1935-04-04

Mr. SPEAKER:: I have the honour to inform the house that I have received the following letter:
Ottawa, April 4, 1935.
Sir,-
I have the honour to inform you that the Right Hon. Sir Lyman P. Duff, Chief Justice of Canada, acting as deputy of His Excellency the Governor General, will proceed to the Senate chamber to-day at 5 p.m. for the purpose of giving the royal assent to certain bills.
F. L. C. Pereira.
Assistant Secretary.



RAILWAYS AND SHIPPING

[Stage Direction]
Mr. G. R. GEARY (South Toronto) presented the first report of the select standing committee on railways and shipping owned, operated and controlled by the government, and moved that the report be concurred in.
Motion agreed to.

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

Mr. MOTHERWELL:: 1.	Has the Minister of External Affairs or any other minister of the government received any further reports, correspondence, cables or other documents from the Hon. Herbert Marler, Canadian minister in Japan, since January 1, 1934, with respect to the sale of wheat and other Canadian farm products in China and Japan?
2.	If so, will such reports, documents, etc., be tabled for the information of the house?


Sir GEORGE PERLEY:: 1.	Yes.
2.	Aside from a report by the assistant trade commissioner in Tokyo transmitted by the minister, and which was published in the Commercial Intelligence Journal of September 1, 1934, the dispatches in which reference is made to this subject are of a confidential character which it would not be in accordance with established practice to make public.


ALBERT ROSENBAUM
Mr. DORION:: 1.	Has the government knowledge that one Rosenbaum carrying a Canadian passport, has just been arrested in Paris on the charge of espionage?
2.	If so, on what date was such passport issued?


Sir GEORGE PERLEY:: 1.	No. Albert Rosenbaum was arrested on the 28th February last on the charge of not having complied with an expulsion order. No charge of espionage has been made.
2.	Date of issue of passport to A. Rosenbaum was February 22, 1934.


DUTY ON PERFUMES AND COSMETICS
Mr. RINFRET:: 1.	In what year was a special duty of 10 per cent imposed on perfumes and other cosmetics?
2. What revenue has accrued from this source, giving each year separately?
3. What revenue was accrued from this source during the first months of 1935?
4.	Are these products subject to the sales tax of 6 per cent besides the above-mentioned duty?


Mr. MATTHEWS:: 1.	March 22, 1933.
2.	1932-33	$ 1,859 86
1933- 34	 759,358 85
1934- 35	 800,708 01
(11 months)
3.	January and February-$146,673.03.
4.	Yes.



QUESTIONS PASSED AS ORDERS FOR RETURNS


Mr. GERSHAW:: 1.	Was Mr. Walter Weller, of Calgary, employed by the parks branch or the Department of Indian Affairs, or by the Department of Public Works or the Department of Trade and Commerce since July, 1930?
2.	If so, for how long in each department and at what salary?


Mr. CAHAN:: Return tabled herewith.



DURUM WHEAT

Mr. COOTE:: With reference to Durum wheat in semipublic terminal elevators at Port Arthur and Fort William,-
(a)	What was the amount of each grade on hand at the beginning of crop year 1933-34?
(b)	What amount of each grade was received during said crop year?
(c)	What amount of each grade was shipped out during said crop year?
(d)	What was the amount of each grade on hand at the end of said crop year?


Mr. HANSON (York-Sunbury):: Return
tabled herewith.

The King's Jubilee Cancer Fund



THE KING'S JUBILEE CANCER FUND


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Right Hon.   S@: I have a telegram from His Excellency the Governor General, informing me that the king has authorized the announcement that His Majesty wishes that the jubilee cancer fund be regarded as a comprehensive jubilee gift from all his Canadian subjects including dominion and provincial governments and official bodies, and that it is not expected or desired that any other jubilee gift, whether collective or individual, be sent to His Majesty.
I am making this public in this way at this time because there appears to be some idea that personal gifts will be sent to His Majesty by governments and official bodies at the time of the silver jubilee, as has been done on other occasions of a similar character. As the king has graciously decided that, instead of any such personal gifts, support should be given to the King George V silver jubilee cancer fund for Canada, which His Majesty would regard as a comprehensive jubilee gift from all his Canadian subjects, I may be permitted to express the hope that the people of Canada will support this jubilee cancer fund, not only on account of our great loyalty to and admiration for His Majesty, but also because the money so raised will be used in our fight against cancer, which is the worst disease from which we are now suffering.


Right Hon. W. L. MACKENZIE KING (Leader of the Opposition):: I am very
pleased to have this opportunity to support the right hon. the acting leader of the government (Sir George Perley) in the hope he has expressed that contributions to the silver jubilee cancer fund will be both widespread and generous. It is, I think, appropriate that the matter should have been brought up in this house, because the gift will constitute a national thanksgiving offering, and there has apparently been some misunderstanding as to the feature of it which has just been mentioned by my right hon. friend, namely, that individual gifts from the governments of the different provinces or from the municipalities, and possibly from the federal government as well might be expected, whereas, as I understand my right hon. friend now, the intention is that all parties in the country, both public bodies and individuals, should join together to make this one collective gift-a gift that
92582-153i
will be worthy of the historic occasion which it is intended to commemorate, worthy of the admiration and affection which the people of Canada have for His Majesty, and worthy of the great cause to which the proceeds of the gift will be applied. I do hope that the national aspect of the matter will be appreciated throughout Canada and that contributions will be made generously from all sides. In that connection I might point out that the impression does exist, since there has been mention of small amounts of one dollar as contributions to be sent to Her Excellency at Government House, that the intention is to have the gift made up solely of such small contributions. I imagine that the purpose is rather that contributions in any amount will be most welcome. Certainly where they can be made generously and on a large scale they will be most acceptable.


Mr. ROBERT GARDINER (Acadia):: Permit me, Mr. Speaker, to say a few words in support of this very laudable object, namely, the cancer fund. I am sure that every member of this house trusts that the support will be generous. But may I go a little further than either the acting Prime Minister or the leader of the opposition has gone. Cancer is recognized to-day as the most insidious disease which the human race has to deal with, and while we all appreciate the fact that this fund is being started for the purpose of investigating not only the cause but the cure of cancer, may I suggest to the house that the time has come when we should have a government policy in regard to this matter. We have been allowing this very important question to remain solely in the hands of private individuals, but the disease is so insidious that, while some progress has been made, what has been done through private initiative is absolutely insignificant in relation to the devastation which the disease causes in human life. I submit that this is a good time to impress on the government of Canada the fact that responsibility rests on the governments in this country to prosecute this matter not only with financial support but by every other means within their power. I trust that this cancer fund will be the beginning of such a new policy.



CLASSIFICATION OF UNEMPLOYED

[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. JEAN FRANCOIS POULIOT (Temiscouata):: Yesterday every member received a translated copy of the correspondence between Mr. Leon Trepanier, joint secretary, congress
B.NA. Act-Interpretation

of the mayors of Canada and myself, and between Mr. G. A. Wenige, mayor of London, and myself with regard to the classification of unemployed. In his letter Mr. Trepanier says:
(Translation) Professor Marsh of McGill is at the disposal of the government to complete that tabulation by adding to it the information which you asked for.
May I ask the government whether the questionnaire also mentioned in Mr. Tre-panier's letter was submitted to them before being sent to the municipality and whether Professor Marsh has been employed by the government to do any work in that regard. If so, may I suggest to the government that they should rather have this classification work done by the bureau of statistics.


Hon. W. A. GORDON (Minister of Labour) :: Professor Marsh has not been employed by the government to carry on the work suggested. As long ago as 1931 the provinces were asked to try to compile as well as they could figures with respect to unemployment. Now, anyone who has paid attention to the experiences of other countries with respect to the assembling of figures of this character knows that it is probably one of the most difficult tasks that can be undertaken. It has been stated repeatedly at the League of Nations and repeatedly in the House of Commons that from the very nature of the thing no figures in any country are even fairly accurate. The mobility of the individual is one of the great difficulties. A census taken to-day with respect to unemployed and their classification, while fairly accurate as of today, would be wholly undependable thirty days from now. The government in 1931 did ask the provinces to endeavour to determine the number of unemployed who were employable and I must confess-I do not blame the provinces-that the report we received was not very enlightening. In January this year I had the director of unemployment relief communicate with the various provinces to see whether they could not give us a classification which would reflect a more accurate picture. Since that time useful information has been received from all the provinces except Quebec, though Quebec has advised me that the information asked for might be supplied by the tenth of this month. I am not calling attention to the fact that Quebec has delayed, because they may have very good reasons there; it is a very difficult thing to compile these figures. The information compiled by Professor Marsh for the municipal conference which was held in Montreal
(Mr. Pouliot.l
recently, covered in the main municipal figures with respect to revenue and matters of that character. In Professor Marsh's resume reference was made to relief expenditures, and if the rest of the information contained therein was no more accurate than that with respect to relief expenditures by the dominion, I am afraid it is just fifty per cent out. However I caused some inquiry to be made and Professor Marsh explains that his figures were taken from a newspaper report which was obviously inaccurate. It would be highly desirable if there were some method we could employ that would keep us informed from day to day of the number of unemployed people capable of being employed and their classification. When we get the complete information from the provinces, I of course intend to go into it with care in order to see whether, on the basis of the information given, some further steps should be taken in order to classify the unemployed, because it is obvious, if a method can be adopted to give us a complete picture as has been suggested by the hon. member for Temiseouata (Mr. Pouliot), that would be most helpful.



BRITISH NORTH AMERICA ACT


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
William Lyon Mackenzie King: A day or two ago I asked a question of the ministry as to the construction to be placed upon the section in the British North America Act relating to the duration of the present House of Commons and the possible bearing of the government's interpretation upon the date of a general election. The Minister of Justice was going to reply, perhaps to-day. I would ask him if he is in a position to do so now.


Hon. HUGH GUTHRIE (Minister of Justice):: The replies to the questions submitted by my right hon. friend a day or two ago in regard to the duration of the present parliament are as follows:
1. Which was the day of the return of the -writs for choosing the present House of Commons?
The government is not prepared to answer this question, as it involves a matter of opinion on a point of law, namely: What is the true construction of section 50 of the British North America Act? However, the invariable practice since confederation has been to adopt the date named in the proclamation of the election for the return of the

Conference in London
writs, which for the present House of Commons was the 18th day of August, 1930.
2.	When does the present House of Commons cease to continue?
Answered by number one.
3.	Is it necessary that the writs for a general election be issued during the duration of the House of Commons?
The government is not aware of any provision requiring the writs for a general election to be issued during the duration of the House of Commons, but the invariable practice since confederation has been to issue the writs during such period.
4.	Is there a limit to the period of time which may elapse between the date of the issue of the writs for a general election and the day of polling?
No-subject to the provision of section 20 of the British North America Act.


William Lyon Mackenzie King: May I ask my hon. friend a further question? Is it the intention of the present government to follow the invariable practice in the particulars referred to?


Hugh Guthrie: If I were to express my own opinion on the matter, I would say yes; but I am not in a position on such a question to express the opinion of the government.


William Lyon Mackenzie King: Could the opinion of the government not be ascertained?


Hugh Guthrie: In due time, I fancy.


William Lyon Mackenzie King: Could it be ascertained in the near future?


Mr. MANION:: We will give the right hon. gentleman plenty of notice.



ANYOX SMELTER

[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. OLOF HANSON (Skeena):: I would like to ask the Minister of Labour or the government a question:	Have any representations been made to the federal government by the provincial authorities of British Columbia or any other source in regard to the closing of the Anyox smelter, throwing approximately a thousand men out of employment? If such representations have been made, what action does the government propose to take in this matter?


Wesley Ashton Gordon: About a year ago the copper
refinery or smelter at Anyox was closed down by reason of a strike that took place at the plant. At that time I took steps to remove
from Canada and to return to their native country a number of agitators who fomented that strike. I was well aware that the Anyox operation was in a most difficult position by reason not only of the nature of the ore on which they were working and the cost of winning and refining it, but also the market situation for copper. At that time I was criticized by a number of my hon. friends opposite for taking the action I did, although it did result in a cessation of the strike. But I am informed that as a result of the closing down on that occasion, in addition to the other reasons which I have just indicated, the Anyox smelter has now been or is about to be permanently closed down. Representations have been made to me by a number of people-I do not think there were any from the government of British Columbia, although I shall have to look into that question and make sure-with respect to what help might be given to the operation at Anyox. A number of suggestions have been made, but the real situation is that with the present world price and market for copper, that operation in my judgment at least cannot be successfully carried on.
With respect to those who will unfortunately be thrown out of work if the plant closes down, that is essentially a problem for British Columbia. The assets of mines are of a wasting character; they do not last forever. You cannot take the same ounce of gold or pound of copper out of the ground twice, and since the beginning of time mines have come into being and gone out of the picture by reason of the exhaustion of their ore bodies. I have lived in mining camps when they started, when they reached the top of their output and when they faded out of the picture. This is purely a local problem and must be handled by the individual himself, the locality and the province if it is beyond the capacity of the individual to take care of it.



CONFERENCE IN LONDON


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Right Hon. Sir GEORGiE PERLEY (Acting Prime Minister):	The day before yesterday
the right hon. leader of the opposition (Mr. Mackenzie King) asked me whether it was suggested that anything in the nature of an imperial conference would be held at London while the jubilee celebrations were taking place. I told the right hon. gentleman at that time that I thought only informal con-
[Stage Direction]
Conference in London
versations would take place then.. Now I find that Mr. Stanley Baldwin announced in the British parliament on July 30 of last year that the United Kingdom government have invited the prime ministers of the dominions to take part in the jubilee ceremonies to be held' in London in May, and that it was hoped to take advantage of their presence in London to discuss personally and informally any questions of particular importance outstanding. I may say that on inquiry I understand that is the position.
William Lyon Mackenzie King: Is my right hon. friend aware of any questions of particular importance outstanding that are likely to be discussed? Has he any knowledge of any such question?


Sir GEORGE PERLEY:: No, I have not heard anything of any such questions.


William Lyon Mackenzie King: I understand
that if the Prime Minister is well enough to do so, it is the intention that he will be present in London, at the time of the jubilee ceremonies. May I ask if it is the intention of the government to have him accompanied by any other members of the government or any official personages?


George Halsey Perley: No one except
the Prime Minister has been invited'. Whether he will be attended by others has not yet been considered.


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
William Lyon Mackenzie King: My right hon
friend the acting leader of the government (Sir George Perley) promised me that he would have something to say about the probable date and length of the adjournment of parliament at the Easter season. I do not wish to press him unduly in the matter, but every day we are getting nearer to the Easter recess, and if he could give some information very soon it would be much appreciated.


Right Hon.   S@: As to the date of the adjournment of the house, that will depend' on how the business progresses, and we shall endeavour to meet the convenience of members in that respect. It is intended to ask the house to agree to an adjournment of some time, but I am unable to-day to fix any date. I will endeavour to be a little more definite to-morrow.


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. VINCENT DUPUIS (Laprairie-Napier-ville):: On March 21 I asked1 the Minister of Agriculture (Mr. Weir) to be kind enough to give me an explanation regarding importations of butter from Great Britain. He then told me that my question would be taken as notice of a question. The hon. minister was kind1 enough to give me his answer by letter. As there are many people inquiring about the answer, and the newspapers are making guesses about it, I think it proper to ask the minister to allow me to read this letter, so that it shall be on the record.


Pierre Édouard Blondin: There is no rule that
permits Of the hon. member doing as he proposes.


Vincent Dupuis: Then I ask the minister to read the letter, so that it shall be on record because it is very interesting.


Hon. ROBERT WEIR (Minister of Agriculture) :: I was not aware at the time the
hon. member asked the question that he wished the reply put on Hansard. I gave a partial answer and said that if there was any further information required I would be glad to supply it. I have no objection to putting the information on Hansardi at some future time, perhaps to-morrow.


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. J. S. WOODSWORTH (Winnipeg North Centre):: Yesterday I asked the government whether it was proposed to carry out the recommendations of the royal commission with regard to prosecuting those who were guilty of fraud in connection with the building of the post office at Waterloo, Quebec. The Minister of Public Works (Mr. Stewart) said the matter had been handed over to the Minister of Justice (Mr. Guthrie). I should like to ask the Minister of Justice whether his department proposes to seek to recover the moneys unlawfully obtained.


Hugh Guthrie: The report is now being examined
by the law officers of the Department of Justice, but the evidence has not been received yet. It is necessary to have the evidence in order to form any opinion.

______________Supply

Justice-Supreme Court


[Stage Direction]
Oti the orders of the day:
Vincent Dupuis: Mr. Speaker, I do not appear to have much luck in obtaining answers to my questions. On the 22nd of March last I asked the honourable ministers from the province of Quebec if they were in favour of the Barrette plan for a contribution of three million dollars towards the completion of the University of Montreal, jointly with the government of the province of Quebec and the city of Montreal. The right honourable the acting prime minister (Sir George Perley) asked me to have my question inscribed on the order paper. As the hon. Minister of Marine knows full well that a private member oannot present any measure involving the expenditure of public funds-such measures being the exclusive prerogative of ministers of the Crown-would he kindly inform us whether he is in favour of submitting such a plan to the house, as the city of Montreal and the province of Quebec are interested to know.


Hon. ALFRED DURANLEAU (Minister of Marine) (Translation):: Mr. Speaker, the leader of the house did suggest to my hon. friend that he have his question put on the order paper; we have not seen it there as yet. We were waiting for it to consider my hon. friend's request and to give him an answer. The answer must come from the government itself and not from the Minister of Marine alone.


Vincent Dupuis: What about cabinet solidarity? Mr. Speaker, the hon. Minister of Marine has no doubt heard of the matter from the hon. member for Berthier-Maskinonge (Mr. Barrette), as I am informed that the hon. member mentioned it to all the ministers from the province of Quebec, to the right hon. the Prime Minister and to other members of the government. Since that time -that is more than three months ago-have the hon. Minister of Marine and the other members of the government not had time to consider the matter? I should like to have an immediate answer.


Alfred Duranleau: I do
not intend to engage in debate with my hon. friend on this question, which is an extremely delicate one. My hon. friend may laugh, but-


Vincent Dupuis: No.


Alfred Duranleau: -but
he is not doing it in the interest of the institution.


Vincent Dupuis: No, I am not laughing about that.


Alfred Duranleau: The
citizens of the province of Quebec and the authorities of the university of Montreal know perfectly well how the ministers representing that province feel towards the institution in question, but I have some doubt as to the efficacy of the means used by hon. members opposite-


Vincent Dupuis: The plan originated on the government side.


Alfred Duranleau: -to help the university.


Vincent Dupuis: The plan originated on the government side.


Alfred Duranleau: I will say to my hon. friend that when he will have put his question in the proper form the government will be in a position to answer it.


Mr. BARRETT (Translation):: Hear, hear.


Vincent Dupuis: If the hon. member for Berthier-Maskinonge is satisfied with that, he is easily pleased.


[Stage Direction]
The house in committee of supply, Mr. Morand in the chair.
Supreme Court of Canada-
Contingencies and disbursements, including books, magazines, etc., for judges, not exceeding, $350, $4,100.
Law books and books of reference for library, and binding of same, $7,000.
Printing, binding and distributing supreme court reports, $8,000.
Jean-François Pouliot: On this item may I ask
the Minister of Justice if the government contemplate the construction of a new building for the Supreme Court of Canada. This matter was brought up in the house previously and the answer of the minister was very satisfactory, but every member would be delighted to have a more complete answer. I mention this again because the supreme court library is most valuable, containing books which could not be replaced, and I wonder if that library could not be made fireproof in order to protect that important collection of books.


Hugh Guthrie: The hon. member's suggestion, I think, is well worthy of consideration, but this is a matter upon which I could not commit the government. It would have to be discussed in the first instance with the Department of Public Works, but I agree that it is high time something should be done in that regard.

Supply-Justice-Supreme Court


James Shaver Woodsworth: Mr. Chairman, it
is absolutely impossible for us in this end of the chamber to hear anything that is going on.
Mr. 'GUTHRIE:	I usually speak quite
loudly, but there is a good deal of noise in the chamber. I agree that the time has come when some consideration should be given the question of a new building for the Supreme Court of Canada and the Exchequer Court of Canada, and I think some consideration should be given the question of library accommodation both in connection with the House of Commons and in connection with the libraries of those courts, which represent a great deal of money and which are now in buildings that are not looked upon as fireproof. However, this is a matter which concerns very largely the 'Department of Finance and very intimately the Department of Public Works. I can only express my own views on the subject and my sympathy with the views expressed by my hon. friend who asked' the question.


