1938-05-25

Mr. SPEAKER:: I have the honour to inform the house that I have received the following letter:
Ottawa, 25th May, 1938.
Sir,-I have the honour to inform you that the Right Honourable 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, Wednesday, the 25th May, at 5.30 p.m., for the purpose of giving the Royal Assent to certain Bills.
I have the honour to be, Sir,
Your obedient servant,
F. L. C. Pereira, Assistant Secretary to the
Governor General.



PETITION


[Stage Direction]
On the order for motions:
Mr. R. E. FINN (Halifax):: I desire under this order and under the rules of the house- the rule has now been changed-to present
51952-204J
a petition signed by 1,500 fishermen along the coast of Nova Scotia in the county of Halifax. In invoking the rule in reference to presenting petitions I desire to present the names of the petitioners, living in these fishing villages from Ecum Secum to Hubbards. I do not desire to take up the time of the house, because the business of the house should be proceeded with; may I therefore, with the indulgence of the house, without reading the names, have them become a part of the record when the petition is laid upon the table? If that meets with the approval of the Prime Minister (Mr. Mackenzie King), the leader of the opposition (Mr. Bennett), the leaders of other groups in the house, and hon. members generally, I am content to do it in that way.


Some hon. MEMBERS:: Read it.


Robert Emmett Finn: "We, the undersigned-


Walter Edward Foster: I think the hon. member should present his petition, and when it is presented it will be considered and he may then move, if he wishes, that it be read by the clerk at the table.


Robert Emmett Finn: I do not propose that. I am well within the rules of the house in presenting this petition under this order. I have a perfect right to invoke the rule in order that I may read the names of these 1,500 people. But I do not propose to do that; all I ask is that the names become a part of the record in Hansard when the petition is laid on the table of the house.


Walter Edward Foster: It will be in order for the hon. member to lay his petition on the table of the house.


Robert Emmett Finn: With the understanding that it becomes a part of the record.


Some hon. MEMBERS:: No.


Robert Emmett Finn: Then I shall invoke the rule and read the names. Hon. members must take one horn of the dilemma or the other.


Walter Edward Foster: I do not think it is the practice to read a petition in that way. Petitions are generally presented at the table to the clerk of the house. The other day the hon. member for Comox-Alberni (Mr. Neill) moved that a petition be read, but it was a short petition-


Robert Emmett Finn: I do not think the length or shortness of the petition alters the rule. I desired not to keep the house from getting on with its business. If the house is agreeable under the rule that these names shall become a part of the record in Hansard I am content.
Halifax Inshore Fishing


Mr. THORSON:: What rule?


Robert Emmett Finn: I am speaking under motions. I am not going to be cross-fired at by hon. members on this side of the house. It is all very well for them, living inland among the oats and hay and barley. If the hon. member is not able to look up the rule for himself I am not his clerk.


Right Hon. W. L. MACKENZIE KING (Prime Minister):: May I draw the attention of my hon. friend to the rale-paragraph 7 under standing order 68:
On the next day following the presentation of the petition the clerk of the house shall lay upon the table the report of the clerk of petitions upon the petitions presented and such report shall be printed in the votes and proceedings of that day. Every petition so reported upon, not containing matter in breach of the privileges of this house and which, according to the rules or practice of this house, can be received, shall then be deemed to be permitted to be read and received.
In the first instance the petition should be merely presented. After it has been examined and a report has been made upon it, is the time when it will be known if the petition may be read and received.


Mr. BENNETT:: It is presented first
without comment.


Robert Emmett Finn: If that is the stand of the
right hon. Prime Minister (Mr. Mackenzie King), I am content.


Some hon. MEMBERS:: Order.


Walter Edward Foster: Order.


Robert Emmett Finn: Has this assembly, this parliament, this House of Commons become accustomed to some rules other than the rales of the house? It is too bad that I seem to be in conflict with you, Mr. Speaker, so often. It is not my desire, but this is a very important matter to the people of my county.


Walter Edward Foster: Order. I have already
explained to the hon. member how petitions are presented, and the right hon. Prime Minister has quoted the rule:
Petitions may be either written or printed, provided always that when there are three or more petitioners the signatures of at least three petitioners shall be subscribed on the sheet containing the prayer of the petition.
The next paragraph states:
On the next day following the presentation of the petition the clerk of the house shall lay upon the table the report of the clerk of petitions upon the petitions presented and such report shall be printed in the votes and proceedings of that day.
I think it is competent for the hon. member to present his petition, and then it will appear in the records of the house.


Mr. NEILL:: May I speak to the point of order. At page 209 of Beauchesne's Parliamentary Rules and Forms, citation 731 provides :
Every member offering to present a petition to the house, not being a petition for a private bill, or relating to a private bill before the house, shall confine himself to a statement of the parties from whom it comes, of the number of signatures attached to it, and of the material allegations contained in it, and to the reading of the prayer of such petition.
The hon. member would be within the rules if he now read the prayer of the petition, which apparently is what he wants to do.


Mr. LAPOINTE (Quebec East):: He has not asked for permission to do that.


Robert Emmett Finn: I shall read this:
We, the undersigned, have assisted in circulating the attached petition and in securing the signatures which appear on the original petition of which this is a copy. The original petition has been forwarded to the Honourable, the Minister of Fisheries at Ottawa.
Dated April 30th, 1938.
Matthew Boutlier, Mushaboom.
Jacob H. Josey, Spry Bay.
Stanford Josey, Spry Harbour.
Fulton Butler, Pleasant Harbour.


Some hon. MEMBERS:: Order.


Robert Emmett Finn: These are not the names on the petition; this is conclusive evidence, before I lay the petition on the table of the house, that these are the fishermen from East and West Halifax who have interested themselves in going around, seeing the fishermen and ascertaining their views. Then I shall read this:
We, the undersigned, engaged in the inshore fishing industry in Halifax East, urge immediate reconsideration by government, of trawler licensing. Conditions in the fishing industry along this shore, definitely will not permit the addition of further burdens, if we and our families are to live. We believe the reissuing of trawler licences is a direct blow to any hopes we had for a betterment of our conditions this year. We respectfully request that immediate reconsideration be given to the licensing of trawlers, as, unless such licences are cancelled at once, it means an increase in unemployment and depressed prices which we cannot face.
We call upon our representatives in the senate, parliament and local legislature to stand by us at this time.
April 30th, 1938.



DIVORCE AND MATRIMONIAL CAUSES


[Stage Direction]
Mr. J. S. WOODSWORTH (Winnipeg North Centre) moved the first reading of Bill No. 119. respecting divorce and matrimonial causes.
Some hon. MEMBERS:: Explain.

Supply-Agriculture-Live Stock


Mr. WOODSWORTH:: I think this bill is pretty generally known. It has been discussed for a considerable length of time in the senate. It provides for the widening of the grounds for divorce.
Motion agreed to and bill read the first time.



PRIVATE BILL


[Stage Direction]
Bill No. 121, to incorporate The Roman Catholic Episcopal Corporation of Hudson's Bay.-Mr. Boulanger.


Mr. PELLETIER:: 1.	Was one Lucien Dansereau ever employed by the Department of Transport or the Department of Public Works?
2.	If so, in what capacity?
3.	What were his duties?
4.	What was his salary?
5.	Where was he employed?
6.	When was he first employed?
7.	Was he ever transferred from one department to another?
8.	Has he resigned, or been pensioned or dismissed?


Mr. RINFRET:: Return tabled.


CANADIAN NAVY-FUEL OIL SUPPLIES
Mr. LENNARD:: 1.	From what company or companies is the fuel oil procured that is used on the destroyers in the Canadian navy?
2.	What price per gallon is being paid for this fuel oil ?



CANADA-CUBA TRADE AGREEMENT

[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. A. E. MacLEAN (Prince):: I noticed in the Charlottetown Guardian of May 23 the following dispatch:
Ottawa, May 22-Official sources here confirm the report from Havana that negotiations for a trade agreement between Canada and Cuba were in the offing. However, the preliminaries to such negotiations had not reached the stage where any announcement could be made.
The Havana dispatch said that an exchange of Canadian potatoes for Cuban sugar and tobacco was under consideration.
I should like to ask the government or the minister in charge if this statement is correct; and, if so, what progress has been made.


Hon. W. D. EULER (Minister of Trade and Commerce):: My attention had not been directed to the dispatch quoted by my hon. friend, but I may say to him and to the house that no negotiations for a trade agreement have been initiated either by the government of Cuba or by the government of Canada.



ASCENSION DAY


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. WILFRID LACROIX (Quebec-Mont-morency):: I should like to ask the Minister of Transport (Mr. Howe) if orders have been issued to close the Canadian National shops at Quebec to-morrow, on account of the fact that it is a legal holiday in that province.


Hon. C. D. HOWE (Minister of Transport):: I have no knowledge of the situation, but I shall make inquiries and advise my hon. friend as soon as those inquiries are complete.


Wilfrid Lacroix: May I direct the same question, as far as the post office in Quebec is concerned, to the acting Postmaster General (Mr. Euler). Have orders been issued to close the post office to-morrow on account of the fact that Ascension day is a legal holiday in Quebec?


