parks. I wonder if the minister .can tell us about how much work was done in the parks in the past year under the unemployment relief grants. I understood some work was done, and I am wondering if it would offset the reduction in this vote.


Thomas Gerow Murphy: Between 8800,000 and
S900.000	of unemployment relief moneys were spent in connection with the various parks.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
To provide for the construction of the Golden-Revelstoke highway, $271,900.
Ian Alistair Mackenzie: Will this construction bring the Big Bend road to a point where it joins the provincial undertaking?


Thomas Gerow Murphy: No; we anticipate the
road will be completed next year by the dominion and the province.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
To provide for a refund of amount paid in 1928 on behalf of the Central Manitoba Mines Limited, being royalty on gold obtained from mineral claims in the province of Manitoba and acquired under the provisions of the Quartz Mining regulations, $1,916.37.
John Vallance: I think we should have some explanation on that item. Why are these people being paid the sum of money mentioned?


Thomas Gerow Murphy: The Yukon Quartz and
Yukon Placer Mining Acts, applicable to that territory only, as well as quartz mining regulations applicable to the prairie provinces and the Northwest Territories, provided for the payment to the crown of a royalty on gold at the rate of 37J cents per ounce. On June 11, 1928, the Yukon Quartz Mining Act was amended to provide for the payment of a royalty on the profits of the mine in excess of 110,000 during any year, in lieu of a fixed royalty of 371 cents per ounce, but the royalty on placer gold remained unchanged. It was understood that a similar amendment would be made as soon as possible to the quartz mining regulations applicable to the prairie provinces, but as a general revision and amendment of these regulations was at the time engaging the attention of an interdepartmental committee, the change referred to was not made effective until April 1, 1929- that is, for a period of nine months thereafter. During that time Central Manitoba Mines, Limited, paid in royalties the sum of $1,916.37, which was at a higher rate than afterwards obtaining, and for that reason they are asking for a refund.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
To provide for expenses in connection with determination of location and boundaries of ordnance and admiralty lands in the province of British Columbia, $3,000.
Thomas Reid: Would the minister kindly
explain this item?


Thomas Gerow Murphy: Section 8 of the agreement of February 20, 1930, between the dominion and the province of British Columbia on the transfer of the railway belt and Peace river block, provides for the appointment of two persons, one by the governor general in council and one by the lieutenant-governor in council, to determine the location and boundaries of the several parcels of ordnance and admiralty lands within and without the railway belt. By section 6 of

Supply-Lnterior
the said agreement, ordnance and admiralty lands included in the railway belt did not pass to the province. By section 7 of the said agreement, all ordnance and admiralty lands which were set aside as such before 1871, and which have been transferred to Canada by the Imperial government, continue to be vested in and administered by the government of Canada. It is provided, however, that Canada shall recognize and confirm any alienation of any part of such lands made by the province prior to the date of the said agreement. The dominion also undertakes to perform every obligation of the province under any agreement made by the province or any provincial act, orders in council or regulation.
It is very advisable at the earliest possible date there should be a dear understanding with the province as to the location and boundaries of the several parcels of ordnance and admiralty lands in the province of British Columbia, some of which are said to be very valuable. It is therefore proposed to provide a sum of $3,000 for the expenses of a commissioner to be appointed under the authority of section 8, who will possibly be accompanied by a departmental expert, as the matter of titles to be investigated is in some cases very complicated.


John Vallance: I have lived in western Canada for twenty-six years and I am puzzled to know what are admiralty lands.


Thomas Gerow Murphy: In the main they are lands which were set aside by the British Admiralty in the early days for admiralty purposes. They have been transferred to the crown in the right of the dominion.


Edward James Young: What were those admiralty
purposes?


Thomas Gerow Murphy: I am sorry my knowledge of history is not sufficient to inform the hon. member for what particular purpose any parcel of land was set aside, but as I understand it, these parcels of land were set aside for various admiralty purposes in the same manner that ordnance lands are set aside for military purposes.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
To provide amounts required for expropriation of areas for right of way on the Savona-Port Moody section of the main line of the Canadian Pacific Railway, also on the Pembina and Stonewall branches of the same road, $2,500.
Some hon. MEMBERS:: Explain.


