1944-02-16

Hon. C. G. POWER (Minister of National Defence for Air):: Mr. Speaker, as promised last week, I have a statement to make re-
garding the discussions which have taken place in connection with the British commonwealth air training.
Representatives of the Canadian and United Kingdom governments have been discussing matters of common interest to the R.C.A.F. and the R.A.F. in their overseas relations, and in connection with the British commonwealth air training plan.
The United Kingdom was represented by Captain the Right Hon. Harold H. Balfour, Under-Secretary of State for Air, and Air Marshal Sir Peter Drummond. Canada was represented by myself, Air Marshal Robert Leckie and staff officers.
Members of the R.C.A.F. are not only serving in Britain and elsewhere in Canadian squadrons, but also in their thousands axe attached temporarily to the R.A.F. squadrons, detachments, units and formations, widely dispersed throughout the world.	.
It is inevitable that innumerable questions arise concerning the welfare, careers and conditions of service of these Canadians attached to another force and for the time being serving under commanders other than Canadians. The R.C.A.F., which recruited and trained them, is responsible at all times to the people of Canada for their welfare and future prospects.
Such matters as length of service with R.A.F., commissions, promotions, operational and nonoperational tours, and leave to Canada, vitally concern not only these boys, but also their parents, dependents and friends in Canada.
From time to time adjustments must be made, and the Department of National Defence for Air, either directly or through the Canadian air officer commanding-in-chief, overseas, in conjunction with the United Kingdom air ministry, discusses and formulates the general policies which are to be followed by both forces in dealing with these important and sometimes difficult problems.
The basic agreements made between the two governments in 1939 and 1942 have been modified and amended where necessary and certain understandings have been reached which confer on us a larger measure of responsibility for our own personnel.
The policies laid down in the agreement of June 1942 have not been materially altered, but there has been clarification on some points, as well as modification of administrative procedure. The amendments to the agreements of June 1942 are tabled herewith.
Long and tough fighting lies ahead before the war is won. But we must be ready with plans for demobilization, repatriation and rehabilitation well in advance. Our problems in this

R.CA.F.-General Policies
connection are greatly accentuated because by far the largest numbers of our aircrews are serving with the R.A.F. in distant and varied theatres of war. It must be and is a matter of primary concern to the government to ensure that these men are not .placed in an unfavourable position by reason of their service in the R.A.F., or in any way handicapped as compared with men in the other Canadian services, or with their air force comrades at home. All our men must be given the same opportunities with regard to priorities in demobilization, repatriation and rehabilitation, and whilst demobilization procedure and related questions must fundamentally be the problem of each country to be dealt with in the light of the interests of its own economy and its own nationals, it is essential that our plans be closely correlated with those of the United Kingdom in order to give these benefits and advantages to our personnel when their service abroad is no longer required. To this end, it has been agreed that a joint committee of air force representatives of both countries will be established with headquarters in London, to discuss these problems, to exchange views and to advise their ministers. It has already been agreed that arrangements which have been made either by the United Kingdom or Canada for pre-demobilization, educational and vocational training shall be available to the nationals of both countries on a reciprocal basis.
Finally, a matter which, though not connected with the air training plan or its graduates but which is of considerable interest to Canadians, was also considered-that of the transfer from the R.A.F. of certain Canadian nationals who had joined that service prior to and during the early stages of the war. In this connection it has been agreed with the United Kingdom representatives that such officers and men may apply for transfer to the R.C.A.F. Certain Canadian-born women not normally domiciled in the United Kingdom who joined the Women's Auxiliary Air Force of the R.A.F. will also be eligible to apply for transfer.


Mr. HANSON (York-Sunbury):: May I ask a question at that point? Take the case of young officers in the R.A.F.-


Charles Gavan Power: I would prefer to complete
my statement first.


Richard Burpee Hanson: I am sorry that I have to leave the house in a moment. Will these officers be transferred on the same basis as their present status?