William Daum Euler: I am not sure that I can completely answer the question of my hon. friend, since I was given no notice of it. I can tell him that to-morrow in the province of Quebec there will be no deliveries of mail, and postmasters in the various centres are given discretion to serve the public, perhaps with a limited service in some cases or no service at all in others, as may be found desirable.

The house in committee of supply, Mr. Sanderson in the chair.



DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE

[Stage Direction]
Production services-Live stock and poultry, further amount required, $24,785.
Mr. SENN:: For what is the additional
amount required?


Hon. J. G. GARDINER (Minister of Agriculture) :: Supply-Agriculture-Live Stock
The explanations given when we were in committee before in respect to the first item apply equally to this one. The reclassification and reorganization were in progress at the time the original estimates were brought down, and these are the further amounts required as a result of the completion of the reorganization and reclassification.


Mr. STEWART:: How does the total vote for these services compare with the total for similar services last year? I gather from the minister's observation that some reorganization has taken place. To what extent has such reorganization increased or decreased expenditures for these services?


James Garfield Gardiner: 
Hugh Alexander Stewart: Would the minister outline the reasons for the substantial increase in the vote. I have gathered from his statements concerning some of the other estimates that no really new activities have been undertaken, and that there has simply been a rearrangement or readjustment of duties. It now appears that there is a large increase in expenditures for practically the same work.


James Garfield Gardiner: The number of services or activities has not increased, but there is an extension of service right across Canada in connection with live stock production.


Mr. ROWE (Dufferin-Simcoe):: Are there any new services, or have we only an extension of the old ones?


James Garfield Gardiner: That is true of production. There are no what might be called new services in connection with production; it is simply a matter of extending existing services.


Mark Cecil Senn: What are the duties of field-men? I understand they undertake certain work in the country, but I should like to know their special duties?


James Garfield Gardiner: The men we have out in the field are overseeing or inspecting the live stock production activities in connection with swine, cattle, sheep and poultry, and they are known as fieldmen. Their work is that of inspection and giving advice to farmers with respect to improvement of herds.


Mark Cecil Senn: I understand to a great extent they deal with live stock associations as well

as with private individuals. Are those appointments to be made by the civil service commission?


James Garfield Gardiner: Yes; they are all made by the civil service commission, and these men deal with individuals as well as associations. That is, they are concerned with pure bred herds, and even with farmers who have not pure bred herds but are interested in improving their stock.


Mark Cecil Senn: Will they have permanent or temporary appointments? I see in the original vote there was an increase of about $27,000 for prizes, bonuses and premiums, and in the supplementaries there is a further vote for $8,000. Would the minister explain what these bonuses and premiums, and particularly the prizes, are for? No doubt the premiums are for ram and bull enterprises, and probably bonuses would be in the same category. But I do not understand what the prizes are for. When the minister is answering, would he give the different amounts spent in bonuses, prizes and premiums.


James Garfield Gardiner: The amount to provide salaries, as I stated before, is $16,785, and the amount for prizes, bonuses and premiums is $8,000. The sum of $3000 is required in Quebec in connection with the bull premium policy. A Short time ago we had suggested to Quebec that this year we would probably discontinue that policy. It is one which is carried on only in Quebec, and eastern Canada. The policy in connection with stallions is carried on in Saskatchewan, and that is the only part of western Canada in which that policy obtained. It was decided this year to discontinue those two policies. We had to make the decision between expending them right across eastern Canada, so far as the one policy was concerned, and of extending the stallion policy right across western Canada, so far as that part of the country was concerned, or discontinuing them after having tried them out for a year or two.


William Earl Rowe: Why discontinue them?


James Garfield Gardiner: We were giving assistance in other directions. This is a policy that extends for two years and the request was made that we pay the premium on bulls this year. When we gave notice that we were likely to discontinue this policy this year, it was pointed out to us that it would not be fair to do so on immediate notice, that we should give at least one year's notice. That was the position when we brought down the main estimates. Had it not been for that decision we would have required to include

Supply-Agriculture-Live Stock
an amount of $10,000 in the main estimates. We hare given notice of our intention to discontinue, and we are providing $3,000 to take care of this year's payments.


Mr. PELLETIER:: What about the other $5,000?


James Garfield Gardiner: Another $2,500 has to do with the Saskatchewan situation, to take care of new clubs that are being set up to take the place of the premium policy followed before.


René-Antoine Pelletier: The minister has said that this decision had not been reached when the main estimates were brought down, that it was arrived at subsequently to that time.


James Garfield Gardiner: When the main estimates were brought down we had given notice to Saskatchewan and Quebec that we were discontinuing these policies, and as a result of discontinuing them we did not intend to put anything in the estimates. Since then representations have been made from both provinces that in view of the fact that the premiums carry over a two year period it would be unfair to discontinue without notice. So we have given notice of our intention to discontinue, but we are making the payments for this year. The idea is that there will be no further payments under this vote in succeeding years. In Saskatchewan, so far as the horse breeders' policy is concerned, a club policy has been developed to take the place of the premium policy which is being discontinued. A further amount of $2,500 is required to take care of the additional clubs which are necessary in order that these stallions may go on the road.


Mark Cecil Senn: I have asked the minister already how much was being spent in prizes and what they were given for. I should like to know further if the premium policy in connection with rams is being continued in Ontario and other provinces.


James Garfield Gardiner: The premium policy with regard to rams is being continued. No part of this $8,000 will go for prizes. That matter was dealt with in the main estimates. This $8,000 is covered by the explanation I have just given, but the heading under which this is voted is the same as the heading under which the other was voted.


William Earl Rowe: Is there the same policy with reference to hogs?


James Garfield Gardiner: Yes, a similar policy.


William Earl Rowe: Does that apply all over the dominion?


James Garfield Gardiner: There may be some variation in the different provinces, but the policy remains the same as it was previously.


William Earl Rowe: Would the
minister explain that policy?


James Garfield Gardiner: I am sorry but I have not all the details before me. In some provinces we have a distribution of sows, while in other provinces we have a distribution of boars. There are different features in the different provinces.


William Earl Rowe: Is not the same policy followed in all provinces?


James Garfield Gardiner: Not exactly the same. We cooperate with the provincial governments in this work. In certain provinces the provincial governments are carrying on a certain line of work, while in other provinces a slightly different line is followed. We cooperate with the provinces.


Mark Cecil Senn: Is the same premium not paid in every province?


James Garfield Gardiner: Where the purpose is the same, the premium is the same. Where there is a variation, there would be some variation in the assistance given.


Mark Cecil Senn: I understand that the rams are graded X, XX, and XXX. Would a X ram in Ontario receive a different premium to a X ram in Quebec or Saskatchewan? Who grades these animals? How are the graders chosen? How are they paid, and how much?


James Garfield Gardiner: The graders are departmental fieldmen appointed by the department for that purpose. The premium for a X ram in Ontario would be the same as the premium for a X ram in any other province. For similar work a similar premium is paid all across Canada.
Mr- PELLETIER: As a result of representations from Quebec and Saskatchewan the minister decided to continue the payment of prizes, bonuses and premiums. The minister has stated that $3,000 is needed for Quebec and $2,500 for Saskatchewan, but the amount of this vote is $8,000. Have other provinces made a similar representation and, if so, how were their cases dealt with? What was the result of their approaches to the government on the matter?


James Garfield Gardiner: The $8,000 is covered
by the two groups. Perhaps if I read the outline, it would give the details quite clearly. When it was proposed to discontinue the bull premium policy in Quebec, $3,000 was deducted. As it has been decided that this policy is to be continued it has been necessary to restore that amount. An amount of $10,000 was originally recommended; that is, it would require $10,000 to operate it for one year.

Supply-Agriculture-Live Stock
Three thousand dollars is the additional amount that will be paid on the first payments this year. Then, in connection with the horse breeders' clubs in Saskatchewan, provision is being made for the extension of this policy by the addition of twenty-four new clubs which have applied for assistance. These are to take the place of the premium policy which is being discontinued this year in Saskatchewan. This province is coming in under the club scheme which has been taken up by all the western provinces. It will require 82,500 to provide for this. Then we have had to provide for the payment of premiums on the services of premium stallions in Quebec, payment to be on the basis of last year's system of computation. It has been decided that the system of computation should be the same as that applying in the other provinces where the same policy is in effect. Stallions were purchased last year in Quebec on the understanding that the previous basis of computing premiums would apply on last year's services, which premiums would be payable this year. The total of $8,000 is made up by $2,500 for the stallion policy in Quebec, 82,500 for stallions in Saskatchewan and $3,000 for bulls in Quebec,


René-Antoine Pelletier: Were similar requests
received from any other province?


James Garfield Gardiner: These changes in policies affect only those two provinces. That is why we have given notice that we are going to discontinue.


Mr. PERLEY:: I notice in the monthly
bulletin of agricultural statistics there appears a report of the value of live stock production in the different provinces during 1937. There appears to be a considerable reduction in the value of the production in Saskatchewan, apparently this being the only province in which there is a reduction. I assume that the field men of the department are surveying the situation there, and I should like to know if the minister could give us any report upon this condition.


James Garfield Gardiner: It is true that a survey by field men is made from time to time with regard to live stock in the different provinces, and a survey in Saskatchewan showed that on December 1, 1936, the total number of cattle in the province was 1,366,200, and the number of milch cows, 612,600; on December 1, 1937, the total number of cattle was 960,400, and the total number of milch cows, 517,300. These figures show a reduction in Saskatchewan between December 1, 1936, and December 1, 1937, of 29-7 per cent in the total number of cattle, and of 15-6 per cent in the total number of milch cows.