Thomas Gerow Murphy: In connection with those
portions of the Canadian Pacific Railway
which were constructed by the Dominion government and afterwards turned over to the Canadian Pacific Railway Company, it is provided in the contract between the dominion and the company that the necessary right of way for the railway will be acquired by the government where necessary. Before this department had advice as to what lands were affected by the right of way, a certain number of patents were issued which contained no reservation of the lands required for the railway. Many years ago the neccessary deeds were obtained from owners in a large number of cases, but some cases have remained unsettled up to the present time. The areas in each case are small, but in addition to paying for the land the government has to provide the necessary expenses for the legal work connected with the transfer of title. It is impossible to forecast what expenditure may be required, as there is no means of knowing what price will be demanded by the various owners, nor is there any means to estimate what amount will be required for legal purposes, and possibly for expropriation proceedings. The sum of $2,500 is named merely as affording a basis for action to clear off all these pending cases as far as possible in 1932-33. The Department of Justice has advised that it is the duty of the Dominion government to procure title for the railway in all these cases.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
The CHAIRMAN (Mr. MacNicol):: Shall the resolution carry?


Mr. MacLEAN:: Before the resolution
carries I would ask the consent of the committee to revert to vote 206 dealing with the administration of the Migratory Birds Convention Act.


Some hon. MEMBERS:: Carried.


Alfred Edgar MacLean: There are one or two matters I should like to bring to the attention of the minister. The treaty was entered into in 1916 and will expire this fall, but it is provided that it shall remain in force from year to year after that date or until notice is given by either party to determine it. The people of Prince Edward Island think that our American friends have been getting the best of the bargain, and that we are really preserving the birds in the maritimes for their benefit- Two or three years in succession the provincial legislature has passed a resolution objecting to the renewal of the treaty without the province being consulted. One recital in the resolution states:
Supply-Interior

Whereas the said prohibition was enacted without receiving the assent of the government or the legislative assembly of the province of Prince Edward Island.
They refused to be a party to the treaty. Another recital states:
And whereas the government of the province was requested to enact a law confirming the provision of the said treaty and the federal legislation thereunder, which the government refused to do.
The government of Prince Edward Island has absolutely refused to be a party to this legislation. As the treaty expires this year, would the minister consult the three maritime provinces, particularly Prince Edward Island, to find out just what their objections are? Perhaps he could give us some information regarding the proposal he has in mind for continuing the treaty.


Thomas Gerow Murphy: I am not in a position to state that the provisions of this treaty are satisfactory in their entirety to any or all of the provinces. I think the hon. member will realize the difficulties that any government would be under in drafting a treaty or formulating regulations under it which would be satisfactory to each province. But I may say for his information that the provinces have-been consulted in regard to the operations of this treaty, officers of this department being continually in touch with officials of the various game departments of the provinces. As for over twenty-five years I have been a sportsman myself, I feel I have some little knowledge with regard to this problem. I am quite convinced of the value of the treaty to the people of Canada and to Canadian sportsmen. From my knowledge of its workings I believe it is very important not only from that standpoint, but by reason of the provisions it contains for the protection of insectivorous birds. The hon. member knows that increasingly our crops, both grain and vegetable as well as fruit, have been suffering from the ravages of insects, and it is most important that we protect our bird life, especially the insectivorous birds. That protection is one of the main items in the treaty and I do not at present intend to take any step to discontinue the treaty, although I do not say that regulations drafted thereunder might not be amended from time to time to suit particular areas in different parts of the country.


Alfred Edgar MacLean: Has the department received a resolution passed by the legislature of Prince Edward Island in connection with this matter?


Thomas Gerow Murphy: Yes; a resolution has
been received by the department from the Prince Edward Island legislature. I have called a conference to be held some time during the present month, to which officials and ministers from every province in the dominion have been invited in order that they may lay their views fully before the department and the government.
Mr. MaciLEAN:	That conference is in
connection with the treaty?


Thomas Gerow Murphy: In connection with the
operations of the treaty, yes.