Mr. LUCHKOVICH:: I really wanted to
speak on item No. 13, but since the subject I wish to discuss to-day pertains to the administration of justice I think I am justified in saying what I have to say even under this item. On March 11, 1935, a news item, headlined in large capital letters, appeared in the Montreal Star which might have destroyed forever more the high regard I have for the judiciary of Canada were it not for the fact that the unfortunate and indiscreet conduct of only one of its members cannot be regarded as the attitude of the whole body. One black sheep in the judicial family does not necessarily mean that they are all of the same colour. The item in question reads as follows:
Judge Delivers Scathing Rebuke
Ukrainians who attacked woman denounced in court
A scathing indictment of Slav morals and standards of life, as compared with those of Canada, was read from the bench of the Court of King's Bench, this morning, by Mr. Justice Wilson in passing sentence of two years imprisonment with hard labour, the maximum under section 280 of the criminal code, on Stanley Kardach and Steve Kaveleo, convicted of assault on a female.	_
After summarizing the case against the two Ukrainians and telling them that_ "the court has no hesitation in saying that in this case a verdict of rape would have been justified and applicable under the evidence," His Lordship said:


Hugh Guthrie: At this point I am going to raise the question of order. It is against the rules of order in this house to comment in any way upon judges in respect of cases

tried by them. If complaints are to be made against judges they must be definite, and our only relief in regard to such complaints is to take up the matter in the Senate and House of Commons by way of an address. Otherwise our rules do not permit us to comment upon the decisions of judges in any cases that come before them.


Michael Luchkovich: This does not happen to be a decision of the judge in question; it is a reported statement made on passing sentence.


Hugh Guthrie: That is part of the
judgment.


Mr. LAPOINTE:: I should like to know what this has to do with the library of the supreme court.


The CHAIRMAN:: I will have to rule this discussion out of order.


Michael Luchkovich: On a point of order, surely when the judge of one of our courts indicts a whole race because of the action of two individuals there should be some recourse.


Raymond Ducharme Morand: The hon. member has recourse if he wishes to bring it up by means of a substantive motion, but he cannot bring it up in supply. I would refer him to paragraph 293 (j) of Beauchesne:
(j) oast reflections upon the conduct of judges of superior courts unless such conduct is based upon -a substantive motion.
I am sorry, but I must rule this discussion out of order.


Mr. GARLAND (Bow River):: I desire to direct a question to the Minister of Justice. In a Canadian Press dispatch dated November 13, appearing in the Montreal Star, I read the following:
With the assurance of the bench that sentence would not be such as to ruin their trade should' they be convicted, representatives of five Montreal coal companies facing charges of forming a combine in restraint of trade prepared to-day to present their side of the case. Pleas for counsel of the crown were concluded yesterday and the case for the defence begun.
Mr. Justice Wilfrid Laliberte-
According to this dispatch-
-who was on the bench when five other companies were convicted on similar charges and sentenced to fines totalling $30,000 early this year, yesterday said that the sentences would not hurt the companies' trade should they be found guilty. He had' given the same assurance to the five other companies in the first trial.	[DOT]

Supply-Justice-Penitentiaries


Hugh Guthrie: I will have to raise the same point of order.


Edward Joseph Garland: The question I want to ask the minister is whether it is proper for a judge to anticipate his decision in a court and to make the statement that the defendants in the case will not be injured by his decision.


Hugh Guthrie: I have no comment whatever to make in regard to the conduct of judges. It must be remembered also that the federal government has nothing to do with the administration of justice in the provincial courts.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Penitentiaries,-Amount required for cost of administration, construction, purchase of land, supplies and equipment, maintenance and discharge of inmates at Kingston, St. Vincent de Paul, Dorchester, Manitoba, British Columbia, Piers Island, Saskatchewan and Collin's Bay penitentiaries, $2,830,947.75.
Mis3 MACPHAIL:	I should like to ask
the Minister of Justice if he cares to make a statement with regard to the recent fire in Kingston.
Hugh Guthrie: I have a more detailed
report than the one I gave the house recently. It does not vary very much from my original statement, and it is pretty lengthy. However if I may be permitted to summarize it I would say in the first place that the loss in damage is not as great as was originally expected. The loss in the shoe shop including material and machinery is estimated at $3,484.33. The structural damage to the building by fire is comparatively slight, chiefly from smoke and water and broken glass, and will amount to $400. The damage to machinery in the tailor shop is estimated at $1,443 so that the total damage caused by the destruction will be in the neighbourhood of $5,000.
The occurrence arose almost as I described on a former occasion. Since my former statement information has come to hand through the evidence of prisoners. The only complaint or excuse which has so far been made by any prisoner is that the prisoners are not allowed to play baseball. There is a period of exercise allowed in the penitentiary, various specific exercises being provided. It may be remembered that last spring without lawful authority and contrary to the rules and regulations baseball was permitted by the warden for a limited period, until he was instructed to stop it. After it was stopped there was another outbreak.


Mr. JACOBS:: Why not allow them to play golf?


Hugh Guthrie: Now the demand is again for baseball, and that is the only complaint which so far has been made by any prisoner. However, I am satisfied from information which has come to me that the matter has been under consideration for some time by a certain element in the penitentiary which had definitely resolved, for some purposes of their own, to stage a revolt. One of the documents circulated among the prisoners in the penitentiary and handed by one of the prisoners to the warden is a document of a little more than a page in length prepared in block letter printing and received by the warden on March 21. For the information of hon. members I shall read parts of the document to the house, omitting the names of prisoners.
The movement that is now on foot is similar to the one that was talked of a few weeks ago. It is to take place in the Protestant chapel, if they cannot get out into the dome. They will endeavour to hold the chapel and cause militia to be brought here. The view in doing this is to get publicity and cause trouble before the elections. There is only to be one or two men in each shop that are to be acquainted with all the details, and they are to talk it up and ascertain how many could be counted on, but not to tell when or where it is going to happen. Ihe plans are that its to take place this Sunday or the following Sunday at the latest. The feeling among the men is against it, but the agitators insist on a "blow-off" before the elections.
Then follows a list of names of prisoners to be depended upon to assist in the outbreak.


Ernest Lapointe: Who has written this?


Hugh Guthrie: It is assumed it is written by a prisoner and was passed around among the prisoners prior to March 21.


James Shaver Woodsworth: Was there any investigation made regarding this document?


Hugh Guthrie: I think the actual revolt occurred on March 21, did it not?


Mr. WOODSW ORTH:: But I am speaking with regard to this particular document.


Hugh Guthrie: There was an investigation, as soon as the document was received. Do not interrupt me; let me finish and then ask the questions. As soon as the document was received an investigation was immediately started in order that the necessary-


James Shaver Woodsworth: Mr. Chairman, I hope the minister will not accuse me of interrupting, but I must point out he is reading a document, and I should like to know how that document is authenticated.

Supply-Justice-Penitentiaries


Hugh Guthrie: It is authenticated by a prisoner who handed it to the warden, and I have a number of-


Edward Joseph Garland: On a point of order I submit there is grave doubt as to whether or not the minister is privileged to read to the house any letter unless he gives the signature to the letter, or accepts personal responsibility for it. I can recall many occasions when that point has been raised by hon. members on the government side of the house. It has been a form of coercion exercised by the government against other people, compelling them under the rules to give signatures. In this instance the signature either should be given, the letter tabled or in some other way the document should be authenticated.


Hugh Guthrie: The letter is mot addressed to anybody and is not signed by anybody. It is a part of the evidence-


Edward Joseph Garland: What standing has it?


Hugh Guthrie: It is part of the evidence which developed at the investigation which was held. I was asked for a report on the investigation.


Edward Joseph Garland: But that is not evidence.


Hugh Guthrie: I am not submitting it as evidence; I am submitting it as a document which warned officials that something was under way.


Ernest Lapointe: It is a paper.


Hugh Guthrie: I shall not read the part which gives the names. The document continues :
In giving names I have not spared or protected anyone. This is a despicable thing for me to do, but the consequences are too grave for me to stand by. There is talk of trouble of some kind to happen on Friday. Of this I have heard very little.
I read this only to show that evidently there had been some preparation for the outbreak, and that the matter did reach the knowledge of prison officials on March 21. No definite conclusion has yet been arrived at by the warden, who is conducting the investigation, as to the names of the prisoners who were the ringleaders in the outbreak. Certainly it is true that a large number of the prisoners in that particular shop were not implicated, but rather through fear joined in, whatever took place in those shops. As I have said the fire was not of a very serious nature, although when the men were barricaded in the building-they had barricaded

it themselves-and the smoke was pouring out, the officers in charge did not know how far the fire might go, and for that reason asked assistance of a detachment of the city fire brigade, which assistance was given. The fire was under control about 6.30 at night.


Miss MACPHAIL:: I think a fire which caused $5,000 damage is after all not a slight affair.


Hugh Guthrie: The fire did not cause that; the prisoners broke machinery to the extent of $4,000 or $4,500.


Agnes Campbell Macphail: According to the minister's figures the whole cost ran about $5,000. On the night of the fire I recall that the local newspapers carried a heading stating that 50 men had barricaded themselves in the burning building; is that correct?


Hugh Guthrie: I cannot give the exact number. I believe 71 men were in the building. They had barricaded the doors,-closed them and locked them from the inside. The doors had to be opened by means of an acetylene torch, and I suppose the hinges were melted off so as to gain access to the inside.


Agnes Campbell Macphail: Were there any guards in the burning building with the prisoners?


Hugh Guthrie: Three guards were overpowered and tied; I think their hands and feet were tied, although I am not certain on that point. Originally they were taken down to the basement, but subsequently were marched up into one of the tailor or shoe shops above, where the men were gathered. As soon as the outside guards forced their way in they were all taken out of the building.


Agnes Campbell Macphail: Does the minister contemplate having a thorough investigation made into the penitentiaries, gaols and reformatories of Canada; an investigation into crime and its punishment?


Hugh Guthrie: Before answering that question perhaps I might deal with another matter. There is another investigation under contemplation at the present time. On March 19 a charge was made in this house that one of the inspectors of the penitentiary had made some very derogatory statements about a prisoner by the name of Hall, since liberated. I made a pretty full inquiry in connection with that charge and upon being given the word of honour by Inspector Dawson, I informed the house that there was no

Supply-Justice-Penitentiaries
foundation for the charge, that the statements had never been made. The next day the hon. member for Southeast Grey (Miss Macphail) produced a document in the house which was purported to be an affidavit.


Agnes Campbell Macphail: Which was an affidavit.


Hugh Guthrie: That is my hon. friend's view.


Samuel William Jacobs: When is an affidavit not an affidavit?


Agnes Campbell Macphail: What is an affidavit? Perhaps we had better have a definition.


Hugh Guthrie: An affidavit is a document used in a judicial proceeding or of a form prescribed by some statute which authorizes it. A statutory declaration can be taken under the provisions of the Canada Evidence Act.


Agnes Campbell Macphail: If a document is signed before one of the law officers of the crown and sworn to, is that not an affidavit?


Hugh Guthrie: No, it is not an affidavit. An affidavit must be made in a judicial proceeding or in compliance with the requirements of some statute.


Robert Gardiner: What is it then?


Hugh Guthrie: A nullity; it has no effect any more than any signed statement.
I should like to refer to the affidavit which was read here. I am aware the hon. member for Southeast Grey perhaps is actuated by some animosity against me. I hope she is not as I feel none against her.


Agnes Campbell Macphail: I would not trouble
myself to feel any animosity. When I came into the house last year about as well as the hon. member for Muskoka-Ontario (Mr. Mc-Gibbon)-


Some hon. MEMBERS:: Take it back.


Agnes Campbell Macphail: No, I will not take it back. When I came into this house last year about as well as the hon. member for Muskoka-Ontario was yesterday, the Minister of Justice came over to my desk and shook hands with me in the guise of friendship. I assumed that his feelings were genuine. He suggested the holding over of a resolution which I had been discussing through a special arrangement. I told him that I was not used to asking for special privileges in the house but I assumed that his offer was made in all kindness. The matter was held over and because of that I did something which afterwards turned out to be indefensible. The Minister of Justice deliberately made it possible for me to do this.
This was a very miserable case, in fact so miserable that only one newspaper reported it. The minister thought he was doing something which would injure me, and this matter was spread on Hansard in the greatest detail. I do not know whether the minister realizes what he did last year. I had just recovered from one shock two months previously and it took me weeks and months to recover from the other shock. People told me that this would not affect me in my constituency but I replied that oddly enough I had not thought of that. That was not what concerned me, it was the fact that a minister in the guise of apparent friendship led me on to making a statement which he knew I would not have made had I known the facts. I followed up this matter and found that all the files in connection therewith had been in the possession of the minister from January 25. I did not arrive in the house until about February 18 or 19. I feel no animosity to the Minister of Justice but he is the only person in public life in Canada for whom I have not the respect I would like to have.


Hugh Guthrie: Apparently I was not
very far wrong in my original statement. I am afraid the hon. member for Southeast Grey has not a very warm and friendly feeling toward me.


Agnes Campbell Macphail: You are quite right.


Hugh Guthrie: Notwithstanding that, I
bear her no ill feeling whatever. I have forgotten the incident of last year to which she referred. She brought up the other matter in connection with another prisoner during the course of a rather vindictive speech against the penitentiary management.


Agnes Campbell Macphail: That is true, I admit that.


Hugh Guthrie: When I referred to this
matter she replied that this prisoner had had a good social outlook, I think they were the words used. It is true that I had the record of this man before me, as I have the records of all prisoners. In a very polite and inoffensive way I gave my hon. friend the information. I believe she has been misled by certain people who have been furnishing her with information. I said that in connection with the case last year and I am sorry to have to say it again in connectior with the case she brought up this year. My hon. friend is of a very sympathetic disposition and I fear that she has been imposed upon. We are all liable to imposition from time to time, and I believe that is what has happened in connection with the charges she
Supply-Justice-Penitentiaries

makes against Inspector Dawson. Her informant was a prisoner until some time in February when he was released. She based a rather serious charge against a high officer of the penitentiaries' staff on information supplied by this man Hall.


Agnes Campbell Macphail: I am very sorry to
interrupt but I think we should have this thing straight as we go along. I visited the penitentiary on February 16, at which time I knew nothing whatever of this case. I was being shown around by Warden Allen. I asked to see in his presence the convict who had caused me so much suffering last year, I believe his number was 3242. In the presence of the warden this convict asked me if I knew that Inspector Dawson had attempted to induce him, first by cajolery and then by threats, to sign a certain statement. This statement was to the effect that he had given me information in connection with the Lloyd case at Stony Mountain penitentiary, away back in 1927 or 1928. This convict stated that he did not sign this statement because he had not given me any information in connection with the Lloyd case. The fact is that that information was given to me by Mrs. Lloyd, the widow or the mother of the man who died because of defective scaffolding used in the penitentiary. I could not believe that an inspector of the penitentiaries in Ottawa would go to Kingston and attempt, first by cajolery and then by threats, to have a prisoner make a statement saying that he had supplied me with information in connection with any case I had brought up. I said to him that it surely could not be true and he said he would give me the name of the guard, who was there at the time. That guard has since then been promoted. At the time this man said to me, "If I live to come out of the penitentiary I want to do what I can to stop a practice that should not be carried on." I was as astonished at the statement as any member of this house would have been. The man was obviously not only worried but almost obsessed and I said, "Forget it. You are in here now and there is nothing you can do about it; if there is anything to be done it must be done from outside." And as Warden Allen and I walked up to the administration building I remarked to him, " I cannot think that even a penitentiary branch would do a thing of that sort." I said what I felt at the time; I said they had their nerve. I have forgotten the details of the conversation because, not being in the position of the

penitentiary branch, I did not have a stenographer to take it all down in detail, but Inspector Dawson was able to tell convict 3242 how many times he had called at my office in the House of Commons and on what dates. Well, I can save the department all that trouble, because I should be glad to give them a detailed account of where I go and who calls at my office. I ask the men at the main door to keep as many people as possible from coming to my office, but we can get all the details without putting Inspector Dawson to so much trouble. In that conversation convict 3242 said that Hall would be out in a day or two and would see me in regard to the matter. I asked who Hall was and he told me that he was a man in the penitentiary, and he too was interviewed by Inspector Dawson regarding this matter. If so, I said, I should be glad to see him. The day I addressed the Canadian Club in Toronto, a guest-I did not know him- handed me a letter. When I opened the letter I saw it was from Hall and he said he would call at my office in the afternoon. I told the man at the desk-I was going to have my dinner-that a man named Hall would call to see me and that I was going to be in the dining room, and I asked that he be sent down. When he came down I asked him whether it was true that Inspector Dawson had interviewed him in regard to the matter and he said that he was willing to make an affidavit to the effect that Inspector Dawson had1 questioned him, not exactly in the same way but in a manner similar to his questioning of the other convict No. 3242, except that Inspector Dawson did not ask him whether he had furnished me with information but, instead, expressed to him his opinion of me and of the information which he had received. He may believe it for all I know, but it is not true.
Do hon. members wonder that in those circumstances I did want to know whether or not Inspector Dawson had gone to Kingston penitentiary and talked with a convict there-and a convict with such a record-and had tried to get him to sign a statement indicating that he had furnished me with information regarding the Lloyd case, which had occurred when the hon. member for Quebec East (Mr. Lapointe) was Minister of Justice. That case had to do with a man who was killed on some defective scaffolding in Stony Mountain penitentiary. I had a good many letters from the Lloyd connection with regard to that case, and I never heard from anyone but the Lloyds so far as that matter was concerned. I do not want the Minister of

Supply-J ustice-Penitentiaries
Justice to tie me up a second time with somebody with a long record-I do not know whether Hall was in gaol ten times or sixteen times; I do not know whether it is a case of sex perversion or embezzlement or both. I simply know that a man-a human being at any rate-came and offered to take an affidavit as to the truth of the statement he had made. So that you have two convicts and a guard whose name I have, and who has since that time been promoted, who all seem to know of these circumstances.
It does not matter that the incident reflected on me but it does matter whether any member of this house can be put in the position in which I was placed by this sort of thing.


Hugh Guthrie: I heartily agree with the last statement of my hon. friend and, as I intimated at the beginning, if any member of the penitentiaries staff or of any other staff under my control is guilty of making derogatory remarks against members of this house, that person is taking his position in his own hands and will not be continued in the service. I am satisfied that my hon. friend from Southeast Grey has been imposed upon. I am not going to discuss the other convict at all-convict 3242. I am leaving him out of it. I am discussing the man who made the affidavit and the charge submitted by my hon. friend. That is one which I will see is cleared up. My hon. friend would not accept my statement when I made it that the inspector, on his word of honour, had denied the charge, but on the following day she brought in the affidavit. I propose to let the house, and particularly my hon. friend, know something of this man Hall, because he is imposing on her. She must listen to this. I want to warn her against the man. He has a criminal record which starts, so far as our records go, on September 13, 1923, at Vancouver. Before giving his record I will say that he is a confidence man out and out. At Vancouver he was convicted on September 13, 1923 of obtaining credit by false pretences, and sentenced as A. E. Hall. On July 2, 1924 he was convicted at Vancouver of false pretences with intent to defraud and was sentenced to six months in Oakalla prison. On January 14, 1925 he was convicted at Vancouver of obtaining money by false pretences and was sentenced to twelve days. Again, in May 1925, he was convicted at Vancouver of obtaining money by false pretences and sentenced to a term in gaol from the first of May. In 1926, May 12, he was convicted in Chicago, Illinois of obtaining money by
false pretences and was sentenced to six months in the house of correction, Chicago, to pay a fine of $25 in addition to costs, and ordered to be held to await the action of Cook county grand jury on two charges of issuing bogus cheques. He was placed under bond of $2,000. I have no record to show what ultimately came of that charge. In 1930 in Toronto, on May 9, he was convicted of false pretences and sentenced to a term of from six to twelve months in Burwash prison. In 1931, in Toronto, he was convicted of fraud,-$5 by a worthless cheque; fraud, $20 by a worthless cheque; fraud, $15 by a worthless cheque; fraud, $16 in goods by a worthless cheque. He was remanded for sentence and was put on probation for a year. On January 3, 1933, there was a breach of probation. He was brought up again and remanded again and put on probation for two years further. The last offence was on April 6, 1933, in Toronto when he was sentenced to two years in Kingston penitentiary on a charge of theft.
That is the sentence which he recently served and following which he has been released. I stated that this person was an adept confidence man and I think I fairly well described him. But his operations have not been confined on all occasions to little, petty cheques. For the information of the committee I am going to relate almost a national question, because in the month of April, 1930, the gentleman who styles himself as the Reverend Mr. Hall, psychologist, undertook to form the Canadian National Society and approached the Royal York hotel management about giving a tremendous banquet. The proposal was to have two thousand guests, and it was represented to the management that the chief speaker would be Sir George Foster, a senator. Invitations were conveyed to the then Prime Minister of Canada and to the then leader of the opposition, the present Prime Minister. It was to be a grand affair. The Royal York hotel was imposed upon. They went to an expense of something like $1,400 for this banquet and they received under $200. The total attendance at the banquet was one hundred and eighty people, their tickets, it was said, not being paid for, but the Royal York hotel immediately took action in the criminal courts.