A survey was also made of the number in June of those two years, and it showed that in June, 1936, the total number of cattle in Saskatchewan was 1,539,000, a higher number than in December of the same year because there are always more cattle in June, the cattle being marketed between June and the first of December; and that the total number in June, 1937, was 1,441,200. In June, 1936, the number of milch cows in the province was 591,000 and in June, 1937, 563,000. This shows a reduction of 6-1 per cent in the total number of cattle between June, 1936, and June, 1937, and a reduction of 4-6 per cent in the number of milch cows between the same dates. It will be noticed from these figures that the reduction in the total number of cattle between June, 1937, and December, 1937, was 33-4 per cent, while the reduction in milch cows was 8-2 per cent. The following statement is made as a result of investigations into these figures.
It is significant that the decrease in the number of milch cows has not been nearly so great as the decrease in the total number of cattle, and that the number of milch cows is still in excess of the 480,286 reported in the 1931 census.
That is, there are still -more milch cows in Saskatchewan than in the first year of the drought period.


Mr. THOMPSON:: What portion of this grant will be expended on the poultry branch, and what activities are carried on in connection with it?


James Garfield Gardiner: I understand there is
nothing except one position having to do with hatchery work.


William Earl Rowe: Reverting to the bonus policy for sires, why did the department consider it wise to discontinue the bonus policy? During the last number of years many excellent sires have been marketed at the market price, while a large number of inferior types have been used for breeding purposes, despite the desire there has been for many years to improve the standard of our live stock throughout the country. I would ask the minister to explain why the department saw fit to discontinue the bonus policy in the very years that breeders of live stock needed that form of assistance most.


James Garfield Gardiner: We have a bull loaning policy in the different provinces. In Quebec we have been trying out a bull bonusing policy, but we felt that we had come to the point where we should have to make a decision as between the two policies. If we were going to continue the bull bonusing

Supply-Agriculture-Live Stock
policy in Quebec we thought we should apply it to all the provinces in eastern Canada; but the opinion of the department is that the policy which is being followed in the other provinces is the one we should continue, and therefore we are discontinuing the policy in Quebec in order to bring it on the same basis with the other provinces.


William Earl Rowe: Is the department discontinuing the grants according to the grade of sire under the bonus policy, under which a grant was made to all who wished to buy that quality of sire, and is that policy to be replaced by a bull loaning policy? In other words, are certain clubs and farmers to be given the use of a bull free?


James Garfield Gardiner: The bull loaning policy is one under which we purchased the bulls outright and loaned them to clubs. That policy is being continued right across Canada. There is no change in that at all.


William Earl Rowe: Would the minister give us some idea how many bulls are owned by the department now for bull loaning purposes?


James Garfield Gardiner: I am sorry I have not the number before me at the moment.


William Earl Rowe: What was the number purchased last year?


James Garfield Gardiner: Last year we purchased between fifty and sixty bulls.


George Halsey Perley: What steps are being taken to meet the serious situation in Saskatchewan because of the demand for bulls under this scheme? I understand that there have been over two hundred applications, and the situation is serious. I think some desperate effort ought to be made by the department to meet these applications.


James Garfield Gardiner: We have not been able to meet all the demands in Saskatchewan. I do not imagine we have been able to meet all the demands in any province, but in view of the difficulties experienced in Saskatchewan during the last year or two we have given more consideration to that province than to any other. Applications are being made now for an increase in the number, but we are compelled to deny any increase in what we have been able to give up to the present.


William Earl Rowe: (Dufferin-Simcoe):	This
appears to me to be a very weak substitute for the bonus policy.


James Garfield Gardiner: It is not connected with the bonus policy.


William Earl Rowe: I appreciate that. But the minister has intimated that the bull loaning policy has been selected by the department as being the most helpful to the live stock industry.


James Garfield Gardiner: Might I correct that? There has been no bull bonusing policy outside Quebec except in Ontario for about two years, I am informed, but that was discontinued previously. Probably it is the wrong term we are using.


William Earl Rowe: It is a bull premium policy.


James Garfield Gardiner: There is no bull premium policy in Ontario, I am informed, and has not been for some time.


William Earl Rowe: It does appear to me that this is one of the most essential forms of assistance that could be given to the live stock industry, to improve the sires generally. I think we have been rather slow, under all governments, in our policy of eliminating the scrub sire, as the term is. Steps have been taken to improve sires in the different parts of the dominion, but I find that from 1930 until 1936, years when revenues were low, the department purchased annually almost 500 sires for bull loaning purposes. Now, the minister tells us, despite the report of last year stating that the continued popularity of the bull loaning policy is apparent from the fact that each year applications for assistance are greatly in excess of bulls available, just a few minutes ago we heard from the hon. member for Qu'Appelle that there are 200 applications still unfilled in Saskatchewan.


James Garfield Gardiner: Perhaps if I just correct the statement I made a few moments ago it will have some bearing on what has been said. AVhen the question was asked by the hon. member for Haldimand how many were purchased last year, the figure given me was between fifty and sixty. What the deputy had in mind, apparently, was the number purchased in Ontario. The total number purchased right across Canada last year was 283.


William Earl Rowe: I might point out that even if the total number purchased last year was 283, the hon. member for Qu'Appelle told us just now that there are 200 unfilled applications from farmers in the drought stricken areas of western Canada who find it impossible to buy a desirable type of sire. I am quite confident that there are over 200 in Ontario who would gladly make application if they thought the sires were

Supply-Agriculture-Live Stock
available. Again I would point out that 283, the number now given, is scarcely more than half the number which was provided each year from 1930 until 1936. We are told in the reports that the bull loaning policy is very popular and that there is a great increase of applications each year; yet we find the department providing only half the number to maintain a policy which they admit is very popular. I would suggest to the minister, if I can get his attention-


James Garfield Gardiner: Yes; I am just looking up what the hon. member has been speaking of.


William Earl Rowe: -that his department should reconsider their administration of this important policy. As a live stock breeder I regard it as most important that assistance should be given, either by the bull loaning policy or by reinstitution of the premium policy. It is fundamental and basic to the agriculture industry, especially the live stock industry. If we are to meet the market demands which have been spoken about in this chamber we must do it by producing the highest class products, and it seems to me to be a very retrograde step that, while the premium policies are discontinued, bull loaning policies, admitted to be popular and leading to increased demands for such assistance, are to be carried on to only half the extent which obtained in more difficult years. I should like the minister to explain as well what progress has been made by his department with reference to the record of performance clubs for pure bred cattle, and also the advanced registry for dairy sires.


James Garfield Gardiner: On the question of the numbers that have been supplied from year to year, I wish to give the following figures:-
Year	Number Average cost
1933	
348	$1211934	
403	1291935	
394	1321936	
299	1331937	
283	143
The figures indicate that, while there has been some variation, it is not as great as has just been intimated. The total number in 1933 was 348, and last year, 283.
Mr. ROWE (Dufferin-Simcoe); If I have been unfair in stating that it was nearer 500, I wish to explain that I took my figures from the minister's report for the year ended March 31, 1937, where it states that:
The continued popularity of the bull loaning policy is apparent from the fact that each year applications for assistance are greatly in excess of the number of suitable bulls available for purchase by the department.

Further it states that the purchase of some 2,800 bulls of approved type and quality has been made since November, 1930.


James Garfield Gardiner: Yes. If you go back to 1930 and follow it right through from that year those total figures would be correct. I note that the hon. member has apparently averaged the figures from the beginning. But in establishing a policy of that kind you would have to put out more bulls per year, and many of the bulls the hon. member has spoken of, that is of the 2,800, are still in service. After the policy has been in operation a few years and these bulls have been established it is not necessary to change them all year by year, or even to purchase as many as you would purchase in the earlier years. The demands are not all being met in any of these services. It would require a great deal more money than I have been able to get through the house for these services if we were to try to provide for all requirements in connection with every service.


George Halsey Perley: Would the minister give us the number of applications from Saskatchewan in 1935, 1936 and 1937, and how many bulls were supplied?


James Garfield Gardiner: The number placed in Saskatchewan last year was 65, in Manitoba, 61, and in Alberta, 78. That is a year ago.


George Halsey Perley: Will the minister give us the other years?


James Garfield Gardiner: In 1936 in Saskatchewan, 70; in 1935, 101; in 1934, 123; in 1933, 97.


Mr. HAYHURST:: Does that apply to all breeds? That is all the breeds are together?


James Garfield Gardiner: Yes, that is the total for all breeds.


George Halsey Perley: Following out a policy of that kind will certainly decrease the production in Saskatchewan. Only about half as many were supplied last year as in 1935.


James Garfield Gardiner: 1934.


George Halsey Perley: Just half what there were in 1934. I should like to point out another thing. The figures the minister gave us with respect to the comparison between 1936 and 1937 of the number of cattle and the number of cows give a percentage reduction in 1937 in cattle, of 29-7 per cent, and in cows, of 15-6 per cent. There was a reduction in cattle of 406,000 and in milch cows of 95,000. The reduction in milch cows amounted to about twenty-five per cent of the total reduction in milch cows and cattle.