Alfred Edgar MacLean: I am pleased to get that
information from the minister, and I trust that the representations which have been made by the local legislature will be given consideration, and that they will be notified when the conference is called. *


Thomas Merritt Cayley: There is no item here for
assistance to Jack Miner in his splendid work, and I do not know whether it is the intention of the minister to see that some assistance is given him. Since, however, the minister has revealed the fact that he is an ardent sportsman, I am sure that the work that Jack Miner is doing in western Ontario will appeal to him, and that he will do what he can to have the small amount of $2,500 which Mr. Miner is asking for included in the supple-mentaries.


Thomas Gerow Murphy: This item, I am informed,
has always been included in a special vote in the supiplementary miscellaneous estimates.


Joseph Philippe Baby Casgrain: Did not the department receive a request some time ago from a society that part of the land of Manoir Richelieu, Murray Bay, be made a sanctuary for birds? I heard that this request had been made to the department by Canada Steamship Lines. Has it been favourably received?


Thomas Gerow Murphy: Certain recommendations
reach the department from time to time in regard to the establishment of bird sanctuaries throughout the dominion, and they are dealt with almost immediately; but at the moment I am unable to inform the hon. member whether this particular request has been received by the department or not. To the best of my knowledge it has not, but I speak subject to correction. If such a request is received, I assure the hon. gentleman that it will be dealt with at once.

Supply-Pensions


Joseph Philippe Baby Casgrain: Is the government paying a certain amount of money to these people for their land for the bird sanctuary?


Thomas Gerow Murphy: No.
Mr. MaeINNIS: I wish to call to the attention of the minister certain matters in connection with the Migratory Birds Convention Act, and in doing so I may say that I am speaking not from personal knowledge but from what has been told me. The licences or permits given to collectors in British Columbia for the collection of specimens have been, I am informed, largely abused. I am encouraged to bring this to the attention of the minister in view of his reply to the question asked by the hon. member for Prince and the minister's intimation that he realizes the value of conserving the bird life of Canada for the good of the country. I am informed that there are really too many licences or permits granted for the collection of specimens, and that the specimens collected are indeed the rarest birds. It is stated that the number of specimens allowed each collector is far too great, and that the privilege of collection has been commercialized. Furthermore, it is pointed out that collectors coming in from other countries, particularly the United States, are allowed to collect specimens without any restriction whatsoever:	That there is a certain amount of
commercialization can be substantiated by the case tried in the British Columbia courts recently. The person prosecuted claimed that he was merely exchanging skins of one kind for skins of another, and the magistrate held that an exchange of that kind was tantamount to a sale of skins outright. I had some definite information on the subject, but not knowing that this question would come up to-night I did not bring it with me; I cannot therefore present it to the minister at the moment. If, however, he wishes, I shall be glad to give him the names of those who have complained to me and to help him in any way I can.


Thomas Gerow Murphy: If the hon. member will submit his complaint in writing, I shall be glad to have the matter investigated.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.

[Stage Direction]
Civil flying, $1,000.
Ross Wilfred Gray: Will the minister explain this item?


Hon. MURRAY MacLAREN (Minister of Pensions and National Health):: This is to provide a small sum for pensions in connection with flying. The list is a very limited one, and those provided for by other acts do not come within it. For the last four years the expenditures have been $240, $240, $346.40, and $230.


Ian Alistair Mackenzie: Is the
pension given for sendee or disability?


Murray MacLaren: Disability.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
European war-naval, militia and air forces after the war, $48,000,000.
Ian Alistair Mackenzie: Will the minister explain the decrease of $2,500,000 in this item?


Murray MacLaren: The decrease is more
apparent than real. The estimate for the previous year, $50,500,000 was considerably in excess of the amount expended, which was about $44,000,000, a difference of over $6,000,000. The estimate this year is for $48,000,000, which is actually $4,000,000 more than the expenditure of last year. It has been found very difficult to make these estimates with absolute certainty. Because of the amendments made in 1930 to the Pension Act, those who had previously accepted a final payment in lieu of pension were permitted to make a fresh application. There were 19,000 men who came within this category, and it was impossible to say just what proportion of this number would make application last year. As a matter of fact, the claims came in much slower than was anticipated, and the expenditures were less than the estimate of the previous year by the amount I have mentioned, $6,000,000.


Ian Alistair Mackenzie: If the minister will look at page 8 of the annual report of the department he will see that the payments made to the .men and their dependents amounted to $50,491,000. Does that amount cover the pension list as well?