Ernest Lapointe: Who were the star
speakers at the banquet?


Hugh Guthrie: I have not been able to get from the newspapers the names of those who attended. I am taking from the Toronto

Supply-Justice-Penitentiaries
Globe the report of the affair as given in the issue of May 9, 1930, after the prosecution had been instituted:
Debonair "Doctor" Hall complains in court of "persecution."
He was tried before Judge O'Connell of the county court of the county of York.
Judgment reserved on Royal York's fraud
charge.
"National order" data.
As dramatic in his role of prisoner at the bar as he had been in his speaking appearances on Toronto platform, "Doctor" Alfred Ernest George Hall, yesterday appeared before Judge O'Connell in the county criminal court charged with fraud. Judgment was reserved until today.
The accused, self-styled psychologist, clergyman and officer of the "National Order of Canada," was alleged to have obtained food by fraud from the Royal York hotel, and to have fraudulently obtained credit from the assistant manager of the hotel. George R. Street, and the Canadian Pacific Railway.
In November last, the hotel official testified, he met Hall, who arranged with him to give a banquet for two thousand people on the occasion of the initiation of new members of the National Order of Canada. When the banquet was held, witness said, only one hundred and eighty guests turned up. The bill came to $1,149. Hall had previously received credit from witness, it was said.
Albert Wetherley testified that he was once treasurer of the National Order of Canada. He had never received any salary, and at December 9 there was less than $200 to the order's credit. Witness was to have the title of right honourable. There were seventy-five members, but only twenty had paid their fees. A bank manager testified that the order at present had $1.31 in the bank.
"Doctor" Hall, attired in a braided black cutaway coat, double-breasted waistcoat, wing collar and gray trousers, then took the stand. Questioned by Crown Attorney Gordon, he swore that he was ordained' in 1908 into the Church of Divine Metaphysics, in Indiana. He at present preached to a "group" in Kitchener.
"During your preaching you spent considerable -time in jail," remarked the crown.
"You are trying to persecute me," complained accused. He then proceeded to tell how he had joined the "order" in 1929. He told' of planning the banquet, and of trying unsuccessfully to secure the Prime Minister as a speaker.
That would be the former Prime Minister.
They also invited Sir George Foster to speak.
After legal argument, judgment was postponed until to-day.
The following day the so-called reverend gentleman was convicted and sentenced to a term of imprisonment at Burwash, an Ontario prison.
His next venture is also worth describing. After being released from Burwash, he started some magazine subscription company with headquarters in Toronto, not using his own

name at all, and he induced people throughout Canada to send him subscriptions to various magazines for which he claimed to be an authorized agent. People who sent their money got no reply, and after waiting a while they placed the matter in the hands of the attorney general at Toronto and also of the crown attorney in that city. Some two hundred and forty-one unfortunates made complaints. The amounts involved in their subscriptions were I think around S2,000. Those others who subscribed and did not complain, we have no record of, but the reverend gentleman was again arrested and tried in the criminal courts of Toronto. On this occasion he was sentenced to two years in Kingston penitentiary.
That is the man who made the affidavit or the alleged affidavit. That is the man by whom this charge against Inspector Dawson has been launched. I have inquired fully into the charge as far as I can, not on oath I will say, but I have the word of Inspector Dawson, who is a gentleman, that there is no foundation for the charge.
I shall not refer to prisoner 3242 except to say that I think he must be mentally wrong because he is looked upon as the greatest liar we have ever had in the institution. I will give the committee one sample. We have in the department a letter from his brother who is a prominent man, a British government official in the West Indies. He writes to our department saying that prisoner 3242 was born in Antigua, was brought up in the Church of England and came to Canada in 1903. Prisoner 3242 says: "I was bom in Toronto; I was brought up in the Roman Catholic Church and I have lived in Canada all my life." The brother is a highly distinguished man. I wish the hon. member for Southeast Grey would not be led away with stories of this kind and by men of this character. These men are trying to excite her sympathy and probably her animosity against the penitentiary staff. They have laid clever plans for that purpose, and I sincerely hope she will place no dependence upon those stories that were circulated. We all want to protect the honour of everyone in the House of Commons. I am sorry that the matter has been brought to the attention of the house at all, but I am bringing it now and giving the man's record in order that the house may judge. This I am going to say: Having made my statement, if the hon. member for Southeast Grey desires an investigation into this question, the truth or falsity of these statements between Hall and Inspector Dawson, I will appoint a county court or high court judge of Ontario to undertake such an invest-

Supply-Justice-Penitentiaries
igation at once. Personally I do not think an investigation of the kind is necessary, but I do think, as the honour of a member of parliament is to some extent involved, that the matter ought to be cleared up, so I make that offer now to the hon. member for Southeast Grey. If she desires the investigation after the statement of fact I have given I am quite content to order it.


Michael Luchkovich: The minister said
that if anyone in the service were guilty of any derogatory remarks he would be discontinued in the service. May I therefore ask whether, if a judge made a derogatory statement indicting a whole race because of the isolated crime of an individual he should not also be discontinued in the service?


Hugh Guthrie: That is another question. There are certain privileges, honours and responsibilities attaching to members of this House of Commons that should be protected.


Agnes Campbell Macphail: I shall be very glad to have an investigation into this matter. But this particular question is not what interests me most, although I am most anxious that it should be cleared up, and I shall be very happy to accept the suggestion of the minister. But what I want is an investigation by a royal commission into the whole penal system in Canada, which is a very much greater thing than anything said about me. One must say this at any rate for Hall, he was not asking me for sympathy. He said, "I have a bad record." I did not even ask what it was. He said, " The record will be spread on Hansard, so do not defend me." He said, "I am making an affidavit and the affidavit I make is true, and if it is not true let them put me back in penitentiary." There you are. The department headed by the minister will not have an investigation into the penal S3'stem in Canada. It is all very well to put these two cases on Hansard and make it look very bad for me, but what about a penal system marked by demonstrations and riots and fires from one end of the dominion to the other. Let me specify some of the recent ones:
April 5, 1932-
Demonstration at Stony Mountain penitentiary where several guards were injured and one killed.
September 9, 1932-
Further disturbances at Stony Mountain. October 17, 1932-
Riot, Stony Mountain.
October 20, 1932-
Riots, Kingston.
November 4, 1932-
Riots and fire at St. Vincent de Paul.
Again in 1932-
Unrest in British Columbia penitentiary. Again in 1932-
Some difficulty not particularly described in Saskatchewan penitentiary.
January 17, 1933-
Riots, Dorchester.
December 6, 1933-
Stone shed strike, Kingston.
May 5, 1934-
Demonstration, Kingston.
May 15, 1934-
Fire and $35,000 damage, Kingston.
March 21, 1935-
Fire at Kingston which the minister says cost something about $5,000.
We have a penal system in Canada in which seventy-three per cent of the total prison population are recidivists-I am using the figures of the hierarchy so they ought to be correct. Twenty-eight per cent have been in penitentiary before and forty-five per cent in gaols and reformatories; in other words three out of four return again. Irrespective of any other evidence, there is something radically wrong with a system that produces such a condition. Imprisonment is necessary, but in my opinion it should be made to serve a constructive purpose, and the moment it does not do so it is failing in its object. I am interested in penal conditions. I used to feel that I could work with the former superintendent of penitentiaries, Brigadier General Hughes. He issued reports that were reports; he always had recommendations at the end. I have talked with him many a time about penology and the things he would like to see done and that I would like to see done. I have read through many of his reports, I happen to have two in my hand; they were certainly very different documents from those of General Ormond. In one of his reports, covering several years starting with 1923, General Hughes said:
The more punishment inflicted on inmates in a prison the stronger the probability that the place is badly managed.
And again on page 13 of his report for 1923 he sajrs:
Most of those educated in the treatment of the criminal agree that strict discipline is essential in a properly conducted institution, but all disciplinary efforts are wasted unless tempered with loving and merciful treatment. I have looked in vain for one example of true conversion to virtue through punishment.
I read through again last night the report of Superintendent Ormond for 1934. It certainly is not the kind of report I would think a superintendent of a penitentiary would make. I question whether Lieutenant Colonel Megloughlin ever wrote the report attributed to him on page 11. It is the most curious

Supply-Justice-Penitentiaries
sort of report I ever read that anyone would make about his own work. He criticizes himself about the matter of the baseball which the minister mentioned a little while ago, and although baseball may have been carried on in Kingston without the consent of the Ottawa office at any rate it did get this commendation from Reverend Father Kingsley. On page 12 I see he reports that:
A marked improvement has taken place in the ranks of the convicts in Kingston penitentiary since the inception of softball more than a year ago. The physical improvement is so evident that it needs here no labouring by me. But an improvement exists which, not so apparent to the casual onlooker, is none the less very real and even more important.
I suppose one can accept Father Kingsley as a disinterested person, concerned only in the welfare of the people incarcerated in Kingston. Then on the opposite page you have this report, apparently made by Warden Megloughlin:
The warden neglected to comply with the instructions and regulations requiring that every physically fit convict employed in a shop or at indoor work should be given systematic' physical exercises during one-half of the period allotted for exercise. He contented himself with permitting the convicts to play at softball or the tossing of quoits.
I do not think Warden Megloughlin wrote that. It was written possibly after he was asked for his resignation. Then it goes on:
The softball eventually developed into competitive scheduled games between different convict gangs and was subversive of prison discipline.
Although across on the other page we have Father Kingsley praising it very highly.
The warden was instructed to discontinue this type of exercise in October, 1933, and gave assurance -that "softball will be replaced by free movement exercise just as soon as conditions warrant." Up to the end of the fiscal year no systematic exercise of convicts had been carried out, the result being that a large proportion of the convicts did not carry out any physical exercise but were permitted to sit around in groups and watch other convicts taking part in games of softball and the tossing of quoits. This is the only penitentiary in which the warden and the physician have not reported very satisfactory results following the introduction of systematic and controlled free movement exercises.
At this point I am very much interested to know who wrote that report?


Hugh Guthrie: The report itself states that it is written by the inspectors. These are not wardens' reports, these are the results of inspections carried on in those penitentiaries.
The figures and details are all in the wardens' reports, but these are the comments, favourable or adverse, that are made in respect
[Miss Macphail.J
of each penitentiary, Warden Megloughlin did not write that or any part of it; neither did Colonel Piuze, in regard to St. Vincent de Paul.
In regard to the question of a commission to investigate penitentiary matters I want to say that notwithstanding the criticism that has been heard from some quarters of this house and notwithstanding the attitude taken by some newspapers in Canada I am proud to say that Canadian penitentiaries to-day stand higher than or as high as those of any other country in the world. I claim no credit at all for that condition. On August 1, 1932, General Ormond was made superintendent of penitentiaries. That was not my selection. I had never met General Ormond before; I had never seen him. He was selected by the civil service commission. I do not know his politics; if he had any certainly he was not a Conservative. I took him as he was sent to me, and he entered upon his job early in August as a man new to penitentiary management, though he had had much experience in the management of men in our militia and also during the great war. I gave him pretty much of a free hand, but before he had made his preliminary visits to the penitentiaries the great riot broke out in Kingston, in October, 1932. At that time he had been superintendent for only three months and I think had been at Kingston for only two days, on two different occasions. He had nothing to do with that situation, though I know sometimes newspapers and individuals blame him. There is documentary evidence on file that the riot was planned in the spring of that year; the former acting warden had evidence on his file-to which he paid no attention-that there was going to be an outbreak in that institution.
As I have said, I gave the superintendent pretty much of a free hand. Before the first riot he made a number of recommendations which I thought it my duty to submit to the various wardens, the superintendent being a new man. Between the time of submitting them and the end of October the outbreak took place.
We have introduced so many changes in the penitentiary system of Canada in the last three years that you would hardly know it as the same system, and all these Changes have been the direct result, from beginning to end, of the recommendations of superintendent Ormond. I claim no credit for them. There have been some thirty or forty changes, which have vastly improved the penitentiary system throughout Canada, Conditions have been very greatly ameliorated. Exercise has been very greatly improved. Privileges are now

Supply-Justice-Penitentiaries
granted the prisoners-some people say we grant too many privileges-whibh in former days they never dreamed of. We allowed what they demanded in the riot of 1932, cigarette papers, and now we give them an allowance of two ounces of tobacco a week, which seems to satisfy them. We now give them pay.


Agnes Campbell Macphail: Do they pay for that tobacco out of their five cents a day?


Hugh Guthrie: They pay for that out of their wages. We pay them now; we did not do so previously.


Mr. MACKENZIE (Vancouver):: How
much?


Hugh Guthrie: I am going to discuss
that now. I know there is some criticism of that, because all people do not approve of paying convicts. In England they pay very, very modest amounts in a very few prisons. I believe the highest pay in any place is a shilling a week, but it is only in two or three institutions that anything is paid. In the United States they pay from two cents up to five cents in some prisons, but in ninety per cent of the prisons of that country they pay nothing. There are one or two prisons in which they pay as much as thirty-five cents a day; those are prisons in which prison labour is recognized, where the convicts work on contract work and the goods are sold in competition with the ordinary goods of the country. In those two institutions the contractors are bound to pay wages of thirty-five cents a day.
We allow wages of five cents a day, and they are computed in this way. For the first week nothing is paid. After that they are entitled to five cents a day or thirty cents a week for their work; that applies to the first six months. After they have been six months in the institution they are entitled to six days per month remission. Therefore for the twelve months after the first six months, if their conduct has been good, they receive a remission of seventy-two days on their sentence. After they have seventy-two days to their credit we start paying them ten cents a day and after eighteen months their remission counts up more rapidly because after that period they get ten days a month off for good conduct.
From the amounts paid the convicts is deducted the actual cost of the tobacco used. Formerly they received a free issue of one-eleventh of a pound. Now they receive an issue of one-eighth of a pound, the cost of which is deducted from their wages. The
tobacco and papers for a week cost them 13i cents. They have a balance to their credit in the penitentiary books, accumulating from month to month or year to year until their sentence is served, and on discharge the accumulation is handed to them. For many years back no convict has been sent out with an empty pocket; in recent years he has always received S10 in cash and a ticket to his home or the point where he was convicted.


Ian Alistair Mackenzie: Regardless of the length of sentence?


Hugh Guthrie: Regardless of the length of sentence. Any man who has not earned anything in the penitentiary or who has not S10 to his credit when he is released still will be given his ticket and $10, but men who have accumulated $30, $40 or $50 will be given that accumulation but will not get the $10. It is estimated that this payment to prisoners will cost the government of Canada about $27,000 a year. We will save what we formerly spent for tobacco, but that is taken into account when it is estimated that the sum will amount to $27,000 a year. This payment of wages, which was only instituted last January, is working well and is appreciated by the men, according to the reports of the wardens.
That is one new move. Another change that will be instituted in the near future, I hope, is what is known as the Borstal system, as operated in England. In that country they have a system for the training of youthful offenders which has not been adopted in the federal prisons of Canada to any extent. The Borstal system in England only applies to prisoners between the ages of sixteen and twenty-one. Youthful offenders in that country between these ages are sent first to a detention prison, where they are examined, their fitness for future life is considered, including their adaptability, and a general examination takes place in regard to their history, as well as their present and their future. If they are approved as hopeful or suitable cases they are then put in a Borstal institution and if not so approved they are sent to the ordinary prison. They are kept in Borstal institutions for two or three years. Three years is the limit, and I have read reports indicating that a three-year term is necessary in order to obtain good results. As hon. members are aware these are not what one would call people of the convict class, they are minor or juvenile offenders. In England three classes are made to the first of which belong individuals below the age of



Supply-Justice-Penitentiaries
sixteen years who come under what is known as the Children's Act. With a similar act this federal government does not deal. We do not take them into our institutions under the age of sixteen years. Between the ages of sixteen and twenty-one they are regarded as juvenile offenders. We have no person in our Canadian penitentiaries below the age of sixteen, not a single person. We have however 314 persons between the ages of sixteen and twenty-one. It is considered that a large proportion of these youthful prisoners might be treated under the Borstal system as it exists in England.
No change would be necessary in out Penitentiaries Act to bring that system into effect. We could utilize the present act, in its present form, and if we so desired introduce the system now under discussion. Of course some extra expenditures would be entailed when the system was brought into force. At the present time it is estimated that about 250 of the 314 prisoners under the age of twenty-one might be improved and given a brighter future than otherwise they could have. A great proportion-probably I should say a fair proportion of the offenders between these ages are not first offenders; some of them are third offenders. Forty-four of them are incarcerated under two-year sentences for escapes from provincial institutions where they have been treated more or less along the lines of those followed under the Borstal system. The institution at Guelph could be so described. However these prisoners have escaped and for that reason have come into our hands.
The adaptation of the buildings is a point which will have to be considered. If we adopt this system we will have to have further prison construction. At St. Vincent de Paul there will not be a great deal more required because at the present time we have in course of erection at that point an institution which would suit very well application to the Borstal system. The work, if not performed by convict labour, could be very speedily completed by contract labour. As a rule, nearly al'l penitentiary construction is iby convict labour. This I will grant is not the most satisfactory kind of construction, because in a great many instances the labour is not what could be described as skilled labour. However the institution at St. Vincent de Paul could readily, if we adopted the contract system, be completed and made into a first-class Borstal institution. At Kingston some further building would be required. I believe the facilities in Manitoba could be adapted to the Borstal system without any great expense,, and the same would apply to Prince Albert. I am told however

that at New Westminster there would have to be some additional expenditures.
As the total population at the present time between these ages is only 314, and as it is divided among six or seven penitentiaries, I believe some system whereby we could reduce the number to two or three would be most satisfactory, having regard to the geographical situation in Canada. Distances in this dominion are very great. So far as possible it is proposed to adopt that system in dominion prisons. However the great bulk of youthful or juvenile offenders in this country are not those to be found in our penitentiaries. They are to be found in provincial institutions, and whether or not we will be able to induce the provinces of Canada to adopt the system I cannot say. The ordinary gaol and reformatory are under provincial, not federal jurisdiction. However I propose at an early date to send the superintendent to England to make additional inquiries concerning the Borstal system, so that we may have a report upon it at the earliest possible moment. I am satisfied that at least to some extent it can be adopted without enormous expense to the penitentiaries of Canada.
I am pleased to say the penitentiaries population is slightly decreasing and that our staff is being gradually reduced. According to information I have the actual penitentiaries population on February 28 of the present year was 3,603 prisoners.


Agnes Campbell Macphail: Would the minister
repeat that?


Hugh Guthrie: 3,603 prisoners of all
grades.


Ernest Lapointe: A decrease from what
year?