Supply-Agriculture-Live Stock


James Garfield Gardiner: From June to December 1, 1937, the reduction in cattle was 33-4 per cent and in milch cows 8-2 per cent. That is the period during which we were handling the cattle last fall.


Mark Cecil Senn: I am in accordance with what was said by the hon. member for Dufferin-Simcoe (Mr. Rowe) about the importance of this policy and the need for better sires not only in Saskatchewan but throughout the dominion. The report of the department for the year ended March, 1937, states that each year the applications for assistance are greatly in excess of the number of animals available.
I believe that animals of all breeds are purchased, and it seems almost incredible that the department could not have found more than 280 bulls suitable for this purpose in 1937.
I know of many occasions on which these animals were sent to the stockyards simply because there was no market for them for breeding purposes. I cannot understand why the minister is unable to furnish more money for this purpose. Bulls for breeding are always bought in the early months of the winter, before the estimates are brought down. I am sure money is spent for many other purposes less important than this. What are the determining factors that lead the department to refuse one application and accept another, and who makes the decision?


James Garfield Gardiner: Answering the Last question first, the general policy is that where the department after investigation is of opinion that the persons concerned are able to and properly should provide their own bulls of proper grade and standard, the department does not undertake to place a bull in that community. The policy really applies in the more outlying districts and places where it is difficult'for people to get the services of a high grade bull, and where they are beginning the establishment of herds. Once those herds are established it is not the policy of the department, and never has been, to try to do all the work in connection with raising the standard of cattle.


Mark Cecil Senn: Does the minister suggest
that all these applications from outlying districts are filled?


James Garfield Gardiner: That is the basis on which they are considered. They might not be what some people would call outlying districts, but districts in which, perhaps because of difficult circumstances, people are starting in to raise such types of cattle for the first time. In connection with this vote, there is an additional amount of $5,446 which would provide for the purchase of about thirty more
bulls this year than a year ago. Many of the bulls being put out this year would be purchased out of the estimates of last year. This estimate will be for purchases to be made in the winter months of this year for putting out next spring.


Mark Cecil Senn: There comes a time in the
life of every animal when it has to be disposed of. Does the department get any return from these animals when they have to be sent to the stockyards, or what disposition is made of them when the clubs are through with them?


James Garfield Gardiner: While the bull is of service he is moved about from place to place; he may be with one club this year and another club next year. The department uses them very much as the ordinary breeder would. When they come to the end of the period of service they are disposed of to the stockyards.


Mark Cecil Senn: Does the department get any financial return for them; and if so, how much? Very often an animal is purchased when it is young, and when it is old it has grown to such an extent that if it realizes a reasonable price it is worth pretty nearly as much as when bought in the first place.


James Garfield Gardiner: That is true in some cases, but the great majority of them will be sold as bulls at the market price, and as the hon. member knows, that varies greatly. The market for bulls, I understand, is largely for making bologna. If there is a good market for that class of animal they will sell well.


Mark Cecil Senn: The minister has not yet told us whether the department realizes anything from these animals.


James Garfield Gardiner: Yes, we realize whatever the market price brings. I have not the figures here.


Mr. CHURCH:: What I cannot understand about this department is that in one week we have the main estimates for production services, $829,000, an increase of $95,000, about ninety per cent being for the west and ten per cent for the east; then the next week the supplementary estimates are brought down with further sums for the same thing. There seems to be a total lack of business method in the department. The minister has a very large staff of inspectors, yet he cannot figure out in advance of the meeting of parliament how much money is wanted for these production services. In addition to $95,112 in the main estimates here is another $24,000 in item 489. Why is it? Is it because some more people come down and ask for additional services? A great many of the sober sensible

Supply-Agriculture-Live Stock
people in this country wonder why it is necessary to have such an elaborate establishment in the federal Department of Agriculture-inspectors for everything agricultural, but for ten million humans no proper votes at all, people dying of diseases of all kinds, and very little help from the federal authorities-only $400,000 a year. There should be some business methods in the department. It is the lack of business methods which keeps parliament meeting month after month because the government is not ready with its program. Here is this department with a very large expenditure, and almost every item in the main estimates is paralleled in the supplementaries. I am not prepared to say that the present minister is to blame, but I object to a lot of these expenditures because there is a lot of duplication of the work done by the provincial departments. Ontario has a minister in Queen's Park doing the same things. The city of Toronto had to build an abattoir and do inspection also, so that all cattle killed could be looked after by the health department of the city. Diseased meat was found and a check-up was made by the health department of all places of sale. The city of Toronto now has to send inspectors out as far as 60 to 110 miles to guard its milk supply, and the same with cattle. You have the dominion, the province and the municipality all adding to the cost of the necessaries of life. No wonder there is complaint before these commissions of over-government and over-taxation in Canada. People are inspected to death; there are about seventy-six inspectors of fruit down in Prince Edward Island, as the hon. member for Parkdale (Mr. Spence) said the other day, but there are no proper votes to guard the health of human beings. The people are inspected to death, but there are no proper health votes in regard to the health of humans. This item is to recoup the owners of cattle for their losses. If a man loses his children through some fatal disease this parliament does not give a snap of the fingers. In the main and supplementary estimates together we have three and a half or four million dollars for the health of animals. No wonder the people who pay this money are tired of having so many inspectors. These amounts provided in the main and supplementary estimates come out of the income that must be raised by taxation, and that largely comes from the industrial workers of the central provinces. They get only ten per cent of the inspection and the rest the ninety. I would far rather rely on a modem health department than on any inspectors of federal or provincial departments of agriculture. They

have a small standing army of inspectors; we are falling all over them. I see them on the trains, travelling all over; I see some of them driving buggies on the highways and byways, looking at the cattle. They say to the animals, "Stick out your tongue," and so on. Is it any wonder the tax rate is going up? I saw a line up of two thousand people in the customs building in Toronto paying their income taxes just to provide fads and frills like this; one of them was the late Mr. Justice Magee, who died just last week. The income tax payers pay for all this.
What are we getting from all this? Does it help us to secure a market in Great Britain in competition with Denmark and the other countries? I would vote to strike out the item entirely if there was such a motion. In the main estimates last week there was an increase of $95,000, and now we have another increase of $24,785. That covers salaries, reclassifications and increases, travelling expenses and so on. Then we have insects; they are going to inspect insects and see if they have any diseases. We have a live stock production assistant; no doubt they need an assistant like that in Saskatchewan at the present time. Then there is a senior live stock fieldman, and $2,040 is provided for him. There is a supervising live stock fieldman; in fact there are two of them, both at $2,640, a total of $5,280. Did not the department know, when the main estimates were being made up, that these two men would be needed? We will never see them in Ontario. What do they supervise? I do not know. I suppose they supervise the inspectors; then in turn they are supervised by the deputy supervisors, and finally they come under the supervision of the department. Then we have a senior poultry fieldman; apparently a junior man would not do. There is $4,785 provided for salaries, reclassifications and increases, and the total salaries amount to $16,785. Then we have prizes, bonuses and premiums, for the star insects, the star bugs, amounting to $8,000. In my opinion this is not worth eight cents to the people who have to raise the money by way of income tax.
If this were a municipal council they would just amend these estimates by striking out the whole item. The department has had twelve months in which to get its estimates ready, and if the department did not know what it wanted it should wait until next year for this amount. I fail to see why we should have such a large department as this, with the machinery we have in the municipalities and the provinces. I believe most of these officers should be over in the health department, helping human beings. We could get

Supply-Agriculture-Live Stock
along without this department at all. Let the provinces do the work. The dominion is being governed now by the provinces; almost every time a bill comes up we have to get the opinions of the attorneys general of the provinces. Some hon. members who have sat on municipal council would call these fads and frills, and would give short shift to such matters. What insect has a better right to be inspected than the insect which drove so many children from the schools last fall and which, if you can believe what the medical associations say, will drive them away again next fall? There is not a dollar in the estimates for that. On the other hand we have these items and these increases. I do not see why parliament should deal with one of these estimates one week and another similar item the following week. Surely one item should do. Let us do something to stop this overgovernment and over-taxation. Here is an item which I would vote to strike out, if such a motion were to be made.