Murray MacLaren: It includes the pensions paid and other items such as pay and allowances.


Frederick George Sanderson: Am I to understand
that the difference 'between the estimate and the expenditure was caused by certain applications not having been decided?


Murray MacLaren: No. A previous amendment to the Pension Act permitted a man receiving a small pension, say of five or ten per cent, to take a lump sum as a settlement. At one time there were something like 25,000 men in this class. The amendments of 1930
Supply-Pensions

permitted those who had accepted a final settlement to make application for reinstatement of their pensions, and it was necessary to calculate the number of men who might make such applications. There were
19.000	who were eligible for reinstatement, and we did not know whether most of these men would make application in one year or whether the applications would be spread out over a number of years. As a matter of fact the number of applications was under 12,000. That gave us a larger sum of money than we required to expend.


Frederick George Sanderson: I understand, then,
there are 7,000 cases not yet heard or pending decision.


Murray MacLaren: Possibly 6.000 or 7.000. but I cannot say that we expect them all to come up.


Frederick George Sanderson: Has the minister, in
his estimates for this year, estimated on those
6.000	or 7,000 cases?	.


Murray MacLaren: The estimate includes
2.000	of them. It is presumed a number of them will not appear.


Frederick George Sanderson: How does the minister arrive at the decision that a number of the cases will not be pressed?


Murray MacLaren: When we started out
we had nothing to guide us as to how many cases there would be. We have now the experience of something like two years. We have as a basis to guide us the number that have been appealing each month during the last twelve months, and the estimate is made to allow for 2,000 in the current year.


Frederick George Sanderson: Of the cases which
were entered last year or the year before and not decided-and there must be thousands of them-what estimate did the minister make of the ones which would likely come up this year?


Murray MacLaren: Is the hon. member
asking the question in connection with the appropriation, or is it a different question he is asking now?


Frederick George Sanderson: My question is based on the vote.


Ian Alistair Mackenzie: If the
minister will look at page 10 of his annual report he will find the following: Between March 31, 1930, and the end of 1931, there were new pensions awarded by the Board of 
Pension Commissioners, 4,394 for disability and 1,473 for dependent pensioners, and new pensions awarded by the pension tribunal and pension appeal court, 405 for disability and 52 for dependent pensioners. That is apart from the final payments. I think the question my hon. friend was trying to frame was: What is the estimate this year by way of new pensions to be awarded, in the first place by the Board of Pension Commissioners, and in the second place by the pension tribunal and the pension appeal court?


Murray MacLaren: As I was saying, there
are 2,000 of those for final payment. I cannot give the number estimated for the others, except that it is based on the number passing through from month to month.


Ian Alistair Mackenzie: That is
a point I want to emphasize. There is no disposition, is there, on the part of the department gradually to lower the estimate of the number of cases for next year that will be granted pensions? In other words, there is no tendency to be more strict in the adjudication?


Murray MacLaren: No; on the contrary we are anticipating an increase, not a diminution in the pensions. There will probably be an increase in pensions for some considerable time.


Frederick George Sanderson: If the minister says
they are anticipating an increase in applications for pensions, why the decrease in the estimate?


Murray MacLaren: Evidently I have failed
to make the matter clear. Although there is a decrease in the actual estimate, it will allow $4,000,000 more this year than was spent last year on pensions.


Ian Alistair Mackenzie: Perhaps
if the minister will give the increase last year over the year previous and then the estimated increase this year over last year, we shall see whether there is a progressive increase or not.


Murray MacLaren: The expenditures for the last four years are as follows-I am giving round figures:
1928-	29	
$40,000,0001929-	30	
39,000,0001930-	31	
44,234,0001931-	32 (for ten months).. ..	39,000,000
The estimates were:
1928-	29	
$39,000,0001929-	30	
42,000,0001930-	31	
50,000,0001931-	32	
50,500,000


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.

Supply-Pensions
Salaries and contingent expenses of the Board of Pension Commissioners for Canada, $451,284.
Ian Alistair Mackenzie: Would
the minister be good enough to inform the committee as to the success of the amendment of last year in regard to the Board of Pension Commissioners themselves dealing in the first place with all applications for pension?