Charles Gavan Power: My hon. friend will have to wait until the regulations with respect to transfer are issued.
Besides these personnel matters, consideration was given to the overall capacity of the training organization in Canada which is administered by Canada on behalf of the partners of the British Commonwealth air training plan. The air training plan will continue as long as the war lasts.
During the three years which followed the signing of the plan agreement in 1939, the principal. preoccupation of Canada and the other partners was to create a training organization on which could be built fighting air forces equal in size and superior in quality to those of the enemy. Today, in the beginning of 1944, it can be said that this objective has been reached, and we have increasing air superiority over the enemy in every theatre of war. This superiority is evident in the sky-fronts of the operational' theatres over land and sea. Not so evident, but behind the front line squadrons, there are thousands of aircrew being put through operational training units and conversion units, and farther back again there are tens of thousands of young aircrew going through the training schools of the British Commonwealth air training plan in Canada and in similar schools in other parts of the world.
In other words, the personnel necessary to fill squadrons, units and formations planned for the front line are already in the pipeline feeding the air forces of the United Kingdom, the commonwealth and the allies serving under the strategic direction and tactical command of the Royal Air Force. At the present time we have the capital and the necessary immediate replacements.
Our long-term war plans entail certain reductions in the numbers of entrants to aircrew training. The current entrants into training will not in fact engage the enemy for a comparatively long time. This is largely because of the increased complexity of modern aircraft requiring lengthy training over an ever widening range of subjects. The young man who fights in the air in the future will not do so until he has had more flying hours during training than ever before. In a sentence, the standards of skill required and the opportunities for obtaining experience have progressively increased since the beginning of the war.
Consequent upon the reduction in intake of trainees, there will be a gradual and progressive closing of a certain number of training units, and schools in Canada, beginning with the
Questions

R.A.F. transferred schools. The process will be deliberate and extended over many months, and the reduction of training facilities will be geared to the requisite flow of pupils through the plan.
One important objective will be to utilize to the greatest possible extent the resources in skilled personnel in our training organization as they become available, for reinforcing and enlarging the operational units. As the R.A.F. schools in Canada close, the personnel will be transferred to the operational theatre in England to increase the number of skilled men available for the continued expansion of the front line of the Royal Air Force.
Numbers of R.C.A.F. air and ground crew personnel, besides the graduates, will be made available for overseas duties owing to the reduction of training capacity in Canada and also to the curtailment of western hemisphere operations due to the more favourable war situation on our coasts.
This concentration of man-power in the United Kingdom will provide close to the front line more backing to the squadrons now actively engaged or required for forthcoming operations and renders more effective the impact of both the R.A.F. and the R.C.A.F. on the enemy during this critical year of the war.



WAR EXPENDITURES


Right Hon. W. L. MACKENZIE KING (Prime Minister) moved:: That the third report of the special committee on war expenditures, presented to the house on the 26th of January, 1944, be considered by the house during the present session of parliament.


Mr. GORDON GRAYDON (Leader of the Opposition):: Does that include reports of all the subcommittees?


William Lyon Mackenzie King: The third
report.


[Stage Direction]
Motion agreed to.

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

Mr. ROSS (Souris):: 1.	What is the total amount paid on 1943 rye and grass claims under W.A.R.A., as at January 1, 1944?
2.	How many claims have been paid:?
3.	What is the amount paid by provinces?

4.	How many claims have been paid by provinces, in Manitoba, Saskatchewan, Alberta?
5.	When will the balance of claims be paid?


Mr. GARDINER:: 1.	The amount paid on 1943 rye and grass claims is not segregated from the amount paid on other crops or summerfallow. The total amount paid as at January 1, 1944, was $21,160,192.89.
2.	34,163 claims containing grass and rye acreages.
3.	Payments on grass and rye not segregated. Total payments by provinces were: Alberta, $6,373,220.87; Saskatchewan, $11,116,650.28; Manitoba, $3,670,321.74.
4.	Claims containing grass and rye acreages: Manitoba, 7,514; Saskatchewan, 19,669; Alberta, 6,980.
5.	By March 15, 1944.


CANADIAN ARMY-PAY TO THE RANKS
Mr. KNOWLES:: 1.	Are all troopers, gunners, sappers, privates, etc., in the Canadian army, now receiving $1.50 per diem?
2.	If not, on what basis are any of the above receiving less than $1.50 per diem?
3.	If all troopers, gunners, sappers, privates, etc., in the Canadian army, are not receiving $1.50 per diem, what percentages are receiving lesser amounts?