James Garfield Gardiner: I sometimes think it is a good thing that human beings are not inspected just as carefully as we inspect some of the insects and animals; some weaknesses probably would be found out if that were done. In reference to these estimates coming down within a week of each other, the hon. member who has just spoken is responsible for their being at least three weeks nearer each other than otherwise would have been the case. On two or three occasions very early in the session I did attempt to bring my estimates before the house on Tuesday nights, the only nights of the week when it was possible to get them in. I well remember that on one occasion the hon. member for Broadview (Mr. Church) moved an amendment to the motion to go into supply which took up all that evening, so that it was not possible to get my estimates before the house.
That does not explain the whole matter, however. Every hon. member sitting on the front benches of the opposition knows that the main estimates have to be made up by the officials of the department in the fall of the year; that is, they are made up before the new year commences, and they are submitted to parliament very early in the session. Probably the hon. member who has just spoken was not in the house, but on three previous occasions I explained that the reason for items such as the one under consideration was that a reorganization was going on in the department and that as a result of that reorganization a reclassification of the whole service was being made 'by the civil service commission. Because of that we were not able to put into the main estimates all the items
with regard to staffs resulting from this reorganization. Many items of that kind appear in the supplementaries.
The item now under discussion, having to do with live stock and poultry, makes provision for just such things as we have been discussing this afternoon. I have noted that all hon. members who have spoken, with the exception of the last hon. member, have held the opinion that an even larger amount should be expended under these particular estimates. I quite agree that we could do double the amount of work if we could get sufficient funds, and we could do it to good advantage. At the same time I realize that there is some force in the argument of the last speaker that we should not devote to agriculture too great a proportion of the money that is available from taxation. I should like to see the amount much greater than it is, but other ministers in charge of other departments consider their work just as important for the welfare of Canada, and of course they must have their proportions of whatever amount we feel it is proper to take from the people by way of taxation in any one year.
With regard to the question whether we are dealing with humans or merely with animals, I do not think there is an item anywhere in the expenditures for production services which does not relate closely to the human being. We investigate matters concerning insects because we know a maggot in an apple may affect its sale to the human being in Great Britain or Canada. The same applies to insects which attack potatoes, wheat or any growing crop. We investigate these matters so that the food of the human being may be preserved, and so that our farmers may be in a position to produce to better advantage.
In so far as animals are concerned, may I say that votes having to do with the health of animals are made because of their effect upon the health of human beings. We attempt to destroy tuberculosis in animals because we know the bovine tubercular germ can be transferred to the human being. That, again, is one of the chief reasons why we attack Bang's disease. Another reason is that Bang's disease affects the production of the animal. One could go right through the whole of the work done by the department in connection with diseases in live stock and cereals and one would find that all of that work is related to the human being, either because we are producing something by which the human being is fed or because the disease may have an effect upon his health. I believe it is unnecessary to dwell further upon this matter, more than to say that the work done in the Department of Agriculture is supplementary

Supply-Agriculture-Live Stock
to that done in the federal Department of National Health and the provincial departments of health.


William Earl Rowe: The minister was interrupted when he began answering my question of a few moments ago concerning the progress made in advanced registration under the administration by the advanced registry board, of pure bred sires and swine. I believe a record of the performances kept by the registry board is most essential in live stock production.


James Garfield Gardiner: The r.o.p. record for
cattle, effective throughout Canada, provides for official supervision of production records of pure bred dairy cattle. It is only by the establishment of such records that individual sires for the development of grade herds can be determined. The record as to the number of cows tested is as follows:
April 1,	1932	
11,392April 1,	1933	
11,684March 1,	1934	
12,466April 1,	1935	
12,580April 1,	1936	
13,807April 1,	1937	
15,020
The figures for herds under test are as follows:
April 1,	1932	
1,578April 1,	1933	
1,500March 1,	1934	
1,634March 1,	1935	
1,652April 1,	1936	
1,716April 1,	1937	
1,805


William Earl Rowe: What proportion of them were issued certificates?


James Garfield Gardiner: The advanced registry is based on these figures, and there is a special report issued which I have not before me.


William Earl Rowe: What does the government do to encourage advanced registry?


James Garfield Gardiner: We give a grant of $5,000 to the organization.


René-Antoine Pelletier: Is it usual to issue a certificate of health before animals are exported?


James Garfield Gardiner: Yes; there has to be a certificate for all breeding stock exported.


René-Antoine Pelletier: Who is in charge of that work in Quebec?


James Garfield Gardiner: The work is conducted under Doctor Hilton of the health of animals branch. Doctor Langevin is in charge in Quebec.


René-Antoine Pelletier: Has the minister received any complaints about the work performed by Doctor Lange vin in Quebec?
[Mr. Gardiner.1


James Garfield Gardiner: Yes; there were complaints. On one occasion he was suspended for a short time, and later reinstated.


René-Antoine Pelletier: If the nature of his offence warranted suspension, why was he re-employed by the department. If his work was not satisfactory at one time, what provision was made to ensure that in future it would be carried out properly?


James Garfield Gardiner: It is common procedure in the department to suspend men against whom complaints have been made, while investigations are being carried on. Sometimes during the early stages of an investigation we are satisfied a man should not be permitted to act until we have completed all inquiries. If we satisfy ourselves later on that he may proceed to do the work satisfactorily, he is reinstated.


René-Antoine Pelletier: I understand that in this particular instance serious complaints were placed before the minister concerning the work done by this official. In one instance it was impossible to find him when he was needed to inspect certain cattle to be exported. The result was that these cattle had to face outdoor conditions, and remain in the yards. An investigation was held, and I believe a report was made to the minister. I was wondering if the minister had gone to the trouble of asking the Royal Canadian Mounted Police for the report of their investigation, and thus assure himself that he had all the information in the matter.


James Garfield Gardiner: We had all the details respecting the incident. As I recall it, there was no complaint with regard to the work done by the official; rather there was a complaint concerning a dispute he got into with some people, and a complaint as to his actions at the time of that dispute. There was no complaint with regard to his work. We had full inquiries made and satisfied ourselves that he should be given another opportunity to hold his position.


René-Antoine Pelletier: Was that decision
reached after a second complaint had been received, or as a result of the first one? My information is that there were two serious infractions which resulted in heavy loss to certain farmers in the district. No doubt the minister is familiar with the circumstances. However, that particular instance was permitted to pass without notice being taken, and it was in connection with the second incident he was suspended. Did the minister receive

Supply-Agriculture-Live Stock
a copy of the report from the Royal Canadian Mounted Police who investigated the case, or did he act simply on the advice given by Doctor Hilton at Ottawa?


James Garfield Gardiner: I saw all the reports made by any one who investigated the case, including the police.


George Halsey Perley: How many bulls came through the department under the live stock marketing scheme which operated in Saskatchewan last fall?


James Garfield Gardiner: We have no record of that. They were not classified as bulls. All cattle under that scheme were classified as canners, cutters, cows and heifers for breeding purposes, and feeder cattle. Bulls would be sold on the market at the regular prices of butcher cattle.


William Earl Rowe: The government should consider giving greater assistance to the cattle industry in connection with the breeding of stock. I understand the government still has a swine policy, known as the brood sow policy.


James Garfield Gardiner: Yes.


William Earl Rowe: I commend the government for the assistance given in swine production through the advance registry board and other means, but so far as the cattle industry is concerned it seems to be a more or less haphazard policy. We have heard about the bull loaning policy, but this seems to apply only to certain districts. If we are to have greater uniformity and a higher standard in our production, we must have a policy that applies more generally throughout the dominion. Some outlying districts have a few of the oheaper type cattle; others have excellent herds, but we should have a general policy that will give stimulus to the production of better live stock. I suggest to the minister that he should consider adopting a policy of sire assistance. Under the present bull loaning policy it is possible that you may have in close proximity to your club a live stock breeder still using an inferior sire. This practice affects the production of the whole district and brings down the market. There is a mixing of poor quality stock with the better stock produced under the bull loaning policy.
I believe it would be a better policy to provide assistance to any farmer who wishes to buy a good sire. Our farmers would be given encouragement to eliminate their scrub sires and replace them with pure bred stock which had been inspected and accredited by
the government. I am not censuring the department for continuing the policy that has been in vogue; I am not condemning the minister and his able officials for the efforts they have made to improve our live stock industry, but I do feel that very slow progress has been made in connection with our cattle industry. The government has very little to show for the assistance which has been given in the last year or so. I have no desire to make a comparison with what was done in 1933 and 1934. The number of bulls bought for loaning purposes in those years was slightly larger than the number purchased in 1936 and 1937. The minister has pointed out certain reasons for this difference. The hon. member for Haldimand (Mr. Senn) has pointed out that certain of these sires are put up for sale, and it is quite reasonable to assume that the proceeds of these sales might relieve the department of any great expense in continuing this policy. The present policy is sectional; it assists only a certain class of farmers in the outlying districts who could be assisted just as effectively under a broader policy. As the hon. member for Haldimand has pointed out, many pure bred cattle are being sold as ordinary cattle. If we had an effective policy of providing assistance for the purchase of pure bred sires, it seems to me there would be a greater improvement in our standard. We would be able to develop a uniformly higher grade in this industry.
I suggest to the department that during the forthcoming year consideration be given to adopting a broader policy. In many districts in Ontario, in fact not far from my own district, many pure bred cattle are being shipped for slaughter. Pure bred bulls are being sold at butcher prices when farmers in the same districts are producing a most inferior type of cattle. Sometimes this is on account of their lack of judgment; they assume it to be their own business; but if we are going to compete with countries that have a more rigid enforcement of their laws and regulations, this practice must cease. Perhaps it is too much to suggest to this or any other government that there should be an absolute elimination of scrub sires in this dominion. Perhaps that drastic step cannot be taken in this country as it has been taken in certain others. It may not be considered wise to license producers in Canada as has been done in other countries, but I think we could develop a policy that could be applied more generally. We should have a policy that would be available to Tom, Smith and Bob Jones, a policy that would be available to everyone. As the hon. member for Haldimand has pointed out, the

Supply-Agriculture-Live Stock
present policy seems to be applied in some districts and denied in others. I am not saying it is denied for political reasons; the reason is perhaps that the department cannot afford to buy a sufficient number of pure bred sires. With a proper policy the average farmer would be encouraged to get rid of his scrub sire. With a very little outlay on his part he would be enabled to obtain a pure bred sire.
I do not think the department should be asked to provide absolutely free services to any club under a bull loaning policy. However, the members of these clubs should be given an opportunity of purchasing a sire of an accredited standard at a cost slightly higher than they would pay for a scrub sire. We could have a system of premiums, similar to that already used in the sheep and hog industries. I believe in the hog industry. I understand that under the government's breed sow policy, if a club has fifteen pure bred sows they get the use of a male hog free. Is that not right?