Murray MacLaren: That is a question I have much more satisfaction in answering than many others coming under pensions, because the effect of the amendment passed last year was really good. There was a very decided effect on the administration as regards applicants. I should like to put the following on record for the information of the committee: applications for pension received by the Board of Pension Commissions from August 1, 1931, to February 29, 1932, amounted in all to 14,347. Applications granted during the same period numbered: 7,084. That, I think, was a large number within that period. While there have been many cases where the progress in granting pensions has been slow and has taken fnuch time, here is one instance where a large number of applications have been dealt with and1 pensions granted within a comparatively short time. That is one of the very gratifying results of the amendments passed last year. In addition, the pension board had 2,150 applicants medically examined. The board has still a large number of cases to deal with.


Ian Alistair Mackenzie: Is it not a fact that the amendments of last year throwing this work on the pension board have lessened the work of the tribunals out in the country?


Murray MacLaren: They have lessened it materially, for two reasons. They actually deal with the cases themselves, and many of them finally. In addition, the work has been pushed back, as it were, to the pension board, and some of these cases, of course, will ultimately come to the tribunal.


Ross Wilfred Gray: In round figures some 14,000 applications came before the board, and of these some 7,000 were accepted and pensions granted. How many of the balance either were referred to the tribunal or made application to the tribunal?


Murray MacLaren: I have not the exact figures on that, but the pension board was required to assign reasons in writing for declining a pension, and at the same time to inform the applicant that if he could get additional evidence his case would be reconsidered, and if that additional evidence was not satisfactory he could still ask for a hearing before the tribunal. So far many of the applicants whose claims have not been granted have rested there, but they still have the right, which they may ultimately exercise, to proceed further, as I have just stated. The fact remains that a large proportion of those who have not had their claims granted have not proceeded further. I am told that about 500 of the 7,000 have asked for a hearing before the tribunal.


Ross Wilfred Gray: That is 500 out of the 7,000 who were not granted a pension?


Murray MacLaren: Exactly. There were about
7,000	granted and 7,000 declined, so it was about fifty-fifty.


Ross Wilfred Gray: What became of the 7.000 cases in which a pension was declined? The minister will see my point. What is clogging the machinery? Is it because of the great number of applications that are being heard? The minister says that 500 of these 7,000 who were not granted a pension are asking for a hearing before the tribunal. What became of the others?


Mr. GEARY:: He has just told you.


Ross Wilfred Gray: He has not, and with all
respect to my hon. friend from South Toronto, the minister can handle his estimates without his assistance.


George Reginald Geary: I am only addressing myself to my hon. friend, not to the minister.


Murray MacLaren: I cannot say what has
become of the others. All I can say is that they have not proceeded further. They were informed that their application was not granted and they were given the reasons why it was not granted. They were told that they had the opportunity to collect further evidence and to have their case reviewed by the same board, and if an unfavourable decision were then given, they had still the opportunity of being heard before the tribunal. There were about seven thousand of them, ' of whom five hundred have asked to be heard before the tribunal. What about the rest? I do not know. They have not signified anything. They may be looking for further evidence, and they may still ask to be heard before the tribunal. We do not know anything except that they have been so informed, and that with the exception of about five hundred they have not proceeded further.


Ian Alistair Mackenzie: With all respect to the minister I can scarcely credit that statement that only some five hundred of
Supply-Pensions

the seven thousand whose applications were not accepted by the Board of Pension Commissioners are not proceeding further before the pension tribunal or the appeal court, because in reply to a question on the seventeenth day of February the minister replied to me that there were pending at that date, which was just the other day practically, 2,436 cases before the pension tribunals, and before the appeal court 1,231 cases. If the minister's statement is correct the majority of these cases now pending must have antedated the amendment of last year.


Murray MacLaren: Yes, they are not included in the 14,000 to which I was referring.


Mr. KENNEDY (Winnipeg):: I would like to ask a question on a point of procedure. Where cases come before the tribunal and are adjudicated upon, whether favourably or unfavourably to an applicant, what then is the policy of the administration as to the appeal }f such cases? Is there any general instruction that all cases favourable to the applicant shall be appealed?