Hugh Guthrie: I shall come to that in
a moment. In addition to this number we have 76 people in asylums, and 20 in hospitals or on temporary ticket-of-leave making a grand total of 3,699. For the information of hon. members I shall give the figures for each year. In the year 1933 the prison population was 4,587; last year it was 4,220 and the figure for this year, as I have just given it, is 3,699. This decrease has enabled us to reduce the staff of guards in British Columbia by five and to reduce by another five the staff between Collin's Bay and Portsmouth. If the present population decreases we will be very pleased to make any further decreases in staff which may be possible.
Hon. members will note that the vote is for almost the same amount as was asked

last year. The reason is that on account of demands made upon us by labour organizations and the like we have had to adopt three eight-hour shifts, so far as guards are concerned, involving an increase in the number required. When three or four years ago the matter was discussed in parliament a report from the then superintendent indicated that the new system could not be introduced without an increased expenditure of $250,000. However at an increased cost of $70,000 we have the three-shift system operating in all penitentiaries. This practice does not work out in exact compliance with the terms of the eight hour day legislation introduced this session. Under the system in operation more than 48 hours are worked. Some further adjustments will be required because the two remaining shifts do not work quite as long as the day shift. The day shift begins operation at the opening of the prison in the morning and remains at work until the count in the afternoon, after the shops are closed.
I make particular mention about the penitentiary guards because I have received many letters respecting them. May I observe that their working hours, when one year is compared with another, are not too strenuous. As is the case with every other person, they have one rest day each week. They have eighteen days of holidays in each year, something which very few workmen enjoy. They are allowed three of our national or legal holidays, in addition to the eighteen days I have mentioned. If they become sick they are given leave of absence during their sickness. If you compute the days they are allowed off, fifty-one rest days, eighteen days of holidays, three days of national holidays and sick leave I do not think anyone can argue that they are exceptionally hard worked. In some instances they do work a little more than eight hours per day. It is hoped that the staff will be further reduced due to a reduction in prison population.
There is another matter I should like to clear up, one which has been brought to my attention by some hon. gentlemen. I am sorry one of the hon. members interested is not in the chamber. I refer to the alleged decrease in crime and prison population in England. It is currently supposed that there has been a tremendous decrease in crime in Great Britain but I am sorry to say that that is not the fact. The reason there is a supposed decrease is the fact that in the British prison reports they do not include any convictions under the Children's Act, which covers those up to sixteen years of age, or under the juvenile offenders act, which covers those
92582-1MJ
Supply-Justice-Penitentiaries
between sixteen and twenty-one years of age. The result is that the number of felons or convicts is.shown to be decreasing when in fact the opposite is the case.


Ernest Lapointe: Have they not closed some of their gaols?


Hugh Guthrie: I will deal with that; they are opening some too. The following is from the official report of the commissioners of prisons:
I he year 1932 saw an increase in the convict population The daily average of men rose from 1,450 m 1931 to 1,512 in 1932 This increase has continued into 1933, and the total populatmn rose in the last week of September, lyJJ, to 1,646.
After the war and in order to reduce staff, as was stated, a number of old, antiquated and worn out .prisons were closed. There were many such prisons in Great Britain, some of them being centuries old. These buildings were in such a state that they could no longer be used as human habitations and they were torn down. The number of prisons, gaols and lock-ups was reduced from 92 to 30. They are now opening new prisons. I state this not to show that they are worse there than we are here but to rid the house of the impression that serious crime is decreasing in the United Kingdom.
Our penitentiary system as it is to-day is to some extent a model for other countries. This system has been commended by high authorities in prison work in the United States. The superintendent of penitentiaries has been made a member of the American Prison Association, being also a member of the board of directors. He has been made a member of the prison educational committee and in the United States as well as in Canada is looked upon as an authority on such institutions. He has visited innumerable institutions of every kind in the United States in order to see the latest development in prison methods and prison reform.


Agnes Campbell Macphail: How long has he been superintendent?


Hugh Guthrie: Since August, 1932. He has been invited to attend the great world prison congress to be held next summer in Berlin, Germany, but I do not know whether we will be able to spare him. His work is reflected in the condition which exists to-day in Canadian penitentiaries. The accommodation we provide is better than that provided by almost every prison on the continent of America.
241b
The Royal Assent


[Stage Direction]
A message was delivered by Major A. R. Thompson, Gentleman Usher of the Black Rod, as follows:
Mr. Speaker, His Honour, the deputy of His Excellency the Governor General, desires the immediate attendance of this honourable house in the chamber of the honourable the Senate.
Accordingly, the house went up to the Senate.
And having returned,
Mr. SPEAKER informed the house that the deputy of His Excellency the Governor General had been pleased to give in His Majesty's name the royal assent to the following bills:
An Act to provide for a weekly day of rest in accordance with the convention concerning the application of the weekly rest in industrial undertakings adopted by the general conference of the international labour organization of the League of Nations, in accordance with the labour part of the treaty of Versailles of 28th June, 1919.
An Act respecting Relief Measures.
An Act for the relief of Mary Wynifred Bayford Bennett.
An Act for the relief of Lillian Gurden McIntyre.
An Act for the relief of Minnie Elizabeth Lyons Dafoe.
An Act for the relief of Trevor Eardley-Wilmot.
An Act for the relief of Marie Philomene Florence Maher McCaffrey.
An Act for the relief of Stuart Lewis Ralph Henderson.
An Act for the relief of Charles Henry Campbell.
An Act for the relief of Maria Elphinstone Hastie Kinnon.
An Act for granting to His Majesty certain sums of money for the public service of the financial year ending the 31st March, 1935.
An Act for granting to His Majesty certain sums of money for the public service of the financial year ending the 31st March, 1936.
[Stage Direction]
The house ia committee of supply, Mr. Morand in the chair.
Penitentiaries-amount required for cost of administration, construction, purchase of land, supplies and equipment, maintenance and discharge of inmates at Kingston, St. Vincent de Paul, Dorchester, Manitoba, British Columbia, Piers Island, Saskatchewan and Collin's Bay penitentiaries. $2,830,947.75.
Hugh Guthrie: Before I conclude this
part of my statement there is one other matter I should mention which I omitted. We have also established something in the nature of a star class among the prisoners
[Mr. Gutbrie.l
in the penitentiaries, generally on the lines established in England. There they call it the star class, but here we have not adopted that term. We have taken over the old prison for women in Kingston for those prisoners who we think are entitled to perhaps more lenient treatment or a little more liberty than the others. There are now in that women's prison forty-three such prisoners; they have been selected chiefly on account of their conduct and their adaptability for reform. Some of them are serving life terms. Really the only privileges which they enjoy over other convicts is that they are kept by themselves although they work at the ordinary tasks, mixing with other convicts. They are allowed to assemble in a common hall after working hours and to talk or to smoke or to play games as they see fit. They are also allowed to take one meal a day together, while the others are fed separately in their own cells. I do not know that there are any other privileges attached to this class at the present time, but it corresponds very largely to a class of prisoners they have established in England which they call a star class, and I believe it is the only one in English prisons which is permitted to use tobacco. That is in line with the policy of segregation which has been instituted in all Canadian penitentiaries. We are trying as far as possible to carry out a scheme of segregation so that the prisoner who shows any inclination for reform may have every advantage possible in a penal institution. The inspector's report sets out what has been done in that respect, but there is a good deal to be done yet. When a prisoner is admitted, he is examined as carefully as possible by the warden, the deputy warden, the chaplain, the schoolmaster and other officials to see what it is best to do with that man. You cannot altogether segregate them by ages, although ages have a good deal to do in regard to such a question. That work was instituted about a year and a half ago and is being carried on. It will be carried on and continued, and as our buildings afford us an opportunity it will be carried on to a larger extent than it is now.
I do not know if I need go into the various matters which I discussed in this committee a year ago as to cell accommodation and the like, but I refer to it only for this reason, that the hon. member for Southeast Grey, as is also every other member, is a statutory visitor of all penitentiaries whenever she has a desire to go there, and nothing would please me and the staff more than that a deputation should go through these penitentiaries-the nearest one is Kingston or St. Vincent de Paul-from

top to bottom and spend all the time they like there, because I am convinced there would be only one report. The hon. member for Southeast Grey paid a visit as she says, I think it was in February last, and went pretty fully through the male institution. Why she did not go through the female prison, I do not know. Perhaps she had been through it before, or time did not permit. But I would be inclined to think her judgment would be better in regard to the female prison than in regard to the male one. As regards a prison for male convicts I would rather have the judgment of men of the world, but that is neither here nor there. However when she went through this last prison I have spoken of, in one section of which we put the preferred or star class, I do not think this was drawn to her attention or at least she did not go through it. Had she done so, she would have been impressed by the great improvement that has taken place there.
After her visit there were a good many newspaper accounts, I suppose as a result of interviews, and she very stoutly condemned those nine cells which we call punishment cells, commonly called in the penitentiary the "hole." She also condemned all the cells; it was as reported in the newspapers, a general condemnation of the cells. Now we have had an examination of those cells and they measure up for capacity, light and cleanliness with any that are known in the world; they are larger than any on the North American continent. There were a few that were built I think about a hundred years ago that may be six inches shorter than some built in the newest United States prisons last year, but cell for cell ours are larger than those of any other such institution.


Agnes Campbell Macphail: As regards the cell block in St. Vincent de Paul, you could not have much smaller than three and one-half feet by six.


Hugh Guthrie: I am talking of Kingston penitentiary at the present time. It was concerning that penitentiary the interview was given.


Agnes Campbell Macphail: I visited both institutions.


Hugh Guthrie: There are nine punishment cells and they are used only for purposes of punishment. They will be found in all penal institutions, because we get prisoners that we cannot control otherwise than by putting them in a place by themselves. Those cells are supplied with a stout oak door on the outside, so that if the prisoner becomes noisy, as they very often do,
4, 1935
Supply-Justice-Penitentiaries
the door may be closed. It is stated in the interview as reported in the newspapers, that there is no air in those places; that there are only two or three holes in the oak door. Well, the attention of my hon. friend was not called to the fact that in every one of those cells there is a ventilator above.


Agnes Campbell Macphail: I am very sorry but they were called to my attention by the warden who said that they did not work.


Hugh Guthrie: Well, they worked when I was there and I was enclosed in one of those cells, as was also the Prime Minister. Under the door there is a duct especially to provide air, and in the door there are three or four holes, an inch or an inch and a half in diameter, not very large, I admit. Those doors are closed only when we have noisy, obstreperous prisoners that cannot be controlled otherwise. I know in some places they advocate the gag for such prisoners. We do not, but we do what they do in Ontario reformatories -have strong doors to shut out the noise. Those doors are very seldom closed. The last time any one of them was closed on a prisoner was on May 6 of last year, and only for a few hours one night. We have to have some place where we can restrain men and keep them from disturbing the whole institution. I do not approve of the gag. I know it is adopted in prisons throughout the world, but the strong door as they have it in reformatories in Ontario is the only means I know of which we can utilize to maintain order and keep night from becoming hideous.
The whole buildings are open to the inspection of anyone who wants to come and see them. I only wish a large deputation would go through them. I am sure the staff of the penitentiary would welcome this also, but of this I am confident: these prisons in Canada today are of a very high order. No prisons aTe like boarding houses or hotels or homes; they are not supposed to be. But the prisoners are well looked after; their privileges have been tremendously extended under the new superintendent, who deluges me with new suggestions every week. There has been a gradual general improvement throughout them all; there may be others in the future, but I am satisfied that to-day they compare favourably with any prisons in the world.


Mr. CHURCH:: Before this vote passes I wish to bring before the committee a matter in regard to administration which I brought up on many occasions when I sat in opposition. I hope the minister will not

Supply-Justice-Penitentiaries
Heiwart has to say of these rules and regulations having the effect of statutes and removing the liberty of the subject from the protection of the law courts:
But, vital as the independence of judges has always been, there never was a time when it was more manifestly important than in these latter days, when the effect of so much that the executive does or permits is to render it difficult for the courts to maintain the rights of the individual.
Then he goes on to condemn these acts which give the governor in council power to make these regulations.
Another matter which ought to be considered is the choice of officials. There is not a trained man in the whole department; they just train themselves by experience. I remember that when the late chief of police of Toronto Colonel Grasett was retired it was suggested that we should' bring in an outsider, a military man as head of the department. Xn my opinion a military man is the last man who should be chosen to administer a police department; it is not the proper place for a man with military training. The present head, General Ormond was a good soldier; he is a perfect gentleman and I have the utmost confidence in him. I have not the pleasure of his acquaintance, but I know the high regard in which he is held by all those who know anything about him. I would point out, however, that when we considered filling the position of chief of police of Toronto Sir John Eaton and representatives of the board of trade appeared before the commission. I suggested to Sir John Eaton that a man could not learn Eaton's business in a day, and I said that a man could not learn the police business or be superintendent of penitentiaries in a day. Still men are brought into this department (without having received any training at all
They are trained by their experience from day to day; they start off knowing nothing about it, and as days go by they try to learn about their duties. I believe something should be done to create some system such as they have in England by which proper types of officers of all ranks are trained for this work, which is most important. I sympathize with the minister sometimes in the criticisms that are made against his department, as he has effected many important reforms. The Conservative party are the authors of all prison reform in Ontario at Guelph reformatory and the Mimico farm, which reform was. one of the chief glories of Conservative policy under Sir James Whitney and Hon. W. J. Hanna, Provincial Secretary. I do not know anything about the details, but I do plead with the committee to give
rMr. Church.]
some consideration to these youthful offenders. I have before me an article written by Magistrate Jones of Toronto with regard to the Borstal system which is endorsed by the following, among others:
The Primate, Church of England in Canada.
The Moderator of the United Church of Canada.
The General Assembly of the Presbyterian Church in Canada.
The Salvation Army in Canada.
The Church Army, in Canada (Anglican).
The Director of Catholic Charities.
The Catholic Big Brothers.
The Protestant Big Brothers.
The Jewish Big Brothers.
The Catholic Big Sisters.
The Protestant Big Sisters.
The Jewish Big Sisters.
Judge H. S. Mott, juvenile court, Toronto.
Four judges of the county of York.
The magistrates of the city of Toronto.
The crown attorneys of the city of Toronto.
These are all asking this parliament to do something with regard to the Borstal system. The senior magistrate of Toronto, Mr. Jones, has written me many letters in this connection, and I promised to bring the matter to the attention of the house. I should like to read one paragraph from the article:
This expression "Borstal system" has no statutory origin. It is a colloquial expression, adopted because the first "school" established under the Prevention of Crimes Act, 1908, was built at a place called Borstal.
What is this system which has been in operation in England for many years? It has four features, first, education and lectures; second, trade instruction; third, regular gymnastics and drill; fourth, a scheme of rewards. This scheme in its entirety is supported by the various public men and public organizations I have indicated. In the speech from the throne I find this statement:
My government has under consideration the adoption, throughout the penitentiaries of Canada, of a system similar to that which is known in England as the Borstal system and is making investigations as to its operations.
Under that system I believe it is possible to reclaim seventy-five to eighty per cent of our youthful offenders. We all know what the Red Cross did in rescue work during the war in prevention work, and I believe the same thing can be done in peace time to-day in connection with this problem which is one of the most important problems with which this parliament has to deal.
Another matter to Which I should like to refer is the way Magna Charta has been violated, in that we have imprisonment for debt in- this country. I should1 like to refer also to the way these young offenders who escape are treated. Can you blame them for escaping from these institutions? In their

Supply-Justice-Penitentiaries
youthful enthusiasm they get free for an hour or two, and when they are recaptured they are sent to these other institutions which are not prepared to receive them. Where do these young men come from? They come from some of the finest homes in this country, because they cannot get jobs. I agree with some of the things said the other night by the hon. member for Brome-Missisquoi (Mr. Pickel), though I disagree with three-quarters of what he said. You cannot blame the younger generation for this problem, just as you cannot blame them for the railway problem, the Beauharnois deal or the British North America Act. Most of the juvenile crime in this country results from the fact that these young men are living in a jobless age, and instead of staying around home and sponging on their fathers they strike out for themselves. They ride the rods to the coast, *perhaps; they are locked up in some gaol, and when they escape for a day they are sent to these federal institutions. I am surprised at the judges and magistrates who send these young men to prison for escaping while serving a ten days' sentence to two years in circumstances such as these. I think there should be a very liberal policy of clemency followed in all these cases. I believe that about forty per cent of the juvenile inmates of penitentiaries could be sent home without doing any harm to anyone or any public interest especially the first offender.
I should like to refer for a moment also to the indeterminate sentences so often imposed'. I think those sentences should not be permitted. Chief Justice Meredith attacked these sentences of two years determinate plus two years indeterminate; 'he said he believed the act was ultra vires and should be repealed as two years was the limit they had, and I do not think that act is in the best interests of the people of this country. We must expect some criticism. It is often said that those who criticize the system at all are uttering sob stuff, but that is not so. As Tennyson said:
Our little systems have their day;
They have their day and' cease to be:
They are but broken lights of thee,
And thou, 0 Lord, art more than they.
I believe the time has come for prison reform, all along the line. As I said a few days ago, low wages in Canada have been the cause of many crimes. These people have been reduced through poor living and as a result crime has been forced upon society. Child labour has had the same result. Many children who should be at school are working in factories, and records indicate that most
of the young offenders have been underprivileged children who have come from poverty-stricken homes. These young people have never had a chance, and from birth have been under-nourished and handicapped.
Social workers, police and railroad men assert their belief that the overwhelming majority of these young men and boys are " on the road " because there is nothing else to do. Sometimes they are there because pride will not permit them to sit idle at home, sometimes because support for the whole family has come from a relief agency and has been wholly inadequate properly to feed the younger children. Evidence has been conclusive that these people are not of the hobo or criminal type. What is happening to these unfortunate youths is most distressing. Accustomed to decent standards of living these people go for days without taking off their clothes to sleep at nights. Through this manner of living they become dirty and unkempt. In winter they suffer from exposure and hardship. The number of wandering families, unattached men and women and boys and girls vastly exceeds those of former years, and the make-up of these groups has changed radically.
The traditional single transient in earlier years was the seasonal labourer, the knight of the road, and the occasional run-away boy or adventurous youth. To-day young men and boys who would normally be at work or in school predominate in this migratory army. Men and boys swarm on every freight train in such numbers that the railway police are helpless to keep them off.
I know the minister to be a warm-hearted man, one who is most sympathetic, and would urge that he consider this matter. Without sending a deputation to England to study the Borstal system we should include a vote in the supplementary estimates for the purpose of beginning this particular work. These ladies and gentlemen of church and state who signed the recommendation I read before are not asking for any sentimental or soft treatment, but are only asking that we follow the motherland, where all great social reforms originate.
I am not familiar with the details to which the hon. lady member for Southeast Grey has referred, but I will say that a few years ago, in company with two celebrated men, I visited one of these institutions, and after viewing it I came to the conclusion I must be living in the stone age. I saw what was going on. I am of the opinion, as are many other people,

Supply-Justice-Penitentiaries
that something should be done. The city of Toronto pioneered in this work. One superintendent, Rev. Mr. Findlay, a most estimable gentlemen, did admirable work at our jail farm. We know that the Conservative party originated these prison reforms, and tried to do something for the rising generation. To understand the situation thoroughly we must understand causes and effects, and in my view the time is not far distant when something will have to be done.
To my mind the condition is most unsatisfactory when we find it possible to spend millions and millions of dollars to operate our railways and do not see our way clear to spend a small sum to make more bearable the lives of some of our unfortunate citizens, many of whom are in misfortune because of economic conditions and because of the fact that they could not get work. We have a vote of about $2,000,000 for the health of animals, but when it comes to voting a small sum in the present instance to take caxe of people under twenty years of age we think it necessary to send a deputation. When the deputation goes to England I hope it will take time to extend its trip and visit the mythical League of Nations. In that event upon their return we might have some support for the Borstal system. I believe it would be too bad to have to wait another year before doing anything in a practical way towards adopting what these gentlemen of state and church have suggested.


Hugh Guthrie: May I say to the hon. member that grand juries are entitled to visit penitentiaries, and as a matter of fact do visit them. The regulation to which reference has been made was passed on the recommendation of the present superintendent. For a number of years wardens' courts were thoroughly objectionable. The prisoner could be asked for a statement without the complainant being produced before him. The present warden however has made a regulation whereby the complainant must be in the presence of the prisoner, and the evidence of both persons must be taken in connection with a breach of prison rules or discipline. That plan has been in force at least for two or three years.
In connection with the Borstal system may I state it is not proposed to send a commission to England. I have had many requests from estimable people asking me to send them on a commission to England. The document read by the hon. member contains the names of some of them. These people are deeply interested in prison work. It is proposed however to send only one man to look
[Mr. Church. 1
into the matter and that man will furnish a report in three or four weeks.
Then, reference has been made to Lord Hewart's book. I do not know that I need go into the reference. It would appear however that the hon. member condemns military appointments in prisons. Our act provides they shall have preference and must be considered first. In all large prisons in England military men are selected to hold positions as wardens.
At six o'clock the committee took recess.
After Recess
The committee resumed at eight o'clock.