James Garfield Gardiner: Yes.


William Earl Rowe: I commend the department for that to a degree because it is going a long way. If a farmer has the assistance of the government under that policy, he can take his own inferior type of hog to market and bring back, after careful inspection by the department, a pure bred female at no cash outlay of his own; and a similar policy with reference to the male is going a long way in cooperating with the farmer and the producer.
If a similar policy were put into effect in the cattle industry, it would mean millions of dollars annually to the dominion. I do not think an expenditure of this kind can fairly be compared, as one hon. member suggested, with expenditures for health inspection. It is really not an expenditure in the sense of some other expenditures, but rather an investment. The oldest live stock producers in this dominion appreciate the value of good herd sires, and on many occasions, as the minister knows, they have paid half the price of their total herd for a high grade sire. Whether it is for the production of pure bred sheep, swine, cattle or horses, a pure bred herd sire is most essential, and no farmer can continue to produce beef at a profit to-day-I will go that far-if he uses a scrub sire. It is unsound, uneconomical and extravagant. Any money spent by the department to encourage the use of pure bred sires should be regarded not as an expenditure but as an investment, and no greater assistance could be given to this important branch of

agriculture than the inauguration of a policy that could be generally applied throughout the dominion so that cattle producers in every province who so desired might secure pure bred sires. On the other hand the minister knows full well, from his own knowledge as a farmer and from his knowledge of the department, that there are hundreds of producers of pure bred cattle throughout the dominion who find great difficulty in getting rid of their sires. I do not mean that a special policy should be put into effect for producers of pure bred live stock, but I do submit in all sincerity to the minister and the committee that if you discourage the production of pure bred and better live stock you break the very backbone of the live stock industry in Canada.
I therefore submit, Mr. Chairman, that a policy such as I suggest would cut both ways. It would not only assist the farmer to produce better live stock but encourage the pure bred cattle raisers to continue in the business. I am sure the minister is aware that to-day there are many live stock producers in the dominion, especially producers of pure bred beef cattle, who are having a very difficult time, and I know of nothing more discouraging to a live stock producer of pure bred cattle who has spent years and years in the study and production of a special strain of cattle, a strain that he and his parents before him may have studied and improved for fifty years, than to see five or six excellent young pure bred sires being sent to the market at only so much per pound, while as he drives along the road he sees at the same time scrub sires kept for breeding purposes, lowering the standard of production that he is encouraging to raise throughout the country, and thereby helping to destroy the market by destroying what I might call the national grade of the product we export.
I hope the minister will not feel that I am for a moment critical of the progress he has made in the department in this regard, because I am critical of the lack of progress that has been made under all governments during the last fifteen years. We watched our live stock markets slipping away from us from 1920 to 1930, and during all that period very little improvement was made in the live stock industry in Canada in comparison with the progress made in other countries. Independently of the political effects on his party-and, indeed, it would be all to their advantage- I do submit to the minister that serious consideration should be given at this late date to improve generally the cattle industry of Canada.

Supply-Agriculture-Live Stock
I shall say nothing further with regard to the markets we have lost. I think we have all kept pretty closely to the issue before the chair; but I submit that the production of better live stock and better cattle is at the very basis of our production of a more uniform and higher standard of beef as well as dairy products. There has been more progress made in the last year or two, especially in Ontario, and in western Canada, I believe, in the improvement of dairy herds by the advanced registry for dairy sires. While considerable progress has been made in that direction, I would strongly urge the government to reconsider its whole bull loaning policy and reinstating in its place a policy of assistance which can be generally applied, and from which therefore we can expect more general benefits, assisting not only in the production of better live stock throughout the dominion but in accomplishing the several other purposes I have mentioned.


William Hayhurst: I should like to concur in some of the remarks made by the hon. member for Dufferin-Simcoe (Mr. Rowe). From observations I have made in different parts of the country I know that beef clubs which have been established in the past have done good work, but difficulty has arisen in this way: The farmers in certain areas would sometimes get discouraged, and then we found that the original policy was not carried forward. A club would sometimes start with a shorthorn sire, for example, and probably a few years later turn to an Aberdeen-Angus, then to a Hereford, and perhaps wind up with an Ayrshire or something of that kind, and then we would have a mixture and the scrubbiest of scrubs left, although the club might have started with the finest of intentions. The farmers in certain areas do not seem to realize that something should be done in the direction of the line breeding of cattle, and this applies to all animals. I have had considerable experience in these matters because I have been secretary of different farm clubs, which have had at different times sires of different breeds. This applies to both horses and cattle. The club may have started out with percheron horses or a shorthorn bull; yet years afterwards we have seen all the good work which had been started in that way spoiled by the introduction of another breed of animal entirely, and the countryside would be littered with breeds of animals entirely different from the type with which the club started. Thus the good work which has been started has been nullified.
Therefore I should like to recommend to the minister and his department at this time, 51952-205
when rehabilitation, especially in the west, is taking place, a policy of line breeding by community organizations, to be developed into larger districts, something like the county system which prevails in the old country, where probably two or three counties will raise shorthorn cattle, and others, which are near to large cities, will probably raise dairy cattle. Thus we would have better breeds, more uniform types from various areas, and premiums paid upon them. This seems a most opportune time to carry out a program of this kind, because we find the price of October wheat futures is down to seventy-eight cents, and if wheat goes down and the coarse grains market goes down with it, as it likely will with the large crop that is now predicted, there is going to be an abundance of feed, and we shall have fewer cattle in the west at a time when we should have large numbers. These conditions, of course, have been brought about by causes over which we have no control. However, the fact is that they have created a situation which requires dynamic direction. Throughout the west our organizations, possessed with a new vitality, will go forward in response to direction. They have made mistakes in the past, but they realize what can be done in the future. The Department of Agriculture, with a rehabilitation program ahead, and with a policy of line breeding such as I have suggested, suitable to certain localities, is in a position to encourage this kind of work.
By a follow-up policy we should encourage the good farmers, those farmers who are the back-bone of the country, who raise excellent stock, by giving them a fairly good price for the good stock which they raise. We should encourage them to go on with their work and should thereby stimulate the building up of good communities wherein farming would become profitable. As all hon. members know, farmers in the past have suffered greatly, and their remuneration has been very low. Unless a definite policy of mixed farming is now inaugurated, the country will probably suffer more in the future than it has done in the past. I recommend this development, knowing the minister has thought the matter over, but it has been brought to my attention in so many localities in which I am vitally interested that this would seem an opportune time to present it again and to urge that the department go forward with this policy.


Richard Bedford Bennett: The province of Alberta has long been famous for its production of pure bred cattle. While I cannot speak as
an authority, I desire to direct attention to



Supply-Agriculture-Live Stock
one phase of this matter as supplying a reason why. even in difficult times, we endeavoured to purchase as many pure bred cattle as possible so that the production should not cease. The minister must know that the spring sales of pure bred bulls held in Calgary have attracted the notice and attention and purchasing power of people from every part of the country. If production falls off because of lack of markets, it takes a long time to restore the market. The government by reason of its purchases has become rather an important factor in the development of the industry. We have bought from year to year in this country from two to five hundred, and sometimes it has not been easy to find the money. But now, in days of expanding revenues, it seems to me that an additional ten or twenty thousand dollars might readily be found for the purpose of providing pure bred stock and the encouragement of those who are engaged in that industry.


James Garfield Gardiner: It has gone up $5,400 this year.


Richard Bedford Bennett: I know. Probably $5,400 means the purchase of between forty-five and fifty head.


James Garfield Gardiner: About thirty or forty.


Richard Bedford Bennett: Yes. The price has gone up from the period of great depression. The average price was about $125, and I think it has gone up to nearly $140 now.


James Garfield Gardiner: One hundred and forty-five dollars, I think.


Richard Bedford Bennett: That would, as the minister says, involve the purchase of less than forty head. I do not think I can exaggerate the importance of it from the standpoint of the breeder. This purchase by the dominion seems very small; in one sense it is; but it has had a marked effect upon the whole industry in Alberta. It was frequently brought to my attention by those engaged in trying to maintain a very high standard of excellence, that they found this market of tremendous importance, not alone because of the number purchased, but because it gives importance to the industry to have the country as a country making purchases for the purposes which have been indicated here this afternoon. I do not think it is too much to say that the assistance thus given by the government did much to maintain not only a high standard of excellence but the very in-dustiy, the pure bred industry itself in that province. I hope the minister may yet be able, if further supplementary estimates are [Mr. Bennett.)
introduced, to bring in an additional sum sufficient to acquire another fifty or sixty head of cattle this year. That would still limit the total purchases to less than four hundred. I believe that somewhere in the vicinity of three hundred have been acquired, if I followed the figures this afternoon. With the additional $5,400 available, the total purchases would be less than three hundred.


James Garfield Gardiner: Less than three hundred and fifty.