Murray MacLaren: I do not think there is any policy. It is all laid down in the Pension Act. I understand that the question is, in the event of a case failing before the tribunal-


Donald MacBeth Kennedy: In the event of a case being adjudicated upon favourably to the applicant, is it automatically appealed?


Murray MacLaren: No, certainly not. In
the event of an applicant succeeding or failing before the tribunal, the procedure is not a matter of policy at all. It is all laid down in the act. The pensions advocate has the right of appeal for the applicant, and the commission counsel has the right of appeal on behalf of the pension board.


Ian Alistair Mackenzie: The significance of the figures is that whereas since their inception there were 4,545 cases referred to the pension tribunals, of which number they allowed 2,129 and disallowed 2,416-about a fifty fifty proportion-there were appealed by the pension applicants 1,172 and by the commission counsel, who is ostensibly representing the administration or the treasury, 1,550. So that the commission counsel, whether under instructions or not, has appealed far more cases than have advocates acting on behalf of soldiers applying for pensions. I asked' the question how many decisions rendered by the appeal court were in favour of the applicants? The reply was:
On appeals by pension applicants, 26; by commission counsel, 239.

Almost ten to one of the appeals sent to the appeal court were in favour of appeals lodged by commission counsel as against those lodged by pension advocates. Then I asked the question:
How many were adverse to the pension applicant?
And received the answer:
On appeals by pension applicants 703, by commission counsel 343.
Taking it in a negative way we find on appeals there were far fewer decisions against commission counsel than there were against applicants for pensions. I think the figures speak for themselves with relentless severity.
I recall that last year during a discussion on the estimates it was pointed out that a circular letter under date of June 25, 1931 had been sent out by the chief commission counsel to all commission counsel throughout Canada instructing them to pursue the most rigid course in regard to these appeals. On that occasion I complimented the minister because the minute the matter came to his attention he was good enough to withdraw that letter from circulation. I trust there are no more* instructions of that type being given to commission counsel. Speaking for myse'lf I have the utmost confidence in the personnel of the tribunals; I think they have done a remarkable work, but I have very little confidence in the attitude of the appeal court, as constituted, towards the claims of the applicants.


Frederick George Sanderson: I should like to say to the minister that I am not criticizing him; I have found him friendly and considerate, and he has gone out of his way on several occasions personally to investigate oases concerning pensions I have brought to his attention. Therefore anything I may have to say is not critical of the minister. It appears to me, however, that he must realize by now that the Pension Act, with the amendments which were added in 1930, is far from being .perfect, I should like to ask if it is the intention of the government at this session to bring down any amendment or amendments to the act.


Murray MacLaren: I should like to say a few words concerning several points brought up by hon. members opposite. In the first place, it is the right of applicants to appeal. All they have to do is to advise or request a pension advocate to have it done. That is a matter entirely apart from the department. Then, appeals by commission counsel are not departmental matters. Commission counsel acting under the Board of Pension Commissioners make the appeals which in their judgment should be made. I should not like to

Supply-Pensions
agree with the remarks of the hon. member for Vancouver Centre about the appeal court.
I have had much to impress me concerning the good work done by that court. There are certain facts we must bear in mind concerning the three courts. The Board of Pension Commissioners, or some of them, have been acting for ten years or more. They are well trained, experienced men. At the head of the appeal court is a man who was on the supreme court bench of one of the provinces for about fifteen years, a man who has had an extensive training and is fitted for his position. Then there is the tribunal composed of twelve members chosen from every portion of the dominion and representing the different provinces. Naturally most of those men have not been trained in their particular work; they are new men at new work, and I think it is fair to expect that some time will elapse before they learn accurately the value of evidence. I should like hon. members to bear in mind that I recognize there is a marked disparity between the number of appeals allowed on applications by advocates and by commission counsel. I am not going to judge these officials harshly because I think they are all trying to do their best. We may reasonably suppose it will take time to train men properly to weigh evidence as it should and will be done.


George Reginald Geary: I should like to straighten out a matter of procedure. Did I understand the minister to say that the Board of Pension Commissioners instructs the appeals on behalf of the crown, so to speak?


Murray MacLaren: Yes.


George Reginald Geary: So that each case is considered by the Board of Pension Commissioners, and it is the board which gives the instructions that the appeal be taken?