Mr. BELL (Hamilton):: Mr. Chairman, whatever opinions may be entertained by hon. members regarding the value of the arguments which have been put forward in support of varying points of view, I feel that there are at least two things in connection with which all hon. members are entirely in accord. The first and perhaps more obvious is that those who have spoken on this item are entirely right when they refer to it as a matter of the very utmost importance to all the people of Canada. There is no hon. gentleman sitting in this chamber or entitled to sit in this chamber who has not resting upon him the responsibility of representing as fairly and as intelligently as he can the views of his own constituency in regard to this matter of very grave importance. It is but a truism to recall the words of one of the greatest reformers that the British empire has ever known, the immortal Dickens, who said that there was no activity which could be carried on in commercial or family life that was not affected by the way in which the community as a whole elected to treat the criminal class. One must realize that this matter in respect to which the hon. member for Southeast Grey (Miss Macphail) is so wholeheartedly in earnest is of consequence to every hon. member and to all the constituents of those members.
Another thing which seems to me to be entirely clear is the fact that the hon. member herself is so sincere and so anxious to do that which may be of real good. We would be less than fair if we failed to recognize these facts and applaud her for her stand. During the course of this discussion it has been suggested that perhaps her very wholeheartedness and her great womanly sympathy for some of those whom she has seen incarcerated in Kingston penitentiary, and perhaps in St. Vincent de Paul, has affected her

Supply-Justice-Penitentiaries
to the extent of leaving her with not quite the fullest capacity to judge the situation. I can well believe that when it comes from the lips of the Minister of Justice (Mr. Guthrie);
I can well believe it when I recall something which came to my own notice during a visit to Kingston penitentiary in order to acquaint myself with conditions there. It was said of the hon. member for Southeast Grey that she climbed the long stairs which led to the Protestant and Roman Catholic chapels at a time when the prison choir in the Protestant chapel was engaged in practising the hymns for the next Sunday's service. As she entered, the hymn being practised was, "The day thou gavest Lord is ended." It is said that the members of the choir took one look at the hon. member for Southeast Grey and immediately abandoned the practising of that hymn and burst into the strains of "Abide with me." We can therefore realize the universal appeal which the hon. lady has for those in whom she takes an interest.
She told this committee this afternoon that there was something essentially wrong with our penitentiary system because, to use her own words, there had been demonstrations, riots and, I believe, fires in the various penal institutions. I take it that she has had to rely for her information, as all of us would under similar circumstances, upon three things. First, she had to rely upon her personal inspection of the premises. Second, she had to rely upon what she could learn from conversation with those who were or had been incarcerated in the penitentiary. Third, she had to rely upon those things which might come to her notice by wray of correspondence or, as we have heard, in the case of one man whose case she has espoused, by way of an alleged affidavit. Let us consider briefly the effect of those things and the value or weight which can be attached to them.


Agnes Campbell Macphail: I am sorry to correct
the hon. member. The list I gave of fires, demonstrations and riots was not obtained from the sources of information he has mentioned; it came from the reports of the penitentiary officials. He might read them for himself.
Mr. BELL (Hamilton); I am certainly obliged for the gracious permission. It occurred to me that the hon. member had relied to a certain extent upon her inspection of the premises and upon what had been said by those incarcerated there, as well as what had been committed to writing by some one or more of them. If indeed she now informs this committee that she relied upon
none of these sources of information, then our task of dealing with what she now proposes is infinitely easier. Perhaps she would like to reply to that. I pass on.


Agnes Campbell Macphail: Maybe I had better
reply now.


Leslie Gordon Bell: I am grateful.


Agnes Campbell Macphail: I should like to relieve the hon. member's mind about the hymn singing. There was no one singing hymns of any sort when I visited the penitentiary on two occasions.


Leslie Gordon Bell: Perhaps they only said "Abide with me," without singing it.


Agnes Campbell Macphail: There was no one
there to say it.


Leslie Gordon Bell: Coming to the
various sources of information, I am sure the lady member will pardon me for thinking that there were at least reasonable sources of which she might have availed herself. Coming to the possible sources of information which I have alluded to, the reason why I specified them just now was that her statement this afternoon, if I took it down correctly, and I hope I did, was that there must be something wrong with a system that produces such things. There is a gap. When hon. gentlemen are now considering whether or not the request for the appointment of a commission of inquiry shall depend on the determination of whether the alleged conditions have produced these results, how is that gap to be filled? It can be filled only in the event of there being available human knowledge in regard to conditions in other institutions which eliminates the possibility of any other explanation, and that is all.
My hon. friend from Southeast Grey has said!-and I shall be glad to be corrected if I am in error-that there was a very serious charge laid by a man named Hall, regarding whose alleged statement under oath we heard from the Minister of Justice this afternoon. I take it that that did not come out of a report of any prison commissioner. I take it that when the hon. lady relied on that statement-and I am sure she must have, because undoubtedly she acted in good faith-that was something which came to her either as a matter of correspondence or as an alleged affidavit; and when we are considering what value or importance is to be attached to that, we cannot fail to remember that with all these good, splendid intentions that she has for prison reform and for the amelioration of the lot of those who are unhappily confined, she has not been, to put it a little roughly, a very good picker; because the
Supply-J ustice-Penitentiaries

Minister of Justice reminded us this afternoon that one on whom she had placed reliance before, had proved to be almost the least entitled to reliance of those unhappy prisoners incarcerated behind the walls in Kingston. Then again we find what happened in connection with the man Hall. The trouble, I think, is that, in spite of an earnest, sincere, sympathetic-


Agnes Campbell Macphail: Cut out the cant.


Leslie Gordon Bell: -trusting nature such as hers, and, in view of her interruption, I may add her sweet femininity, one of her difficulties seems to be a lack of appreciation of the bona fides of those with whom she may come in contact under these conditions. She is not original in that regard; we have all known: many learned judges who failed to size up at a glance, or more than one glance, those who testified before them. But there is one thing which apparently eludes many people, amongst them the hon. member for Southeast Grey, and that is the sincerity or want of sincerity with which information imparted to them is given. In other words, when she gets this information she takes it at its face value; but the convict who imparts it may have, and very often does have, an entirely different idea in his mind. It reminds one of the story of the chaplain who some years ago visited Dannemora, the tough prison of New York state. This chaplain felt that he had it within himself to reform even the hardest and toughest of prisoners. He was willing to meet them half way and expected, regardless of what the conditions might be, that they would respond; and when he was told that there was one man who had been sent there from another penitentiary because he was, in the vernacular, so tough that no one could reach him, this chaplain said-and he was not the only chaplain- "Let me have a try." And so he inquired as to the antecedents of this particularly hard prisoner. He was told that the man was what is popularly known as a firebug, a man who lives on the proceeds of incendiarism. The prisoner was brought to him and he looked his part, but the chaplain was not discouraged. He made his way to the prisoner's cell and there sat down. The prisoner sat on a stool and turned his back to the chaplain. The chaplain opened his bible and read the wonderful story of the occasion when Elijah ascended to heaven in a fiery chariot and dropped his mantle, which Elisha picked up. At first the prisoner was disrespectful, but after a few moments of the recital he displayed an entirely different attitude and immediately the chaplain was impressed. The 
man had turned his back on him at first, but now he looked over his shoulder, and as the story went on he turned his face and listened intently, and finally, when the chaplain got through, the man said, "Boss, that is great; could I hear that again?" The chaplain said to himself, "There, you see, it is just a question of knowing how to reach them." And so he read the story again, and if possible got more rapt attention than before; in fact, before he had concluded, the prisoner had drawn his stool a little closer. When he got through, he said: "Boss, I do not want to impose upon you. Could I hear that just once again?" The chaplain said: "My poor fellow, I understand now; you have never been approached in the proper way before, but it is a wonderful story, isn't it?" The prisoner replied: "Ah, yes, sir. The story is good enough as far as she goes, but," he said, "I have been in stir now for years and years, and I ain't had a whiff of such good old Scotch for at least seven years." So the spirit in which the response came was perhaps just a little different from that upon which the narrator had depended, and we may reasonably conclude that in those stories told to the hon. member for Southeast Grey the prisoner did not have in mind exactly what she thought he was trying to convey. Therefore I do not think this committee need worry very long about the extent to which the stories, the would-be affidavits, or things of that kind have established anything of which this committee must take serious notice.
I said that it was my experience to do as was done by the hon. member. I visited the Kingston penitentiary and went through that institution from cellar to garret as she did. I must confess that I found something that I think is a very serious deficiency there, and that I intend to speak of frankly in this chamber. But before I pass on, let me deal first of all very briefly with the suggestion that conditions create riots. It has been said in the first place that there have been serious riots induced in regard to the food supply. That has not been the situation in Kingston. When I say that to the committee, I am dealing not with reports of prison superintendents, not with reports of what I learned by an unannounced visit to that institution, but with what I have learned from prisoners who have been discharged and who, having been discharged, have come to me for help because they knew they would be received in a kindly spirit and their confidences would not be abused. One point that has been emphatically stated by every man that I have ever come across who has been in that unfortunate position, has been that those people have not suffered

Supply-Justice-Penitentiaries
through any deficiency in the food supplied to them. Hon. members may think that is not a very important matter, but I have under my hand the report of the commissioner who investigated the Dartmouth prison riot in 1932, and without taking up in dealing with that matter more time than I can spare, and referring only to pages 18 and 19 of that report, I notice that the terrible disturbances and the fire which caused the loss of many lives were due entirely to complaints about the food supply. Therefore those matters may very well of themselves be a cause for riotings, demonstrations and fires of which the hon. member for Southeast Grey has spoken. But at least they did not exist in Kingston penitentiary.
One need not waste time on the question of cleanliness. One visit to the institution and an observation of conditions there as invited by the Minister of Justice not once but twice this afternoon, would convince anyone interested as to what the situation was in that respect.
The hon. member for Southeast Grey has said that the riots in I think it was the fall of 1932-and they were serious; they came almost on top of the appointment of General Ormond-were occasioned by the prohibition of softball playing. I want to assure hon. members that to my knowledge that is true. When I visited Kingston penitentiary last October, I observed that the inmates were playing ball of various kinds, but for some reason or other they were prohibited from playing softball. The men who, having been discharged from Kingston penitentiary, have come to me from time to time after their experience there, have told me in a way there is not any reason to doubt, that was what provoked the riot which occurred. In that connection we might very well adopt the system that has been inaugurated by Warden Lawes of Sing Sing penitentiary. With twenty-five hundred men in that institution he has established this system and he never deviates from it: men are in prison because of serious offences committed against the law; they are not in prison as inmates of a club, but they may have their condition much ameliorated providing they show themselves worthy. In Sing Sing they have a football team, a band, a baseball team; they have even flower gardens that the men tend, with the idea that it is much better to have a man out digging in a garden than to have him thinking black thoughts while locked up in a cell. Personally I believe that is right. Those are the conditions there and they might well be adopted in this country; that is, that as long as the conduct of the various individuals who
comprise the inmates is beyond reproach or complaint, they are to be accorded all those privileges, and just as soon as they show themselves unworthy of them, those privileges will be withdrawn. The great trouble about that Kingston outbreak in 1932 was the fact that the inmates of Kingston penitentiary came to regard what had been accorded to them as a privilege, as an inalienable right, and when it was taken away from them, they sought by violence to assert that right again. That is not conjecture; that is not anybody's affidavit; that is what I have from the mouth of man after man who was there and who knows conditions in a way that cannot be disputed.
As regards punishment, I have never heard that any punishment, corporal or otherwise, has ever induced revolt. I am one of those who do not believe in the efficacy of flogging;
I do not believe in it because I think it has an extremely brutalizing effect. I do not think you will ever improve the lot of men incarcerated in prison by flogging them on slight provocation like a lot of beasts. I do not believe in lashes that are ordered to be inflicted on men convicted of crimes of violence; I think there are other and better ways of dealing with them. But I do believe that you should not do away entirely with the possibility of corporal punishment, because there are certain men who can be reached in no other way. It is a matter of internal administration, not something that you can make a matter of general policy.
There has been a great deal written in the public press, perhaps not quite correctly, about what has been called "the hole." The Minister of Justice described it this afternoon. I went through it. Do you know what it is? There is a small corridor, lighted by an electric light opposite each cell. The place is like quarters that a janitor would occupy in a good apartment building. But it has those cells on one side. It is true that if a man is put inside one of those cells and yells and howls and makes an infernal nuisance of himself, the door is shut on him. Well, if he wants to act like a baby why not treat him like a baby? Little Willie goes to work and raises cain around the house, his mother spanks him and puts him in the cupboard and says, "You will come out when you are a good boy." It is nothing more than that as far as the hole is concerned. It is clean, sanitary and properly looked after, and unless the warden was guilty of untruth to me, and I do not believe he was, here is what happens: If a man is recalcitrant and refuses to conform to any rules or any discipline, he is first put into a ward, clean, sanitary, well

Supply-Justice-Penitentiaries
lighted, upstairs. If he persists and will not heed what is said to him after he has been confined there for a certain time, he is taken downstairs. The only thing I would quarrel with after that is that he might be paddled, and perhaps paddled too heavily. My hon. friend from Kingston City showed me not so very long ago in a room of this house what he said was a paddle that had been used at Kingston penitentiary, or rather a duplicate of it which had been obtained, I understand, at the time of the trials for rioting. I would say without hesitation that if that instrument was ever used it was a relic of barbarism that would shame our modem civilization. But I am told by the warden, upon whom I descended without warning, that that is not what is used nowadays in Kingston, whatever may have been used in times gone by. If his statement was true, and I see no reason to disbelieve it, the punishment that is administered, however we may shrink from the necessity for corporal punishment at all, is perhaps not unreasonable under all the conditions.
After all, the greatest punishment that can be inflicted on a human being is loss of liberty. The greatest punishment that can be inflicted even on a bird or animal is close confinement. I do feel with all the sincerity of which 1 am capable, that further consideration should be given to the plight of those who are deprived of liberty under those conditions, because that is what is calculated to make them suffer most of all. The Minister of Justice pointed out this afternoon that there is already under way a movement, to which he proposes to give effect, to establish in the penitentiaries of this country what is known as the Borstal system. The hon. member for East Toronto (Mr. Church)
I think did not get it quite correctly when something was said about sending someone abroad, to study this system. The purpose of that, I understand, is merely in regard to the details which might be effectively followed in carrying out the plan. Hon. members should understand that the Borstal system is not the be-all and end-all in dealing with the criminal class; it is a step in the right direction, but only a step. The ideal to be sought is to find a means of dealing with the criminal, young or old, as an individual. Just so far as we fall short of that, so far we fail of attaining what should be our ultimate aim.
My time is short and I must not encroach, but let me quote once again from an official report, that of the commissioners of prisons in England for the year 1932. Lest it be suggested that I am quoting from one that (Mr. C. W. Bell.]
is out of date, let me say that this was brought before the House of Commons in England only in 1934. At page 42 of that report the case is dealt with of an unfortunate young girl who was sentenced to a period of detention in a Borstal institution for breaking her recognizances. She had been twice convicted of theft and once for wandering. She left school at the age of fourteen and had reached the sixth standard, went into domestic service, but left many situations and was never employed for more than a few weeks at a time. She was totally unreliable and untruthful, and the despair of all who tried to assist her. The first theft, of a purse and gold ring, occurred when she was fourteen years old. She again stole a purse when fifteen years old and was sent to a reformatory, and at twenty attempted suicide. I will not take time to pursue the details further, but the point I desire to lay before the committee is that while the setting up of the Borstal system is desirable, we must not then sit down and pat ourselves on the back and think we have solved the problem. No, because it is an individual problem and is going to need all the careful consideration we can devote to it.
In the few remaining moments available to me, let me make one suggestion that I hope is really constructive and that may be of assistance in solving the problem that faces us every time we look at one of our penal institutions. When I visited Kingston penitentiary in October last, I went over the place from cellar to garret. After the most careful investigation it was in my power to make of the premises and of the condition of those incarcerated there, I was told by the warden, "Now you have seen it all." I said, "Oh, no; you cannot be right. I have been in the workshop of the oculist; I have been in the chemical laboratory; I have been in the operating room; I have been in the hospital; but what do you do for the sick mind?" He said, "What do you mean?" I said, "Where is your psychiatric ward?" He said, "We have none." Mr. Chairman, if there is one thing more than another that is needed' for Kingston penitentiary and every penitentiary in this country, it is a psychiatric ward.


Mr. ROSS:: Hear, hear.


Leslie Gordon Bell: There is no question about it; experience has shown it. I was shocked when I was told that any time it was suspected that a man required psychiatric treatment, they had to get a psychiatrist from down town to examine him.

Supply-Justice-Penitentiaries
For what length of time? For half an hour, and then never see him again. What good can that do? In Sing Sing prison, where they have 2,500 convicts, they have three qualified psychiatrists and three well qualified assistants, but in Kingston with 1,000 convicts we have not one. Surely that condition ought to be remedied; surely it should not be allowed to continue much longer. Is it a fact that there is no real necessity for it? Well, I hope hon. members will listen to the reference I am about to give. In The Lawbreaker, by the Calverts, those people who have devoted their lives to the study of this very problem in England, I find this, and I hope the committee will listen to it:
During the ten years 1921-1931 no less than 2.625 persons after being sent to prison on committal were found by the medical officers to be certifiable-
That means certified lunatics.
-under the lunacy or mental deficiency acts, and during the same period 698 persons received into prison on conviction were subsequently certified in prison under the mental deficiency acts.
Why, it ought to be a matter of common sense to us, even without the statistics, that the vast majority of those unfortunates who go back to the penitentiary time and again, who on being let out have but a short time until they are recommitted to those penal institutions in which they have served many dreary hours and many dreary years, go back for one reason- only. They do not go back of their own volition; they do not go back because they are anxious again to commit crime and to return to those miseries of which we have heard; they go back because they are unable to avoid it.
Will anyone say, after listening to those experiences in penal institutions to which I have referred, that something might not be done for those men and women that would give them a chance? Just because my hon. friend from Southeast Grey has been unfortunate enough to have been imposed upon by two people is she going to give up her faith in the criminal class? Is any person who wants to observe the real decencies and obligations of modem society going to say that any man or any woman is hopelessly lost before we have exerted the last possible effort that can be exerted on his or her behalf? That does not rest upon incarceration for years; it does not rest upon anything except the character, the brains and the disposition of the individual, which may be reached no matter how long the time of bitter disappointment or how long the time of lawbreaking they have endured. So I
say as my parting word, Mr. Chairman, that regardless of what other necessities may present themselves to the government; regardless of what difficulties there may be in the way of financing the needs of our prisons, we should not deprive ourselves of psychiatric aid in redeeming some of those people while they still have a chance.
There is one other matter on which I want to say a word before I sit down. It has become our custom in this house, a custom to which I have yielded together with almost everyone else, to say, "Well, this might be for the better, but why did you not do it in the past five years?" Then someone else says, " Why did you not do it in the previous nine years?" And so it goes on. Can we not eliminate that just for once? Can we not say that the question now under consideration is a question of right or wrong, regardless of whether it has escaped the notice of hon. gentlemen in this house or out of it until the present day and hour? Can we not say that we recognize that the lack of that mental help for these mentally sick people should be remedied in order to give them a chance to go forward to something better, even if they are only convicts in a penal institution?