Richard Bedford Bennett: Less than three hundred and fifty at the present minute, and I think that if we could bring the number up to four hundred it would be very desirable. Not only from the standpoint which has been so admirably presented to the committee, to which presentation, with my limited knowledge, I could not hope to add, but from the standpoint of the industry as such, the maintenance of the industry, the preservation of the morale of the producer and the incentive to those who have taken a just pride in their production, I urge the minister to consider the possibility of providing for an expansion of purchases. I realize of course that they would not all be made in Alberta; but some of them, would, and the fact that some of them were made in that province would be extremely helpful in maintaining and supporting an industry whose value has not, I think, been overstated by my colleague to the right in the very strong plea he made this afternoon for the assistance of the industry.


James Garfield Gardiner: I should just like to say, with regard to the remarks made by the leader of the opposition, that we in the department realize the importance of this work. One phase of it probably has not been emphasized. It will be noted that the average price in 1933 was $121; in 1934, $129; in 1935, $132; in 1936, $133; and in 1937, $143.


Richard Bedford Bennett: Lack of purchasing power in the dark days of the depression, clearly.


James Garfield Gardiner: That is true. And there is this to be kept in mind, that when the government goes to these sales to purchase cattle it has a considerable effect upon the price. I think there is a limit to what the government ought to do in that direction, because if we raise the price we may make it impossible for some people to buy bulls. There is much in what has been said as to the necessity for distributing more and more of these bulls, but we have to consider both aspects of the matter in making our purchases.

Supply-Agriculture-Live Stock


Mark Cecil Senn: I should like to second very heartily what was said by the hon. member for Dufferin-Simcoe (Mr. Rowe) and the hon. member' for Vegreville (Mr. Hayhurst) as well as the leader of the opposition (Mr. Bennett) as to the benefit to be derived from the further distribution of pure bred sires. One has only to go to the Toronto stockyards and look at the cattle gathered there from day to day to realize the very great need for better sires in this province as well as throughout the dominion generally. A large proportion of them are nondescript animals. It is often difficult for a farmer who wishes to buy a carload for feeding purposes to get them of uniform grade. Assistance or encouragement of some kind should be given to farmers to carry on line breeding to a greater extent. At the Toronto stockyards one sees cattle of no breed, animals that are a mixture, and degenerated to such an extent that they are not profitable to raise and not only bring very little return to the farmer but bring the whole cattle industry into disrepute. It would be well if we could have some zoning arrangement 'by which certain breeds could be found in one particular area-dairy cattle in one, shorthorns in another, and so on. It is essential to encourage as much as possible the breeding of pure bred cattle. Breeders of such cattle have not enjoyed much prosperity in recent years. They have often had to sell them at a sacrifice, particularly the male animals. If the government could take a few more of these pure bred animals off the breeders' hands it would be a great help, and would encourage them not only to carry on but to breed better and better animals. They are the backbone of the live stock industry; they supply the foundation stock for better herds.
Then I wish to refer to the sow distribution policy. I do not know how the government is finding these animals at the present time or where they come from. A good deal of fault has been found by breeders of pure bred swine with the practice of getting these sows from the stockyards. I do not know whether that is carried out at the present time or not.


James Garfield Gardiner: Yes, that is the way they are secured, from the stockyards.


Mark Cecil Senn: I protest against that system. They may be bought at a little lower price, but what encouragement is given to the breeder of pure bred swine? A large proportion of every litter are sows, and if he cannot sell these for breeding purposes, and the farmers in the district are being provided with "mill-run" sows from the stockyards-


James Garfield Gardiner: They are selected, but they are grades; we do not attempt to select pure bred sows.


Mark Cecil Senn: A lot of them are good animals, but it places the swine breeders at a disadvantage. When they have good animals that they have gone to considerable expense and trouble to raise, it is discouraging to have to send them to the stockyards to be sold at no premium over ordinary stockyard prices. I think the department would be well advised to discontinue that practice. If they wish to furnish farmers in the country districts with breeding sows, they should purchase them from the breeders of pure bred animals who have spent their time and money in building up good herds of swine. They can get these good animals in any quantity.


George Halsey Perley: I wish to endorse what has been said by the last two or three speakers.
I would urge the minister to have a thorough survey made of the situation in Saskatchewan. Saskatchewan breeders have been as hard hit as any in that branch of the industry anywhere.


James Garfield Gardiner: If I may interrupt, I promised some hon. members of the opposition that I would bring up certain items today, and I think the question which is now being discussed could be better discussed under those items than under the one we are now discussing. I therefore suggest that this item be allowed to stand, and that we take item No. 477.
Item stands.
Special-To provide for the payment of freight on the return of live stock and equipment from places of feed supply to the dried-out areas in the provinces of Saskatchewan and. Alberta, $100,000.


Richard Bedford Bennett: This would seem to be' an appropriate place to ask the minister for some information which I cannot expect him to provide at this moment, but which I trust will be made available to the committee before the item is adopted. What quantity of hay and fodder did we import into Canada from the United States? What price per ton did we pay for it? What number of bushels of oats and other grains did we import from, the United States? What number of bushels-of wheat did we import from the Unitedl States? What were the prices paid per bushel for oats and for wheat? What was the cost of transport from the United States to Canada paid by this government for all this feed and fodder?
A further question is: Have these been actually paid? I have received complaints that hay supplied from Manitoba to the

Supply-Agriculture-Live Stock
government has not been paid for. I assume that cannot mean the federal government. I am also informed that other obligations which have been created in connection with relief granted in Saskatchewan have not been paid, and that some of the corporations which provided supplies have been unwilling to take further treasury bills in payment.
As I said, I do not expect answers to these questions now, but they will be on Hansard, and if the answers are not at once available, the minister will have an opportunity to provide them when the item is next considered. I mention this now because it seems to be an appropriate place, although possibly something might also be said under the next item, No. 478. But this is the information which I am particularly anxious to secure.


James Garfield Gardiner: That would properly come under item 478.


Richard Bedford Bennett: No; that only deals with 'three months.


James Garfield Gardiner: The item we are now considering only has to do with the payment of freight on the return of live stock and equipment from places of feed supply to the dried out areas in Saskatchewan and Alberta. This has nothing to do with the purchase of feed and fodder itself. It is true that the next item covers only a period of three months, but that is the only item left. We covered the rest under warrants earlier in the session, so that would be the only place it could be discussed now. I could secure most of the information asked for; I am not sure that I could secure it all. The provincial government is handling that.


George Halsey Perley: Could the minister inform us how much was paid each of the railway companies, the Canadian National and the Canadian Pacific?


James Garfield Gardiner: No, I am not in a position to give that information. That would have to be obtained from Regina. This amount is paid to Regina to assist in doing that work.


George Halsey Perley: This amount is paid to the provincial government, which disburses it as it sees fit?


James Garfield Gardiner: The accounts are submitted by the provincial government to the federal government and the money is advanced by this government to make the payments.


George Halsey Perley: 
James Garfield Gardiner: I have not the particulars for Alberta, but the outward movement of live stock from the drought area of Saskatchewan last year was as follows: 19,000 horses, 23,000 cattle, 9,300 sheep. Of those, 10,200 horses, 5,400 cattle and 8,000 sheep have been returned. There were 555 haying outfits shipped out, of which 342 have been returned, leaving 213 not yet accounted for by returns.


George Halsey Perley: Why were they not returned? I notice there is a very considerable difference between the number of horses and cattle sent out and the number returned. Would the minister tell us where the horses and cattle sent out for winter feeding were shipped? Were they all sent to the Carberry feeding grounds or were they distributed to other points in Manitoba?


James Garfield Gardiner: There were 19,000 horses shipped out and 10,200 returned; 23,000 cattle shipped out and 5,400 returned; 9,300 sheep shipped out and 8,000 returned to date. In the first instance the agreements were made up to March 31, which is the end of our financial year. In previous years that date has been extended, and that was done this year as well. On request the date for return was extended to June 30. Horses that are not required, young horses not needed for work just now, may be left on the pasture; cattle that are not required except for feeding purposes later on, and cows calving, will be left until the pastures at home become good enough for them to be turned out. All the stock that will be returned has not come back yet, and of course it sometimes happens that all the stock shipped out does come back.


Richard Bedford Bennett: Some of them die, I take it.


James Garfield Gardiner: Some of them die and some are slaughtered, as a matter of fact; they find it better to slaughter them in Manitoba than to bring them home and ship them from there.


George Halsey Perley: I have received complaints in regard to a man living in Khedive, Saskatchewan, who shipped cattle to the feeding grounds and was not permitted to bring them back this spring when he wanted them. He was allowed to bring back his horses and his haying equipment, but for some reason he was not allowed to bring back the cattle. Was there any rule or regulation governing that, or what would be the reason?


James Garfield Gardiner: There is no regulation
in that regard, but I presume if the authorities knew, from the fact that they had been shipping feed into that area, that there was

Supply-Agriculture-Live Stock
not sufficient feed there for the stock if it should be shipped back, they would notify the individual that it was not wise to bring it back. They had paid the cost of shipping the stock out in order to avoid having to ship in feed and fodder, and they would not want the farmer to bring the stock back until there was feed available without its being necessary to bring in feed at a high cost.


George Halsey Perley: Then we may expect quite a number to be returned in June? Will there be a further amount required or will this cover the entire movement?