Murray MacLaren: Yes.


George Reginald Geary: I understood the commission counsel-


Murray MacLaren: Yes, that is true; the chief commission counsel is an official of the pension board.


George Reginald Geary: It did transpire last year that a circular letter was sent out which provoked a good many appeals-at least that was the inference. The minister was good enough to see that that letter was withdrawn. Perhaps the minister will let us know if within his knowledge any active part has been taken in invoking the appeal to the federal appeal board since that time, because there is a feeling on the part of some that the right of 41761-110
appeal by commission counsel has been very largely used. In many cases that appeal has been successful, whereas the appeal by the man has not been successful to anything like the same extent. I should like to be assured that it is not departmental policy that there should be such a large proportion of appeals by the commission counsel against the tribunal decisions.


Murray MacLaren: As I have just stated, it is not departmental policy. As soon as my attention was drawn to the letter sent out last year I disapproved of it and asked the pension board to recall it. The chief counsel is an official of the pension board.


Frederick George Sanderson: It does appear to me that the great defect of the Pension Act is the delay in dealing with cases that come before the tribunals. I have personal knowledge of twenty cases, of which ten or twelve have been pending for eight, nine, ten and twelve months, and two cases have been pending for fifteen months.


Murray MacLaren: I cannot discuss specific cases-


Frederick George Sanderson: I would not expect the minister to do that.


Murray MacLaren: I have found that so many conditions were supposed to exist, but a close analysis threw a different light on them.
I do not know whether those cases are still pending, but the applicants sometimes delay their own cases. As to legislation this session, the question is being very closely studied at the present time. Of course, delay cannot be wholly avoided. We are aware now what this machinery is costing the country, and surely no one is going to advocate that it be increased still further. We are trying to expedite the work as far as possible, but, as I pointed out, the pension board is granting more cases than the tribunal and the appeal court hear.


Frederick George Sanderson: I would not suggest for a moment that the machinery be increased, but could not the present machinery be speeded up? For instance, the tribunals meet at certain points in Ontario, but although there, may be twelve or fourteen cases on the docket they will sit for a day, dispose of four or six cases, and then move on to another point. Would it not be possible for the tribunal to clear the docket before they moved on?


Murray MacLaren: If any hon. member will look over the itinerary he will find that the tribunals do clear the docket in each place.

Supply-Interior-Indians

In Toronto we have had a board sitting continuously for the last few months. In many centres the tribunals sit for three, four or five days and dispose of their work.


Frederick George Sanderson: That may apply to
Toronto, but let me take Stratford in the county where the tribunal meets. To my knowledge that tribunal has never sat longer than a day and a half although there would be twelve or fourteen cases on the docket. In that time it could deal with only four or six cases. Why should not the docket be cleared before the tribunal moves on to another point?


Murray MacLaren: There is no reason why the tribunal should not do so.


Frederick George Sanderson: "Will the minister look into that?


Murray MacLaren: I will ask that an itinerary be sent to the hon. member which will show how long the tribunals have sat in the different centres during the last six months.


Mr. HOWARD:: We have succeeded in getting the tribunal to sit in Sherbrooke once. There were fifteen cases on the docket. The tribunal spent only one day there, heard five cases, and then moved on to another centre, just as the hon. member for South Perth (Mr. Sanderson) had said. Of the five cases heard two were immediately dismissed and in the other three the applicants were granted extensions of pensions. But those three cases were appealed, and not a thing was done for any of the applicants. One of those is the most glaring case I have had anything to dp with. It is an absolute shame. If I were to make any suggestion it would be that the decisions of these tribunals be final.
Item stands.


INDIANS
Thomas Gerow Murphy: I would ask the
chairman to call item 201.
To provide for expenses connected with the administration of Indian affairs, including salaries, supplies, relief, medical attendance, hospitalization, dwellings, agricultural activities, surveys, roads, bridges, irrigation, dyking, education, etc., and a grant of $100,000 approved by parliament in the session of 1926-27, $3,873,000.
Item stands.
Progress reported.


[Stage Direction]
At eleven o'clock the house adjourned, without question put, pursuant to standing order.
fMr. MacLaren.]
Wednesday, April 6, 1932