Agnes Campbell Macphail: I appreciate more than I can say the very earnest plea just made by the hon. member for West Hamilton (Mr. Bell). I .am going to make just one reference to my visit to the Kingston and St. Vincent de Paul penitentiaries. One situation which I do feel should not be allowed to continue is that the sick and insane are in the same hospital separated only by the wall against which the heads of the beds stand. There seemed to be quite a number of really sick persons. As we went along at St. Vincent de Paul the warden indicated one man who had been operated on just the day before, and anyone who has gone through the sufferings of the day following a serious operation knows how difficult it
is.	Right near that man, out of his sight but just- beyond the wall, was an insane man who was calling out loudly. The insane man could not help it, of course, but it seemed to me very difficult for the sick. In both institutions there were quite a number of insane persons. I asked Warden Piuze about
it,	and he said it always seemed difficult to get them moved off rapidly. First there was a period during which the officials were not sure whether or not the inmates were insane, and then it seemed quite a while from the time they became sure until the inmates were
242S

Supply-Justice-Penitentiaries
removed. So I do feel that if out of all this some good may result, any suffering I have endured is as nothing at all.
I am going to argue for the appointment of a royal commission to investigate the whole penial system, to study and report on the cause and cure of crime. Before going on with that, however, I must say that I feel that if we are to discuss modem penology intelligently we must know something of the work of Thomas Mott Osborne, the founder of the new penology. Anything that Lawes has been able to do as warden of Sing Sing, or anything that Doctor Leo Palmer, who made such a marveEous address before the Kiwan.is club of Kingston on August 7, 1934, and who is the superintendent of Walkill state prison at Wallkill, New York, and other men who are carrying out the ideas of new penology, have been able to do has come as a result of the tremendous service rendered by Thomas Mott Osborne, who died feeling that his life had been wasted and who was not only prosecuted but who was also persecuted because of his attitude towards criminals. I should like to give a brief outline of what Osborne stood for. He was the first to propound the idea that there is no such thing as a criminal type. He argued that since most prisoners are to return to society the chief objective of prisons should be to prepare them for that return. He contended that only by treating convicts as men, insted of as beasts, can an attitude of cooperation on the part of the prisoners be cultivated, and he demonstrated in actual practice at Auburn penitentiary, at Sing Sing penitentiary and at Portsmouth naval prison that the granting of responsibility to inmates after they had shown their capacity to appreciate it was the best insurance for maintaining a sense of responsibility after their release. His philosophy could be summed up in these words: No man can reform another. What we can do is give him a chance to reform himself. After Osborne's death, tribute was paid to him, all over the United States of America for the tremendous service he rendered in the field of penology.
I feel that we ought to have a royal commission in order that we may be better able to protect the innocent members of society against embittered and revengeful men when they come out of prison. I could not help but wonder how the superintendent of penitentiaries in Canada could have become a noted penologist in such a short time. After the riots and fires and continual disturbances-I gave a list this afternoon, a [Miss Macphail.)
most imposing array-three men in key positions who had no knowledge of penology, no knowledge of psychology, or so far as I know of the social sciences, were appointed. These men were the superintendent, one of the chief inspectors, and the warden at Kingston penitentiary. I was glad to hear the minister state this afternoon that the number of people in penitentiaries is lower. Certainly however it is very much greater than it was ten years ago. I believe the figures indicate that on March 31, 1934, we had within our Canadian penitentiaries 2,373 inmates, while in April, 1933, we had 4,591. Our penitentiaries cost about $2,699,000.
I believe there is no one in this house who would question the integrity and social standing of a man like the Hon. W. F. Nickle. Speaking at Montreal on October 16, 1933, Mr. Nickle made a very strenuous speech in favour of radical changes in our penal system. His observations are reported in the Globe of October 17, 1933, from which I am quoting. The headings are:
Prison cruelty shames Canada. Stripped of rights, convict's fate left to whims of guards. Grim tales of suffering within Portsmouth's walls recounted by Ontario's former Attorney General in heartfelt protest at Montreal.
Then, one or two sentences from his observations:
Branding the penal system of Canada under present administration as a disgrace to the nation, and a regime that should be swept out of existence, Hon. W. F. Nickle, K.C., former Attorney General for Ontario, and parliamentarian of long experience, unfolded before the Young Men's Canadian Club of Montreal to-night some of the facts in connection with penitentiary life that have come within his personal knowledge. He made it clear that the convict is deprived of even the few and minimum rights that society has conceded to the man behind the bars.
This is a long article, and I shall not take time to quote the whole of it. May I, however, read the following:
Mr. Nickle scouted the idea that any political motives were behind the movement to reform penitentiary conditions. He deprecated as unworthy of notice the fallacious jibes, "sob-sisters" and "sentimentalists," which were levelled against those seeking prison reform, by those who did1 not see eye-to-eye with Mr. Nickle and other Canadians who saw the need for improvement.
Then, quoting his words:
Knowing Right Hon. R. B. Bennett and Hon. Hugh Guthrie as I do, I know that if they saw the situation as I do, they would see their duty, as humanitarians, not merely to accept my word for it, or the word of the convicts, but to accept the spirit of the nation that cries out for an improvement in this regard,

Supply-Justice-Penitentiaries
and appoint a commission to investigate. I haven't much faith in parliamentary commissions-they consist of busy men who have inadequate opportunities to go into the thing thoroughly.
He made one other statement in his speech which to me was of particular interest, because I had tried to check up on the point during my last visit. Last year in this chamber I asked a question in the same connection. I quote:
Sometimes convicts were strapped'-
That is not what I want, but undoubtedly they were.
The hospital cells were the occasion for considerable complaint, too. The dishes the men ate from were washed in the baths in which hospitalized convicts washed, and, although it was stated that no cases of disease had been communicated, the situation was, nevertheless, abhorrent to the majority of them.
I did take particular notice of the hospital at Kingston penitentiary, and I felt that the good offices of the hon. member for Kingston City were clearly discernible in the excellence of the hospital in many regards. It is certainly a very much better hospital than is to be found at St. Vincent de Paul, and I attribute the difference to the work of the hon. member I have just mentioned. I must say however that I could not find anywhere the place where they washed dishes, other than in the bathtub in which patients suffering from all sorts of diseases, including those suffering from syphilis, bathed. I would like to know if this heinous method of dish washing has been discontinued. Up until the very last reports I received-I believe they were authentic, and they were not from prisoners-it was still in practice.
In the editorial column on the front page of the Toronto Saturday Night for March 30, 1935, there is an editorial dealing with this subject. This is a very excellent paper, one of high standard and considered to be more or less conservative, from a political standpoint. Its views, which I should like to bring before the house are as follows:
As we have never entertained the view that the indiscipline in the Portsmouth penitentiary was due to the presence of some half-score of members of the communist party within its walls, we are perhaps less surprised than some of our contemporaries that that indiscipline is continuing although the communists have departed.
As I said this afternoon I read through again last night the report of General Ormond, and I find that upon this occasion he does not mention communists. Last year the report reeked with communists; communists, 02582-155
according to him, were the cause of everything. There are no communists in it now. He makes the statement which I shall now quote:
As stated elsewhere the conduct of the convicts during the year has been fairly good and can be looked upon as satisfactory in view of the unrest created by the publicity given to penitentiary affairs.
It is going to be tough on the department if in this coming year there are no communists, and no publicity to blame. Then, to go on with the editorial in the Toronto Saturday Night:
As a matter of fact we are not surprised at all. The conditions which provoked the outbreaks of the last two years, namely gross overcrowding in the penitentiaries and an attitude of smug satisfaction-
I am glad somebody has said it just as I feel it.
-and immovable conservatism throughout the entire organization, are continuing exactly as they were; and the official attitude has become more irritating than ever because there was for a few weeks a hope-due to an announcement by the government that the Borstal system would be examined and reported on with a view to its adoption-that some steps towards prison reform would be taken immediately.
Then, the last sentence:
It is time the Canadian penitentiary system was thoroughly overhauled with the aid of expert advice and criticism from countries where penology has been studied with greater exactitude than here.
That will be difficult, since the minister told us that Canada has the best penal system in the world. A few days ago the following appeared as an editorial in the Ottawa Citizen:
One thing is certain, it is that Kingston penitentiary needs to be investigated to see if it is conducted in accordance with modern standards. There are at present grave doubts that it is.
I need not, I think, quote the Toronto Globe because for a long time it has conducted a campaign for penal reform. No matter what other people may think of it I am convinced that the Globe is sincerely anxious to bring about real changes in our penal system. From the issue of March 20, 1935, I will read only one sentence:
The rights of parliament to full information about penitentiary happenings have been accorded scant respect by the responsible minister in the past. Even in the last weeks before dissolution there can be no excuse for relaxing of effort to clear up the prison situation so far as it is possible to wrench the facts from quibbling administrators.
Last year Major W. M. Nickle, in an interview with the Toronto Globe on Wednesday June 27, said:

Supply-Justice-Penitentiaries

What is needed at Kingston penitentiary is reform, not repression. An inmate should be taught a trade or calling, so that on discharge he can make an honest living with his fellow men and not be, as is now the ease, on discharge, as many years backward' as the length of his term.
I have noticed in two or three papers and letters received from prominent people who are interested in this subject that they have compared it with the practice of medicine, indicating how far behind medical science is the study of penology. I now look again at the speech of Doctor Leo J. Palmer, superintendent of the state prison at Wallkill, New York, who speaking in Kingston last year, said:
Our modern medicine is the product of scientific investigation without which we would still be attempting to cure our sick and insane by trying to drive out evil spirits. We know to-day that there are as many causes of crime as there are criminals and are forced to the conclusion that as there is no single cause of crime, there can be no single cure for the criminal.
He is clearer in another sentence:
Whereas the old method sought to make the punishment fit the crime, the new strives to make the treatment suit the individual.
I received a very interesting letter from a prominent medical man in Hamilton, the city of the hon. member who has just taken his seat. This doctor compares our treatment of criminals with our treatment of the insane and sick, and goes on to show that the two treatments are not alike. In. criminal cases the man who hands out the treatment, or the sentence, does not follow it through to see what effect it will have. The criminal is simply turned over to people who are not trained to carry out the orders given. In his opinion our present system is in need of a complete overhauling.
I should like to make some suggestions which I think are constructive. Since so much controversy has taken place on this subject I submit that an investigation should be held with the idea of finding methods to improve the treatment of crime. I have talked this matter over with many people who have had a good deal to do with prisoners, and they are all of the opinion that the place where the psychiatrist should begin his work is the court room. There should1 be a psychiatrist attached to every court in order that the sentence given, particularly to youthful offenders, should be one likely to be of benefit while at the same time protecting society. A case sheet, upon which is entered full information as to the environment and hereditary influences affecting the prisoner,

should accompany the man to the penitentiary so that the warden may have some idea of the type of prisoner with which he was dealing. I agree with the hon. member for West Hamilton! (Mr. Bell), who has spoken so well on this subject, that there should be a trained psychiatrist attached to every penitentiary. If that cannot be afforded at the moment, there should be two appointed, one for the western penitentiaries and one for the eastern.
There should be a classification of prisoners. I realize that this is not an easy thing to do and I do not know enough about penology to say just how they should be classified. However, with all due deference to some of the high officers in the penitentiary, I think I know about as much on the subject as they do.
The prisoners should be trained to do some work, such as carpentry, blacksmithing and so on, so that when they come out of penitentiary they will be able to find a job. I should like to quote from page 24 of General Ormond's report as follows:
Penitentiaries treat the convicts as individuals who will eventually be returned to society. The training in the penitentiary will be such that the convict should', without difficulty, upon his release adjust himself to the conventions accepted by the citizens of Canada.
The fact is that these men have great difficulty in adjusting themselves to conditions and in finding anything to do. While in the penitentiary these men work only seven hours per day, leaving seventeen hours to be spent in their cells. I believe the cells measure something like four by six feet or four by eight feet, although there is a whole tier of cells in St. Vincent de Paul which measure only three and a half by six feet. Seventeen hours is a long time to be shut in a cell and nothing is to be gained by leaving a man's mind vacant so that it can be filled with all that is bad. It would be much better to have some kind of cell activities in which the man could interest himself. I visited a small village some distance from Kingston and some of the people had friends who were convicts in Kingston. One of these convicts had made a watch chain out of horsehair taken from the team he was driving on the farm. This was a remarkable piece of work, but it was the opinion of these people that if the man who made it had been found out he would have been put in the punishment cell. I do not know for certain that that is true, but I judge it is. Everybody does not enjoy reading, and in fact many of the convicts are poorly educated and never will be readers. Would it not be

Supply-Jrntice-Penitentiaries
possible under the regulations to have a lecture or an evening of music once a month which would be calculated to elevate the minds of the convicts? I do not think this is being done in most of the penitentiaries, although I understand it is at St. Vincent de Paul and is permissible under the regulations.
This whole subject should be approached scientifically. It is true that there should be punishment, but the main object in view should be the reformation of the man. I think it is most important that the person in charge of a penitentiary should be trained in penology and know something about psychology and the related social sciences. I am inclined to agree with the hon. member for East Toronto who said he was rather against the appointment of military men to these positions. A military man might be just the person for the position of superintendent, but on the other hand the qualities which make him an excellent military man are likely to militate against bis effective work iwith prisoners. Wardens should be men of education and culture, the sort of men whom all the convicts in their secret hearts would like to be. A warden should also possess the love of humanity and be anxious to help those placed in his charge. Reading the life of Thomas Mott Osborne and the book written by Warden Lawes of Sing Sing convinces one that men of the right type affect tremendously the lives of the convicts.
I think there should be training schools for the guards. Wardens are rather to be pitied by having a number of green men appointed as guards. All that a warden can do is to put a new man on with a trained guard, the new man picking things up as he goes along. I think there should be training schools for the guards of our Canadian penitentiaries. It is "not necessary that the courses should be continuous but these schools might meet at certain definite times, and surely it is not asking anyone too much to expect that he shall put in six months to qualify himself to be a guard. I believe that the higher the standard set for guards and petty officials the sooner we shall have better results. Again-and this is going a good deal further than we have yet gone- I think we ought to begin an experiment in self-government. What the minister said today indicates possibly a beginning in that direction-a segregation of better behaved prisoners who are allowed to meet in a room and have their meals together. It is only as the prisoners begin to show a sense of responsibility that they will be fit to enter society again. Certainly the insane should not be allowed to mingle with the sane.
92582-155J
I would remind the minister that many years ago I asked also that prisoners should be given payment. It must be about eight years since I made this suggestion and the first year the house thought it was a peculiar idea, but the second jmar the resolution carried. I think it was in 1926 it carried, the year when all sorts of peculiar ideas seemed to be quite all right. It took considerable time before it was carried into practice however, and I certainly did not think that it would be the complicated business it has turned out to be. I tried to follow the minister this afternoon but I lost the connection between the five cent day and the ten cent day and paying and not paying for tobacco. I am not so sure that the prisoners would not have been better off if they had not been given the five cents and had not been asked to pay for their tobacco.
The last point, which I suggest is a very important one, is the necessity for simplifying the rules. I do not want to amuse the house unduly, but after a good deal of trouble I obtained the book of rules from which I wish to quote a few examples. There are 724 rules.


An hon. MEMBER:: Who issued it?


Agnes Campbell Macphail: This was issued by
Superintendent Ormond. I understand that he sent out the next year 230 circulars. Some of them confirmed and some contradicted the rules, and if he has been as prolific in 1934 there must be 1,000 rules by now-1,000 rules which someone is supposed to have read and to know.


Ernest Lapointe: One would have to have a good memory for that.


Agnes Campbell Macphail: Yes. I will read two or three of the rules. For instance, it takes fifteen and a half pages to tell the medical officer how to examine a guard when he is applying for the position, and this is supposed to be addressed to a doctor by a layman. Section 7, page 118, reads:
7. Position of applicant.-When not required to approach the applicant for special objects, the medical officer should always take his place at a distance of about six feet from him. The applicant should be placed so that the light will fall upon him.
Then we come to the examination of the head and neck-I like that one.
14. The head and neck-The examination of the head and neck will be made from above downwards. The medical officer will note the intelligence, character of voice and power of hearing of the applicant by his replies to the questions put to him. The following are the directions:
Have you had any blows or cuts on the head?
Are you subject to fits of any kind?
He examines the scalp.
Supply-Justice-Penitentiaries

He examines the ears.
He examines the nostrils.
He examines the mouth, teeth, palate and fauces and then tells the applicant to say loudly, "Who comes there?"
He examines the neck.
It is as minute as that for all parts of the body and, as I say, it takes fifteen and a half pages to tell all about it. It seems to me that there is one officer who does not need any qualifications, and that is the medical officer; all he needs is the book of rules. Let me quote now a few other rules:
632.	When typewriters or adding machines are in need of repair, the warden shall obtain from the local agent a detailed estimate of the cost of repair, and shall submit such estimate to the superintendent on a stationery requisition.
633.	In .the ease of repairs costing not more
than one dollar, the warden may instruct the local agent to proceed with the same, and shall procure an invoice from him and' forward the same to the superintendent, covered by a stationery requisition.	_
634.	Typewriter and adding machine repairs shall not be attempted in the machine shops of the penitentiary.
650.	The chimneys of residences are to be swept once a year, or oftener, if required. This shall include chimneys from bake ovens.
651.	Wherever possible, chimneys are to be swept from the outside of the building, by convict labour. After the chimney has been swept, the soot is to be removed from the basement or clean-out by the tenant:


Samuel William Jacobs: Is it stated that the convict must return to his cell after that is done?


Agnes Campbell Macphail: I do not see anything about that. Let me read something in regard to horses:
576.	If a horse becomes a casualty, and requires to be laid up or receive veterinary treatment, the necessary entries shall be made on form P.B. 17 and the form shall be forwarded to the office of -the superitendent, in order that such entries may be made in the duplicate form held there.
577.	When it becomes necessary or desirable to cast or sell a horse, a full report shall be forwarded to the superintendent, with recommendations.
578.	If it becomes necessary to destroy a horse in an emergency, a full report shall be forwarded, accompanied by the report and certificate of a veterinary officer.
Then it leaves two blanks, 579 and 580. Were these left so that a full report might be made in regard to a team of Percheron horses bought from an M.P.? The price is very good, I am told, around $700. Anyone who goes through these rules, of which there must be 1,000 altogether, will understand how impossible it is for the guards to grasp them. When Brigadier General Hughes was superintendent the warden was in command of the institution but that is no longer true; he has scarcely any command at all.

Dr. Leo Palmer, addressing the Kiwanis club with regard to the rules in his institution, said:
It might be of interest to note at this point that the institution functions with the fewest possible rules. It is true that we have provided certain daily routines. Insistence on punctuality is maintained but only those regulations are enforced that make for a decently well-organized community.
So long as we have such a multiplicity of rules there must be trouble, because no one can become acquainted with them.
Let me now discuss for a moment the important question of parole. This whole subject should be investigated by competent people, and I should like to see a man like Mr. Nickle, who was on the investigation before, and others equally well qualified, carry out a careful inquiry into this subject. There is one parole officer for the whole dominion, and be is in the department. I am sure he does his best, but the people who know most about the prisoners in the different penitentiaries can only make recommendations to the parole officer-he is called remission officer, I think. But any authorities on penology that I have ever read and any of the commissions ever held in Canada-and we have had two excellent ones, one in 1914 and the other in 1921-in both cases urged that there be a parole board for each penitentiary and that parole board consist not of one person but of several.
There is another subject I wish to discuss, although I do not know how the committee will feel about it, and that is the chaplains in the penitentiary. I understand they are really civil servants; they are paid by the dominion government. I am not sure what the salary is; some use the figure $2,500 I am not sure as to the amount. I was just wondering whether the church, whether Catholic or Protestant, should not be responsible for the chaplains, because then they would be free in a way they cannot be if they are paid directly by the government. If we send missionaries all over the world to tell people how to live, I do not see why on the same principle the churches themselves should not be responsible for the chaplains in the penitentiaries.
I should like to refer for a moment to the change there has been in regard to crime and its punishment. When you go back in English history-and you do not have to go back very far-you find hundreds of crimes for which the death penalty was the punishment. People were boiled in oil, hanged, drawn and quartered, and many other forms of punishment were inflicted to try to deter criminals, but these punishments did not have

Supply-Justice-Penitentiaries
the intended effect. Under modem civilization we have got away from that sort of thing. Now we know cruelty does not bring reform. I give the committee the words of Thomas Mott Osborne, who is better qualified to judge than anyone else who has lived on this continent. He says:
When a man, treated like a beast, snarls and bites, you say, "This is the conduct of an abnormal creature-a criminal." When a prisoner, treated like a man, nobly responds, you cry, "A miracle!"
What folly! Both these things are as natural as two and two making four.
I think that is true and should be the basis of the new penology in Canada; I think it should be instituted without delay.