James Garfield Gardiner: This is intended to
cover all the return shipments after March 31. This is expected to cover the full cost of the shipments.


William Earl Rowe: I do not
want to hold up this item, but in connection with shipping live stock to Ontario, say, are there special freight rates provided for breeding stock shipped during the whole year for feding purposes, or are they in force just in the fall? For instance, there is a good deal of breeding stock in the dried out areas, pure bred cows and young breeding stock, that the farmers of Ontario might be ready to purchase, and I believe there are special freight rates-


James Garfield Gardiner: Down to December 31.


William Earl Rowe: But is
there not a special freight rate in addition from the dried out areas?


James Garfield Gardiner: No, this freight rate
applies to the dried out areas only, and it applies on feeder cattle and young female breeding stock up to five years of age. It does not apply to any other stock. It is half the freight rate, provided the person who brings it east keeps it for three months.


William Earl Rowe: Then on
pure bred live stock the present freight rate is half the normal rate?


James Garfield Gardiner: Yes, any time and any place.


William Earl Rowe: So that it
would travel on one-quarter fare from the dried
out areas.


James Garfield Gardiner: No, I understand there was no special provision for pure bred stock. They came down on the half rate.


William Earl Rowe: Then I
would recommend that the government should give consideration to the matter, in view of the fact that there are special freight rates provided when shipping to other districts.
There would be considerable sale for pure bred breeding stock in Ontario and, I presume in Quebec, from the pure bred herds of western Canada.


James Garfield Gardiner: We do not recall any instance of its having been done, but I believe under the regulations as they are we could do as the hon. member suggests. I believe the regulation provides that we pay half the freight.


William Earl Rowe: I think you could do it, too.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
To provide for feed and fodder relief in the dried-out areas and to provide for direct relief in the dried-out areas for the months of April, May and June 1938, $2,000,000.
Richard Bedford Bennett: Probably under this item the information I seek could be made available, because we might as well deal with it now as when the supply bill is in committee. I am not expecting that the information will be provided now, but it seems to me the item should stand until we get it. The questions which arise in connection with the item are these: From what sources are feed and fodder for these months being obtained? Do we pay the money ourselves, or do we merely hand it to Saskatchewan to pay? I notice that we had an inspector at Valley City, North Dakota, in the person of W. Hagerty of Moose Jaw, Saskatchewan, at $125 per month. He drew $640.94 for expenses during that period of four months. I notice that at Thief River Falls, Minnesota, Mr. O. Parker of Valjean, Saskatchewan, was employed at $125 per month, and that in seven months he drew $1,822.34 for expenses. At Crookston, Minnesota, Mr. Andrews, of Cravan, Saskatchewan, was employed at $125 per month, and in five months he drew $1,590.61 for expenses, or a sum at the rate of something over $300 per month or $10 per day. At Breckenridge, Minnesota, Mr. J. W. Rose, of Markiuch, Saskatchewan, was employed at a salary of $125 per month, and in twelve months he drew $1,531.51 for expenses.
These inspectors were apparently supervising our purchases in the United States. Are we merely handing over $2,000,000 to the provincial authorities for these months, or have we assumed any responsibility for the payment of the supplies purchased during that period? I should like to know also from what quarters the feed and fodder have been acquired-what from the United States and what from Canada and from what parts of Canada. What payments per ton or per bushel were made for the supplies thus obtained? How were the sellers selected, and by whom?

Supply-Agriculture-Live Stock


James Garfield Gardiner: I would have to get a considerable part of the detail from Regina.


Richard Bedford Bennett: I wanted to know that.


James Garfield Gardiner: The persons whose
names have been read are some who have been employed as inspectors at different points. I believe two returns asked for by the hon. member for Qu'Appelle have given that information. The first one gives a list of names, and the second gives the salaries and expenses. The payment is at the rate of $125 per month, and the expenses vary from S200 to $300 per month, depending on the area in which they were serving. A man serving in Winnipeg would have a higher expense account than one serving at a smaller point. The greater part of the expense is made up of travelling by motor car at so much per mile. Most of the inspectors have had experience either as elevator -men who purchased grain and handled commodities of this kind, or as practical farmers. They were sent to the points at which purchases were being made in quantities, and they graded and inspected the product after the provincial government had made the purchase. That is, the provincial government made purchases of hay, straw or grain as the case might be, and notified our department that purchases had been made at such and such a point from such and such a person. One of our inspectors would go to that point and grade the hay. Following that he would inform us what the grade was, and from that information we got the value per ton.


Richard Bedford Bennett: Who made payment?


James Garfield Gardiner: I shall cover that point as I proceed. When the province notified the department we had inspections made and had the hay graded and priced, as set out in the agreement with the province. The price could not be more than $8.50 per ton. If more than that amount was paid we did not pay any more. That was the limit we had to -pay under the agreement for No. 1 hay. Then, it was graded down to lower grades at $6.50.


Richard Bedford Bennett: Was that f.oib. cars at point of shipment?


James Garfield Gardiner: Yes, f.o.b. cars at point of shipment. Costs of baling and that sort of things were taken out. Then the freight was added to that price at the point of shipment, and that freight would be checked. When the provincial department had all their accounts made up in accordance with the transaction they submitted them for payment to
fMr. Bennett.]
the federal government. We had four or five officials at Regina connected with the branch of the comptroller of -the treasury.


Richard Bedford Bennett: That is, the comptroller of the treasury had officials there?


James Garfield Gardiner: Yes, he had officials there to check these accounts. They were all checked and if found regular the amounts of money to cover payments were then advanced to the provincial government.


Richard Bedford Bennett: Whose cheque was issued
in payment?


James Garfield Gardiner: The dominion government's cheque was issued in payment to the province, and then the province paid it out in smaller amounts to the individuals. I believe it was paid by the province.


Richard Bedford Bennett: That is what I was
anxious to ascertain.


James Garfield Gardiner: That was all checked by our auditors as well as by auditors of the province.


Richard Bedford Bennett: Because complaints have been made that the persons who supplied fodder in Saskatchewan have not received their payment. That is why I am asking how payment was made.


James Garfield Gardiner: Of course there have been cases all the way through in connection with the handling of feed and fodder in this and other years where disputes have arisen between individuals. Sometimes those disputes have been in connection with grades. Our officials would- grade a product on the ground; but anyone who has had experience with the baling of h-ay knows that if you pack snow or ice with the hay there is a possibility of its spoiling. The question then arises at the other end, when it reaches its destination, as to whether payment should be made. There have been cases where payment has been held- up either as a result of the condition of the fodder when it arrived, or because of grade, or for some other reason which has caused dispute between the two parties. I would say however that that has happened only in a small proportion of the total number of cases.


Richard Bedford Bennett: The minister said he
was uncertain whether these payments wore made by the dominion to the province for the entire quantities of supplies. Take the purchases of feed and fodder for the month of April. Our dominion inspector would certify that everything was in order. What would happen then?

The Royal Assent


James Garfield Gardiner: The province submits
an account for the total amount that should be paid up to that date. Our auditor then checks the accounts-I understand that he has been able to check them inside of twenty-four to forty-eight hours after receiving them 

and if he is satisfied, he notifies Ottawa and Ottawa advances the amount necessary to cover those particular accounts. The auditor checks further in order to see that the money goes to pay those accounts and not something else.


Richard Bedford Bennett: That is what I was
anxious about.


James Garfield Gardiner: I do not think there has been any difficulty about that, either in Alberta or in Saskatchewan.


Richard Bedford Bennett: I have had complaints
that men in Manitoba have not received their money.


James Garfield Gardiner: There is just a possibility that the complaints you speak of may be provincial in character. There is what is called a federal and a provincial area. The province carries on transactions with money it itself is handling, apart from what we put up. There may be some difficulty with payments, but I do not know of any.
Item stands.
Progress reported.



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 for the relief of Dorothy Dean St. Clair Ross.
An Act for the relief of Frances Margaret Stewart Butler.
An Act for the relief of Agnes Le Blanc Archambault.
An Act for the relief of Louise Anderson Lindsay.
An Act for the relief of Kathleen Helen Frances Penfold Findlay.	*
An Act for the relief of Mary Esther Wahl Watt.
An Act for the relief of Eva Grace Barlow Sunbury.
An Act for the relief of Irene Marjorie Wiseman Litwin.
An Act for the relief of Lorraine Olive Lafontaine Caron Pilot.
An Act respecting the Canadian Pacific Railway Company.
An Act respecting Revillon Freres Trading Company, Limited, and to change its name to Rupert's Land Trading Company.
An Act respecting a certain Trade Agreement between Canada and Hayti.
An Act respecting a certain Trade Agreement between Canada and Guatemala.
An Act respecting The Canadian and British Insurance Companies Act, 1932.
An Act to amend An Act respecting The National Battlefields at Quebec.
An Act to amend the Royal Canadian Mounted Police Act.
An Act to assist in the alleviation of Unemployment and Agricultural Distress.
An Act respecting the Canadian National Railways and to provide for the refunding of matured, maturing and callable financial obligations.
An Act for granting to His Majesty certain sums of money for the public service of the financial year ending the 31st March, 1939.
On motion of Mr. Gardiner the house adjourned at 5.57 p.m.
Thursday, May 26, 1938