Mr. REID:: I want to change the discussion somewhat in order to direct the attention of the minister to some cases which I believe should be brought to his attention. These have occurred in the city of New Westminster. They affect three, if not four returned men, and to my mind at least three of them are serious enough I think to merit further investigation on the part of the minister. Before I finish I am going to ask him, if he appoints a royal commission, that these cases be also considered by it. The three of them, while they affect three different parties, involve more or less the same complaint in regard to dismissal. These men had been engaged as guards or clerks, and had been changed from clerks to prison guards, then changed back again to clerks and later discharged from the penitentiary. The minister will I know take the attitude that the warden is in complete control of the penitentiary, as he should be, and that all men in that institution should be under his direct orders and do exactly as they are told. Some men in certain positions in life are a little more conscientious perhaps than are others, and the men about whom I am speaking have in my opinion been conscientious in regard to carrying out their duties. In carrying on clerical work it was their duty to censor letters going out from the convicts to their friends, and I believe that it was due to complaints which they made regarding the disobeying of rules which brought them under the displeasure of the warden who was in the penitentiary at that time and who lately has been transferred from New Westminster to Prince Albert penitentiary.
These men have a wonderful war record. After I sit down I would like the minister, when he answers my appeals, to tell the committee how many returned men have been employed since the civil service regulations
have been done away with and since the hiring of officials or guards has been placed under the jurisdiction of the warden. I ask that because much complaint has been heard since one of the annual reports appeared in which it was stated that ex-service men who had been privates were not as satisfactory as other classes might be on account of the fact, so the report stated, that those men had perhaps reached the height of their efficiency. That slur has travelled from one end of the country to the other, and I have met it particularly in my constituency where it is stated on fairly good authority that since that time preference has been given to those who have not seen active service. I have under my hand a list of many of the men who have been engaged, but perhaps the minister has fuller information regarding that and will be able to answer me when I resume my seat.
The first man I want to deal with is one Pattinson, whose complaint is that because he took the part of a guard named Drage who was dismissed, he came under the displeasure of the warden, fault was found with him and he was fired from the penitentiary. This man was thirty-eight years of age. Here is his army record. He held a regular commission as a captain in His Majesty's army in India. He was temporary major while employed as section administrative commandant at Kalabagh, India. He was also staff captain, administrative staff, and camp commandant with two camps under his command. For these services he was awarded the Order of the British Empire, Military. While serving in France with the Imperials, Notts and Derby regiment, as intelligence officer he gained the Military Cross. He received the following medals apart from decorations: General Service Victory, Northwest Frontier, India, with two clasps; I am putting all these on the record and drawing this to the attention of the minister to show the type of this man Pattinson, who has been let out.
He states that he joined the penitentiary staff on February 9, 1933; that he worked in various posts; that he had control of convicts and that for one day he acted steward. On April 9, 1934, at Colonel Cooper's request, he says that he went to the censor's office. He states that of conditions in the administrative building, re staff, he would not speak at present. He says further that while there he refused to be a party to irregular correspondence passing in and out of the prison and to obey a verbal order delivered to him by then temporary

Supply-Justice-Penitentiaries
second grade clerk Cummings, since made senior clerk by Warden Cooper, purporting to come from Warden Cooper, to obey which he would have had to disobey a written order by the superintendent. He says that he had a letter written requesting the order in writing, but was removed from the office during that week. During his last week there, Cooper had placed in charge of this office a man named Staughton, who, Pattinson understood, had failed to measure up to medical requirements. From this time on he states that he was penalized by Cooper, being permitted to do only tower and stand duty. I need not take up the time of the committee with further details with regard to this man, and also as I want to deal with the other two men; but that which I have now read is enough to show the type of man who was holding that position and also to show that it was on account of the fact that he refused to disobey a written order issued by the superintendent that he fell under the displeasure of the warden at the penitentiary.
The other cases are in connection with two men named Drage and Neild. Those men make exactly the same complaint. In the case of Drage, it will be said that he used a billy on one of the convicts. Two other guards were in charge of that convict, and Drage came to their assistance. He states that investigation proved that the convict was not hurt. He claims that he was acting under the rules of the penitentiary in what he did, but as he had been complaining about the evasion of rules by the warden, he feels that he was discriminated against and let out on that account.
The other case is that of Neild, who was in the penitentiary quite a number of years. He was in the same department, and endeavouring to carry on as provided by the rules. When he found that letters were not being censored he thought it his duty to censor them, but when he endeavoured to do so, he fell foul of the warden. That is his statement to me. It would take too long to go into the whole 'history of these cases, but here are three men who have fine records of war service, who it would seem were conscientious in doing their duty and endeavouring to obey the rules, especially the rules as to correspondence going out from the convicts and in regard to visitors coming to see the convicts. In the course of their duties, believing they should carry out these rules, they complained, I understand, either to the superintendent or to the warden, and very soon they found themselves under the displeasure of the warden and in course

of time were let out. Not only that, but they are discriminated against because, in endeavouring to find employment elsewhere, they cannot obtain from the warden the references they are asked for.
In the circumstances they are prevented from obtaining any position of trust at any rate by reason of the fact that no recommendation will be given. Drage says that during his time friends were allowed to visit prisoners before they were properly investigated; he claimed that they were violating section 107 of the regulations. He drew the attention of the warden to the fact that letters were coming in which should not come, and he would not allow certain letters to leave which were being sent by the convicts. He also claims that fights had occurred there and no report was made of them and no entry made in the books. One of the most serious charges he makes is in connection with shortages of convicts' money and the loss of stamps. He declares that an investigation into the loss of stamps would show that the books have been altered to cover the shortages. Drage, who has a splendid war record, claims also that he was entitled to twenty-seven days' pay because when he was suspended he was told not to seek work, that he was still under the jurisdiction of the warden, and so was kept in suspense for almost a month before being told that he was discharged. One man who was brought there from the city of Vancouver and given a position was named Matthews. Drage claims that Matthews has now been discharged because it was found he was implicated to some extent in certain telephone calls. In my opinion, these statements are very serious. The serious part is the dismissal of three men who, in endeavouring to carry out the rules, incurred the displeasure of the warden and so lost their positions, and now find themselves unable to procure employment and of course, have a black mark against them. The man Pattinson has a very fine record. I appeal to the minister that in connection with those three men an impartial investigation be held. The whole case I understand has been laid before the minister and before the superintendent, who is well aware of all the circumstances. I ask the minister if he has any report regarding these cases; also how many returned men have been engaged since the civil service commission have discontinued hiring men for the penitentiaries?


Hugh Guthrie: I cannot give my hon. friend the figures; I have not them before me, as I did not anticipate being asked the

________ Supply-Justice-Penitentiaries
question. But I can let him have the exact number to-morrow I think. My information is that none but returned men have been engaged when returned men were available. I shall get an exact statement and give it to my hon. friend.
In regard to Pattinson, from reading the report I am satisfied that he had an excellent military record in India. He joined the penitentiary staff in February, 1933, as a temporary guard. He knew when he came on that he was there temporarily. In the course of the last few months it became necessary to reduce the staff in that institution, and five temporary guards were let out. The warden was asked to report as to which men he would let out. He let out those who were least useful or necessary, and in his report Pattin-son's name was among those of the temporary officers to be let out. He was not looked upon as a very good penitentiary official, but there is nothing against the man that I know of. The warden reports nothing against him, but says: My orders are to let out five men, and I shall have to include this man because I do not think he will qualify as a good penitentiary man. There is nothing in the record against the man's character. In fact the warden was friendly to him, befriended him on more than one occasion. I think I let my hon. friend see the report in my office a few days ago.
The second case mentioned is that of the guard Drage. Drage had been on the staff for a considerable time. The reason for letting him out was brutality to a convict. A convict, mentally deficient, had created some disturbance, and three men were conducting him to a cell. Two men had hold of him, and for some reason which is not explained in the evidence or the report Drage drew a loaded billy or club of some kind and crashed this prisoner over the head. Subsequently the man was found insane. It was for that conduct, using that bludgeon or billy, that Drage was let out of the service. It so happened that Drage and Neild and a man named Trappitt were all employed in the censor's department of the penitentiary, and they seem to have connived among themselves against the warden. The warden is the responsible officer of the penitentiary, and complaints against the warden, passed here, there and everywhere, that he was breaking regulations, came to headquarters. As soon as the attention of the headquarters staff was drawn to the irregularities with which the warden was charged, which had to do with admitting improper letters or allowing improper letters to go out, the warden was
severely reprimanded, his attention was directed to the regulations, and he was informed definitely what his duties were.


Ian Alistair Mackenzie: When
was that?


Hugh Guthrie: That was prior to this incident to which I have referred. To meet the case and make it more definite the regulations were changed and they were then drawn directly to the attention of Warden Cooper. Time went on and there was conflict between the warden and these men whc were practically spying on him, undermining him while he was the man in control of the institution. One man was let out on a definite charge of unnecessary cruelty. When the reduction took place another temporary employee named Neild was let out on the recommendation of the warden, as was another member of the staff. It would be impossible to carry on an institution of this kind if the warden was not allowed to be in charge, and if his position was to be undermined in the institution of which he was the head. It was for these reasons that Trappitt and Nield were let out. I am inclined to think these people were working pretty well together. They all complained in long letters to His Excellency the Governor General, to me and to others. All the letters were written on the same typewriter and almost in the same language; probably they were all written at the same time. I am sorry their services could not be retained under the circumstances, but on the report of the warden approved by the superintendent they were released from the service.


Mr. REED:: The minister states that Neild was just, a temporary employee. He had been employed there since May, 1929.


Hugh Guthrie: Yes, we have temporary employees who have been working longer than that.


Thomas Reid: That may be,'but this man can produce wonderful testimonials in regard to the work he did prior to that time, and it seems strange that after he complained about the letters he should be let out as unfit and unsuited to the penitentiary. Human nature being what it is I suppose it was only natural that once complaints had been made about the warden and he had been reprimanded by headquarters, he would not have that good feeling towards the guards that otherwise he might have had. I am not going to discuss whether or not these men should have complained, but they evidently felt it their duty to carry out the rules and regulations, and

Supply-Justice-Penitentiaries
they felt that the letters going out from certain convicts and the visits these convicts were receiving were in violation of the rules. That was admitted by the superintendent, who censured the warden. Then later these men were found to be unsatisfactory, and for that reason I ask that an impartial investigation should take place. If they had been let out previously the minister might very well say that they were not suitable for the work. A man may be a temporary employee for quite a long time, but from 1929 to 1934 is a long time for a man like Neild to be working as a temporary employee without giving satisfaction. It was strange that only in 1934 was he found unsatisfactory for the job. I maintain, and I think the minister will agree, that he might have been found unfit because he made the complaint. In the case of Drage, he was employed for two and a half years. It may, as the minister says, look like collusion, but surely that would not apply in the case of Pattinson. It seems very strange that Neild, who was appointed in 1929, Drage who was appointed in 1932 and Pattinson should all get together and conspire against the administration of the penitentiary. That does not seem very reasonable to me, and I am going to ask the minister to again consider the advisability of making some further investigation. These men have not only lost their positions; they have also lost their means of livelihood, because they cannot obtain recommendations. I have letters here from Neild, who was offered a position which he could not obtain due to the fact that he could not secure a recommendation from the warden of the penitentiary. I think some further consideration should be given this matter.
I should like to know in addition how many returned men have been engaged. I do not want to put it on record in case my information is not correct, but I have a long list of non ex-service men who have been engaged. It looks as though the ex-service men have been discriminated against, and if that has happened I must take very grave objection.


Ian Alistair Mackenzie: I should like to say just a word or two. I have personal knowledge of the three cases mentioned by my hon. friend from New Westminster. I have been interviewed by these men; I have heard their stories; I have seen their evidence, some of it sworn, and after .what I think was an impartial analysis of all the evidence on both sides I am absolutely convinced that there was deliberate discrimination against these men. I think the request made by my hon. friend is very

reasonable indeed, as I think the minister would be the first to admit. I have a very high personal regard for the warden, but I think there should be an outside investigation into the merits or demerits of the claims made by these three men, Drage, Neild and Pattinson, and by another man whose case was not mentioned by my hon. friend, a man named Dickson, whose case I referred to the minister the other day by correspondence. I strongly urge upon the minister that he should have either the superintendent or some other outside person make an exhaustive and impartial investigation into these cases in order that absolute justice may be done these men.
Speaking in all fairness, Mr. Chairman, it seems to me that if the minister refuses the very reasonable request of the hon. member for New Westminster in connection with these cases, to my mind that creates an immediate justification for the demands that have been made by the hon. member for Southeast Grey for the appointment of a commission to conduct an investigation throughout the Dominion of Canada. Through these particular instances, of which we have some knowledge, I think there is created at least a presumption that something is radically wrong. So far as I am concerned, in connection with the cases mentioned by my hon. friend I would be quite satisfied with the promise that even the superintendent himself would go out personally and investigate the grievances of these men in order to see that justice may be done in each individual case.


Hugh Guthrie: I would not have any
objection to showing my hon. friend the file and letting him go through it, as I have gone through it, including the fifteen-page letter they addressed to me, containing complaints against the warden. I think my hon. friend will agree that you cannot have two or three men conspiring, if I may use the word, against their superior officer and still hope for any kind of reasonable management of the institution. My hon. friend from New Westminster said Warden Cooper had been moved. The reason for his move had nothing to do with these cases. There has been a rearrangement of wardens.


Thomas Reid: I did not make that inference.


Hugh Guthrie: Then I made a mistake. But I should like my hon. friend who last spoke to go through this file. I have gone through it and I have come to the conclusion that I should follow the recommendations made to me. I have read the evidence and

Supply-Justice-Penitentiaries
the complaints also. I will go further; I assume that some time within the next few months the superintendent himself will go to that point, and I will ask him to hold an investigation.


Arthur Edward Ross: This has been a rather interesting afternoon and evening so far as I am concerned. For some time I have been the sole voice asking for certain things which today I hear granted. I am very much interested in the dismissals; certainly I have had my good share of trouble so far as dismissals are concerned. I do not feel that I would accept even the superintendent as investigator. I believe some person outside the institution and the department should look into these dismissals, especially when hon. members who have to bear the criticism ask for action.
I am not interested in the management of the penitentiaries. I quite agree that if he has any experience the warden should run it. Our experience has been that some wardens who did not know anything about them have run penitentiaries. To-day in Kingston we have a very good man in charge, and I have plenty of confidence in him. Although he is not a military man he has given service, has had training and is now giving satisfaction.
I speak to-night with some trepidation because I have seen so many of these things hurled across at hon. members who dare open their mouths in connection with penal matters. The record of the individual prisoner is thrown at you, as though it was something of which one should be ashamed. I know of no person either in the army or out of it who at some time or another has not been deceived. I can remember when only a few months ago a man was up for trial defended by a very celebrated member of this chamber. He forsook the case, and the witnesses ran away from him because that particular counsel was disappointed in and misled as to the character of the man. So it would seem that at times we all go amiss in these matters.
For a great many years I have been interested in two matters. To-night the celebrated gentleman about whom I have been speaking, the hon. member for West Hamilton (Mr. Bell) has backed us up, and has spoken strongly and reasonably in favour of the appointment of psychiatrists. May I point out that the department is spending as much money upon temporary mental examinations as would be sufficient to pay for the maintenance of a permanent psychiatric department. I have in my locker in this building many references . indicating that many examinations costing $10 each have been made. What has been the result? The result has been that we have
proved many cases of lowered mentality in our institutions. What has been the disposition? Surely hon. members will not say that the removal of these mental cases from penitentiaries to provincial mental institutions, places from which they can run away, is a proper disposition. We know, however, that that has been the custom.
We have contended right along that these subnormal people should be treated specially and should be segregated. They are not ordinary mental cases, because we know they are mental criminals. Only to-day a woman came to this building to see me. Perhaps I may be pardoned if I state that I believe I am approached more often than any other member so far as penitentiary matters are concerned. This particular woman wished to speak to me about her boy, a young lad sixteen years of age, who had been sent to penitentiary for life, despite the fact that an expert alienist had expressed the opinion at the trial that the boy had the mentality of a child of eight years. Despite the evidence of the expert this boy is in gaol for life. We do not say he should not be confined, but we do urge that such cases can be treated only scientifically, and that under our present system no scientific treatment is available.
Surely after listening to the presentation of facts offered by the hon. member for West Hamilton, hon. members will be convinced that the time has arrived when this country can afford to treat scientifically these mental cases. I have spoken about this matter for a number of years. I have spoken in this chamber, and I have heard the statement made not only in this building but in my own constituency that I am a thorn in the flesh so far as the government is concerned. Let me say that I shall remain a thorn in the flesh to this or any other government until some action is taken in this matter. I believe a great deal of the difficulty could be corrected and a great deal of discontent in the institutions eliminated.
There is another point about which I should like to speak, and in connection with which in the year 1928 I presented statistics to the house. Upon that occasion the then Minister of Justice promised action. At that time I believed I had accomplished something in life. I thought that the boys, the juveniles, were going to be taken out of large institutions and placed in separate buildings. Money was granted, and if hon. members consult Hansard for 1929 they will find that the then Minister of Justice, speaking from his seat in this chamber, stated that the vote was in answer to a promise given
243S
Supply-J ustice-Penitentiaries

the hon. member for Kingston that something would be done before the end of the year. The money was then granted to buy the site and to begin building an institution for the juveniles. What happened?


Mr. POWER:: It was given to the boys.
Mr. ROS'S:	One class of boys got it; it
went to the preferred class institution. I trust the ex-Minister of Justice will not take . these observations as being in the nature of a criticism. I received the promise that the juveniles would be treated in a separate institution. Eight or nine of the best farms in the county of Frontenac were purchased, and those boys might have been cared for. But the ex-Minister of Justice called it a preferred class institution.


Ernest Lapointe: I was removed from
office before construction was completed.


Arthur Edward Ross: It is not completed yet. Seven years have passed since the building was begun, and I do not know that it is much above the ground even yet. That building was to be for the treatment of juveniles. However, I am satisfied that I have done something, because again and again I have stood in this chamber and pleaded the unfairness and the injustice of putting boys in penitentiaries. The Minister of Justice has said that boys are not placed in penitentiaries. Well, I would aSk him to be sure on that point, because I know that up to July, 1934, under the criminal code those boys could be sent to no other place. Up to July, 1934, the magistrates of this country had no alternative but to send to the penitentiaries boys under sixteen years of age who were found guilty of certain crimes, but a boy over sixteen could be sent to another institution. Can hon. members imagine legislation such as that? I have before me a letter from a magistrate saying, "Why do you not change that provision?" Last year the magistrates met in the city of Sarnia and received the instruction that they need no longer send these boys to the penitentiaries.
I am satisfied I have done some good. This whole matter is now given to us in a new light. We are told that this mental condition can be cured by glandular treatment. No doubt there are inmates in our penitentiaries who could be cured by this treatment. A great field is opened up in connection with this treatment which is being practised in England.
I was told that I was wrong in my statement in connection with, the Borstal system. It was said that I knew nothing about penology and was absolutely wrong in my presentation of the case. In view of this I

could hardly believe my senses when I found that the speech from the throne contained the statement that some action was to be taken in this regard. If the minister does nothing else, if he carries out this one thing, he will be worthy of a crown of glory.
I cannot say that I agree with the minister with regard to the superintendent; I believe he is the wrong man to send there.


Hugh Guthrie: Would I do?


Arthur Edward Ross: You would be better if you would do it.


Hugh Guthrie: I will do it.


Arthur Edward Ross: Then I say: Good luck to you. I cannot accept the word of this superintendent. When the trouble was on in Kingston I did not go near him but he came to my house and made me a definite promise in connection with dismissals. He failed to carry out that promise. We are hearing so much to-day about how you can depend upon government officials, but I want to state openly that the promise made to me was not kept. I have not as much confidence in this gentleman as I had before.
Much has been said about the thirty new improvements. As far as I know, most of these were made long ago. One of the improvements mentioned was the privilege granted to the Jews, but to my knowledge that was given twenty years ago. Another was the ten dollars given to a man when he leaves, but that has been in effect for years.


Hugh Guthrie: Those are not among the thirty improvements mentioned.


Arthur Edward Ross: The one connection with the Jews was. That is nothing new. Reform is in the air, and I am glad. I am not pleading for any individual case; I am not pleading for milder treatment; what I am pleading for is the scientific treatment of this question.
Another matter to which I should like to refer is the dismissal of five guards which occurred in February. It was stated that this was a necessary reduction in staff, but I think these men should have been kept on until at least the month of April. Five men were thrown out into the cold when we should expect more charity from a government institution. These men should have been kept on until the spring.
This whole question needs most serious consideration, and I think the government should consider the appointment of a psychiatrist to act in these institutions.


Hugh Guthrie: Mr. Chairman, I should like to say a word or two on the question of psychiatrists and psychologists. This matter

Supply-Justice-Penitentiaries
has been given close study by the department. The following will be found on page 46 of the report of last year:
It is recommended that a full-time psycho' logist should be employed in each penitentiary. Funds are not available in the appropriation for 1933-34. If this recommendation is approved, the appointments should take place early in the year 1934-35.
The estimates now before us provide for a psychiatrist and psychologist for each penitentiary, although no appointments have yet been made.
Last October a report was made to me by the superintendent and at the same time I received other requests from other quarters to consider the use of the Borstal system in Canada. Early in December a strong appeal was made in the form of a petition, and this was referred to by the hon. member for East Toronto (Mr. Church). At that time it was decided that the Borstal system would be started if at all possible, and for that reason there is included in this vote an amount sufficient to supply a psychiatrist and a psychologist for each penitentiary. The superintendent placed before me a report of His Majesty's commissioner of prisons for England. This gentleman made an examination of prisons in the United States and he devotes a chapter of his report to classification and examination by psychiatrists and psychologists. This report is the foundation for the suggestion that these men be appointed as soon as the Borstal system is established. The writer of this report, a man of great experience, says:
The distinction between the psychiatrist and the psychologist is at first confusing to the English layman. The former is usually a qualified medical man who concerns himself with the problems of mental disease. The latter is commonly not a medical man, but one who has taken a university degree in psychology and concerns himself with the character of a man, the play of his emotions, the strength of his instincts and inhibitions, and the relation of all these things to his conduct.
This eminent authority on prisons points out that both a psychiatrist and a psychologist should be on the staff of a penal institution, and they are on the staff of the Borstal institution in Great Britain.
There seems to be a misapprehension in connection with the treatment given to those who become insane in our penitentiaries. If a patient shows any sign of mental deficiency or insanity of any kind he is kept under close daily observation by the physician in charge of the institution. This officer is not a qualified psychiatrist but is a qualified physician, and particularly one who has mixed with his
patients and, has a general knowledge and idea as to the mental condition of humanity. In any case which excites suspicion the best available experts are called in. At Kingston, members of the staff of Queen's university and other practitioners in the city are called in. It requires a certificate of two physicians to commit a man to an asylum in Ontario. A prisoner who comes in and remains in the institution for three months and subsequently becomes insane becomes a charge on the dominion under the statute. A prisoner who becomes insane within three months after entering the institution becomes a charge on the province whence he came, under the Penitentiary Act, the assumption being that the man was mentally defective at the time he came in and was a proper charge against the province. But an insane prisoner is not kept within the penitentiary; he is immediately sent to the provincial institution for the treatment of the insane.
I grant you that there has been some delay in the removal of some men who have been pronounced insane, but the reason has not been any neglect on the part of the penitentiary officials. All that is necessary is the certificate that the man is insane, then I sign the warrant for his immediate removal, and the same day a letter is dispatched to the provincial authorities requesting them to take the patient. If he has been more than three months a prisoner the dominion has to pay for him; if he has been less than three months a prisoner, the province. But the provinces are not as well equipped in some instances in regard to insane patients as they should be, and many times we have had the reply that we must wait because there is no vacancy. Under those circumstances we have had to maintain the prisoner, sometimes a week, sometimes two weeks and sometimes three weeks before we have been able to get him placed in the provincial institution. The best care possible is taken of him, the best we can afford at all events, and as soon as there is a place in the provincial institution he is removed.


Mr. HOWDEN:: Do most of these cases occur within or after the three months?


Hugh Guthrie: It is hard to say.' I have known of instances that have occurred within a few days. I commuted the sentence of a woman in the west. She was removed to the women's prison as a life prisoner and she had been there ten days when she was pronounced hopelessly insane. I know of another case in the west, where a man's sentence was commuted to life imprisonment. He was less

Supply-Justice-Penitentiaries
than a month in the Prince Albert penitentiary and was pronounced insane and removed to an institution called Ponoka in Alberta. The majority of cases are those of over three months, though there are a good many who become insane within the three month period. We have altogether seventy-six criminal insane in the various asylums.


Arthur Edward Ross: I am afraid the minister
misunderstood me. The complaint is not as to detention or length of detention but it is this, that in the classification you have the mental case-that is, the criminal-and you have the other case, the man who is not a criminal but goes to the provincial institution.


Hugh Guthrie: Ours are all criminal.


Arthur Edward Ross: Exactly. Those cases admitted to the penitentiary are of the criminal class and therefore they should not be sent to the provincial institution. They should be treated as mental criminals. It is not a question of detaining the man; I think the whole situation should be cleared up. Take the situation with regard to the youth of the country. You have the dominion government treating them in a certain way and the provinces treating them differently. I hold that the two authorities should get together and decide upon one way of treating the youth. If the Borstal system is good for the dominion it should be good for the province also. I understand that the Borstal system takes in the class from sixteen to twenty-one only.


Hugh Guthrie: That is in England,
though we might extend it here.


Arthur Edward Ross: I do not see the necessity
for sending anyone to England; we could take the system and use it in our own way, because the English system will not answer. You have the provincial institutions and the dominion institutions in this country. I think that everyone who goes to a penitentiary is a mental criminal and should not be treated in a provincial institution where people are treated for recovery. That is an important point. I am not saying that the department does wrong but I say that the system is wrong, and perhaps the best way would bp to have every case examined previously. We did that at the front. I do not like to refer to this, but one or two boys were shot for desertion and the thing struck a few of us then as being wrong. We felt that an examination of these boys would show that they had a mental, nervous condition that could not resist the strain, and it was wrong to execute them. What happened?
I recommended to headquarters that an
[Mr. Guthrie.)
alienist be sent us and every one of our cases in the Canadian corps was examined by that alienist before it went to court martial. The result was that we saved some boys from an unreasonable and an unjust death, and we were the only corps on the whole front that adopted that method. I throw that out as a suggestion which might well be adopted in the courts. You would not have three doctors testifying one way and three testifying the other, with the result that the boy goes to penitentiary for life. It would not do any harm if we had the whole matter threshed out. Perhaps I am a little obsessed; someone may tell me I am cracked on the subject. But I have had my heart touched when I have seen boys coming as they do to Kingston, knowing that they are mentally wrong. There is something wrong with the system, and surely we are big enough to correct it without party politics or criticism of the minister or the ex-minister. I am not saying that these boys who are sent to the penitentiary are not criminals; but remember this-the boy you see is some father's boy, some mother's boy, and they have suffered through an unjust system which I think we should correct.


Ernest Lapointe: Before the vote is taken on this item I should like the minister to answer the plea of my hon. friend1 from Southeast Grey for the appointment of a royal commission to investigate all conditions in the penitentiaries. I hesitate to say anything about the matter because I do not want to add any material to the flames; I know the difficulties which the minister has to face in the administration of this branch of the department. I agree with much of what he said this afternoon, but there is no doubt that there is a strong current of public opinion in favour of an investigation, if only to prove to those who have wrong ideas regarding the conditions that they are mistaken. There are many well disposed people who are sincere in the matter. I remember an interview I had a few months ago with Archdeacon Scott, of my city, whose public spirit on a question of this kind is second to none, and he besought me to try to convince my hon. friend that an investigation was necessary to satisfy public opinion with regard to this question. I would simply ask my hon. friend at least to consider the demand of the hon. member for Southeast Grey in that respect.
We are talking about reforms everywhere, even in the penitentiary branch. The minister said the other day, in connection with a ghastly incident relating to the hanging of a

Supply-Justice-Penitentiaries
woman in Montreal, that this was under provincial jurisdiction. He is quite right as to that, but I wonder whether we should not, if we retain capital punishment-and I am not prepared to say that we should do away with it-have a change, because this is the criminal code of the country, in the method1 of execution, so that it should be carried out only in a penitentiary and not in any district. I believe the electric chair or some other device might be preferable to this remnant of old days when such things as we have read about in the papers recently are likely to happen. I just suggest to my hon. friend that the question ought to be studied, and I think it is a reform that should be brought about in this country.


Hugh Guthrie: I have a very strong
opinion that in each province a central place might be established where these unfortunate cases would be dealt with. There is nothing I loathe more than to have to deal- with such matters, because I have to devote so much time to them and have so much worry about them before the final word goes forth. But I am inclined to think there would be less comment, less objection and perhaps no miscarriages if a central place were established. I do not know that I am in favour of the electric chair. I have heard opinions expressed both for and against, and whether it is more or less humane than our system it is pretty hard to say. But the suggestion is well worth considering, and I assure my hon. friend that I will consider the plea he has now made and see whether anything can be done in the way he suggests in regard to a commission.


Mr. HEAPS:: It is not often I intervene in a debate of this kind, although perhaps I have good reason to do so. I have the unique distinction of knowing what the inside of a penitentiary is like, and also what the inside of a gaol is like.


Samuel William Jacobs: Why is the hon. member always boasting about that?


Abraham Albert Heaps: I am not boasting about it, but it gives me a reason or excuse for saying a few words with a little more authority than those who have spoken previously on the question. Some of them say that they were voluntary visitors for a few minutes; I happened to be an involuntary visitor to both institutions for a few months. I had an opportunity some years ago of seeing what the reactions of some of the inmates were to the treatment they were receiving. One of the first points that struck me was the fact that one met so many people there who had committed probably the same offence
for which many different sentences had been given by magistrates or judges. When these people meet together and have an opportunity of discussing the various offences for which they have beeen- sentenced, there is nothing that causes more dissatisfaction than for one man who received from a magistrate a sentence of, say, eighteen months for a certain offence to find that another man had been sentenced by another magistrate six months for the same offence. In connection with the administration of justice in this country there ought to be some board that would review sentences so that there might be something in the way of uniformity of punishment of those who have committed a similar class of crime. I have -heard these prisoners discuss these questions and they often feel aggrieved at the sentences that have been imposed upon them. Instead of coming out of the institution better men than they were when they entered it, they come out with a grievance and possibly with the intention of committing another crime, and in many cases it is not long before those who come out with a grievance fall again into the meshes of the law.
Another point that struck me is that many of those who are in these institutions are really mental or medical cases rather than criminals who should be incarcerated in penitentiaries. My impression is that a very large percentage of the prisoners would probably respond much quicker to medical or mental treatment than they do at the present time to that which they receive in those institutions. I believe fully fifty per cen-t of the prisoners are mentally far below normal, and there ought to be some new method of dealing with that type of case with a view to providing that they shall not mix continuously with the hardened criminals whom we find in our penitentiaries and gaols.
I do not know whether the minister has made any statement to-day with regard to the segregation of prisoners. One of the most pitiful sights inside our gaols and penitentiaries is that of the young boy who goes in for the first time in his life, probably for a minor offence, perhaps because he has been unable to pay a fine that has been inflcted upon him, and is compelled to associate with hardened criminals. For example, a boy of quite respectable family who was unable to meet a fine of twenty dollars for speeding had to go into gaol and there mix with hardened criminals. I just wondered whether there was not some way by which such an offender, compelled to go into a penal institution, might receive treatment of a type

Supply-Justice-Penitentiaries
that at least would make him a better citizen when he came out than he was when he went in.
May I add a word to the plea that has been made by the former Minister of Justice? In view of the widespread dissatisfaction that is at present manifest in our penal institutions, would it not at this time be right and proper for the Minister of Justice to appoint a commission to investigate all the penal institutions in this country and to bring in recommendations that would improve the administration of the law? There is at the present time and has been for a year or so past a good deal of dissatisfaction inside the penitentiaries; it has not been confined to one of them. Had the outbreak occurred at Kingston only, we could say that it was just an outbreak in one institution where probably there might have been a few bad inmates, but we find the same thing taking place in these institutions in different parts of the country at one and the same time. Consequently I feel there must be some cause for the dissatisfaction that is manifesting itself in these penitentiaries, and I hope the Minister of Justice will accede to the various requests that have been made to him both to-day and in the past few months to appoint a strong commission that will, make a thorough investigation into our penal institutions.


Mr. EULER:: I should like to support the suggestion made by the ex-Minister of Justice with reference to two phases of the subject under discussion. Complaints have been presented from time to time for several years with regard to the administration of the penitentiaries. These ought to be investigated and cleared up. This is not said with any idea of criticism of the present Minister of Justice, but I think it would be in the public interest to appoint an unbiased commission to make such investigation.
The other matter I wish to discuss for a moment is that of capital punishment, or the method of execution practised in this country. Some seven or eight, years ago there was a debate in the house as to whether capital punishment should be discontinued entirely. My own thought was and still is that we Should abolish capital punishment. I question very much whether the fear of capital punishment is a deterrent to the crime of murder. But the point I desire to make now is that if we are to continue capital punishment, as a civilized people we certainly ought to discard the barbarous method of hanging. It seems to me it is a degradation of the human body which is repulsive and against all the instincts of decent and civilized people. Whether we should adopt the method

of electrocution, and I suppose that is really the only alternative, I am not prepared to say. Further, whether a new method is adopted, or whether we continue the present practice of hanging, it certainly should not be carried out in the community in which the convicted person lives, because as everyone knows,-I have experienced it a number of times-when the execution is imminent and is carried out, there is a pall of horror over the community for at least a day. I do not think the people of the community should be subjected to that horror. The minister has already said he will take this matter into consideration. I commend that decision and urge serious consideration of the advisability and necessity of instituting a different method than hanging, and of having executions carried out in some central place and not in the community in which the offence was committed.


Mr. CAMPBELL:: It is not often that the hon. member for Kingston (Mr. Ross) and myself can agree on any subject discussed here, but we do when it comes to the well being of the people of Kingston and Fron-tenac-Addington. To-night we have the Chance to agree on matters affecting the well being of the unfortunate people who find themselves confined in our penal institutions. It falls to us to witness either fortunately or unfortunately some of these young lads who are sent to the penitentiary as they appear on entering the city of Kingston. It is a sorry sight to see them, manacled to a strong and upstanding man, going off to spend part of their life or perhaps their entire life in confinement. It has been my privilege in my professional and business experience to handle a lot of men and to hire a good number, and I feel I can say from my observation that the majority of these lads entering the penitentiary appear at first sight to be mentally deranged in some way. I heartily agree with the suggestion that a psychiatrist and psychologist should be appointed to every such institution. I also agree with the request of the hon. member for Southeast Grey (Miss Macphail) and others that a royal commission or some such body be appointed to investigate the entire subject of prisons throughout the dominion. I agree with the hon. member for Kingston Oity that we in that section cannot take the work or the judgment of the superintendent of penitentiaries. I say that in all seriousness, because I know the feeling of the residents of that district on account of the actions of the superintendent and his staff since he has taken the position he now holds. I could refer to many dismissals from Kingston and Collins Bay

Supply-J ustice-Penitentiaries
penitentiaries on which I think the hon. member for Kingston City and myself would agree. I have before me a return concerning one dismissal which certainly is not political, because I am looking at a letter signed by the hon. member for Kingston City, in 1933 backing up this individual. He was appointed by the former Conservative government in 1920. The reasons advanced in this return cannot be accepted either by the hon. member for Kingston or by myself, because I happen to know of the ability, the reliability and honesty of this man; for at one time he did some work for me and for different concerns with which I was connected. I point out also that although this gentleman passed his civil service examination and was going to be employed by another department of the government, in some way, one of the officials of the Department of Justice prevented his receiving the position. That is the way some of the boys have been treated under the autocratic, military regime of the present superintendent.
We in the county of Frontenac and the city of Kingston felt, as did the hon. member for Kingston City, that when the Collin's Bay penitentiary was started it was to be a place of detention for unfortunate youth. I do not know why that plan was not carried out. That penitentiary at the present time is a sorry spectacle. It was started about seven years ago, and everyone who travels between Toronto and Montreal in the train sees the state it is in, the main building with steel work up and the stone scarcely above the ground, as the hon. member for Kingston City has said. I noted this afternoon that the minister stated in connection with the setting up of the Borstal system that there might need to be some construction carried on in some penitentiaries, especially St. Vincent de Paul, and probably that would mean that a contract would have to be let. I am wondering why it was that construction of the Collin's Bay penitentiary was held up, although there is plenty of convict labour there. Was it held up to award a contract to some other political friends? I happen to know that the city of Kingston almost a year ago, as a chance to find a way to use some of their unemployed labour, offered to build a part of a needed water main to the Collin's Bay penitentiary. The department did not see fit to accept that offer, but have since done it, not by convict labour but by other labour employed by the department, naturally at an advanced cost to the department.
I do not want to take up any more time, but only to say, coming from a constituency
which is quite familiar with all the happenings in the Kingston and Collin's Bay penitentiaries, that we in that section of the country feel that a royal commission should be appointed to investigate the actions both of the department and of the wardens and staffs, and so forth, in the different penitentiaries.


Hugh Guthrie: I think my hon. friend
should have given to the committee the full facts of the Van Alstyne case.


Milton Neil Campbell: I have them here.


Hugh Guthrie: I think they should have been given. This man was relieved of his position because of his own actions. During his employment as a guard, or whatever his capacity was-


Milton Neil Campbell: He was not a guard; he was confidential clerk to the warden.


Hugh Guthrie: Well, I am afraid that will not help the matter at all. He was convicted of the offence of driving a car while intoxicated, and conviction of a criminal offence is one of the things we do not tolerate in the staffs of our penitentiaries. It is alleged by this man, this clerk or guard or whatever he was, that this was not the reason; he said that I overlooked that offence, or that I forgave liim. The facts are that he did not turn up for duty one day. It was learned that he was in the hospital, and the warden went to see him. The man said, "I have had a motor accident; I will be all right in a day or two." That was all that was reported to me. Any man may have a motor accident, but subsequently it turned out that there was something more. This man was summoned and convicted of driving a car while intoxicated, and that was why he was released from the penitentiary staff. I am sorry to say that in other penitentiaries we have had to do the same thing.


Milton Neil Campbell: But may I say to the minister that there are several reasons given here, of which that happens to be one.


Hugh Guthrie: That is the reason, and I forgot to mention another matter.


Milton Neil Campbell: Then I am glad to know that this was the reason. It is true that this gentleman was convicted of driving a car while drunk, but at the time he was under the jurisdiction of the militia as one of the officers in charge of A Company of the fourth battalion. He was on leave of absence from the department, and if anyone had jurisdiction over him at that time it must have been the Department of National Defence.

Supply-Justice-Penitentiaries


Hugh Guthrie: All I can say is that even if he were on his holidays and it came to my knowledge that he had been guilty of an offence against the criminal code, I would act in the same way. A man who has a record of that kind should not be in an institution where he is looking after criminals who have broken the law; they do not like to see a man over them who has done the very same thing.


Milton Neil Campbell: Then that is all the more reason why we in that section of the country ask for a royal commission to investigate the penitentiaries. There happened to be another gentleman with this man at the time; that second man is still on the penitentiary staff-


Hugh Guthrie: He was not convicted of
driving a car while drunk.


Milton Neil Campbell: But I could give other cases which have been held up-


Hugh Guthrie: Unfortunately I have had to act in the same way in regard to friends, if I may use that word, of my own.


Abraham Albert Heaps: May I ask the minister if he would be good enough to inform the committee as to whether he is prepared to appoint a commission of investigation?


Hugh Guthrie: No, I will not inform the committee. I have only been asked to consider the matter, and I promised that I would do so.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Royal Canadian Mounted Police-
Salaries, $16,200; contingencies, $12,500.
Mr. SPENCER:: May I ask the minister if he has any information with regard to the possibility of police being stationed at Myrnam, Alberta?


Hugh Guthrie: I am expecting a definite report on that matter. I am afraid it is going to be a difficult matter to put a detachment there, but I think I can let my hon. friend know by the end of the week.


Thomas Reid: May I ask the minister if this is the item under which we are to discuss the cases mentioned when the mounted police bill was under consideration?


Hugh Guthrie: We can take up those
matters under any item; we will let item 186 stand in order that any matter concerning the police may be discussed.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Progress reported.

On motion of Mr. Guthrie the house adjourned at 10.50 p.m.
Friday, April 5, 1935.