Mr. MACDONALD (Halifax):: 1.	No.
2.	In order to qualify for the first increase to $1.40 per diem a soldier must have completed four months' continuous service, provided that during the period in question:
Efficiency
(a) (i) He has reached a state of efficiency which might reasonably be expected in conformity with opportunities for training available to him, has performed his duties satisfactorily, and the officer commanding his unit certifies that these conditions have been met.
Conduct
(ii)	He has not forfeited pay and allowances under articles 85(2) or 149 of F.R. & I. (Canada) in excess of an amount equal to three days' pay, or
(iii)	He has not been awarded fines which in the aggregate exceed an amount equal to three days' pay, or
(iv)	The total of forfeitures and fines under (ii) and (iii) above is not in excess of an amount equal to three days' pay.
A soldier will be eligible for the second increase to $1.50 per diem after six months' continuous service provided:

Questions
Proficiency
(b) (i) He has attained a degree of proficiency in training applicable to his arm or-corps which ought to be reached two months after receipt of the first increase and the officer commanding his unit certifies that this condition has been met.
Conduct
(ii) He fulfils the conditions as defined in sub-para. (a) (ii) (iii) or (iv) above, during the two months' period following the first increase.
3.	The following are the percentages of troopers, gunners, privates, etc., who are receiving lesser amount than $1.50 per diem- as of 1st February, 1944:
Canadian Army
in Canada	Overseas
Number in receipt of
$1.40 per diem	....	9-1%	4-5%
Number in receipt of
$1.30 per diem		25-2%	5-0%


SUGAR IN STORAGE
Mr. HATFIELD:: 1.	What is the quantity of refined sugar stored in the city of Saint John, New Brunswick?
2.	Of the above, what quantity is stored in the Crosby warehouse; what quantity in the Belgian warehouse?
3.	How long has the sugar been in storage?
4.	Has any of the sugar been lost or damaged?
5.	If so, how much was lost or damaged, and why?
6.	What is the quantity of refined sugar stored in other warehouses in Canada?
7.	What is the quantity of raw sugar stored in warehouses in Saint John, New Brunswick?
8.	What is the quantity of raw sugar stored in warehouses in Canada?


Mr. ABBOTT:: 1,	6, 7 and 8. There are no stocks of sugar owned by the government stored in Saint John, New Brunswick, or in any other warehouses in Canada.
2,	3, 4 and 5. The sugar administrator purchases and arranges transportation for all sugar imported and sells it to refiners on arrival. Whereas he does obtain regular reports regarding refiners' holdings of raw and refined sugar, he has no information regarding wholesalers' and retailers' stocks.
For security reasons, it is not considered in the public interest .to publish information regarding stocks of an imported commodity like sugar, on the basis of which it might be
possible for the enemy to draw inferences regarding the movement of ships on the high seas. Stocks vary considerably from day to day, and release of the figures for any particular date might also lead to unwarranted and undesirable speculation as to changes in consumer rations.


STORAGE OP GRAIN
Mr. PERLEY:: 1.	What is the total amount paid by the Canadian wheat board for storage on grain, (a) in interior elevators; (b) in terminal elevators, for the crop year 1942-1943 and 1943-1944, to date?
2.	How much was paid to each company or firm?


Mr. MacKINNON (Edmonton West):: 1. Total amount paid and accrued for storage on grain in terminal elevators for season 1942-43-$6,233,418.30. (Figures showing split of this total between interior terminal elevators and other terminals are not available.)
Terminal storage paid to 31st January, 1944, for season 1943-44-$627,480.81. (This figure does not contain any accrued storage and split between interior terminal elevators and other terminals is not available.)
2.	The amounts paid to each company or firm are not readily available. No useful purpose would be served, as far as the wheat board is concerned, by keeping this information by companies. To obtain the required data would necessitate an exhaustive reanalysis of the year's operations. The comptroller's department is already overburdened in its endeavour to issue the participation certificates as soon as possible.


CANADIAN WHEAT BOARD
Mr. PERLEY:: 1.	How many are at present employed in the Canadian wheat board offices in Winnipeg, Manitoba?
2.	How many outside inspectors or field-men are employed?
3.	What is the present salary of each of these inspectors or field-men, and what was the former occupation of each?


Mr. MacKINNON (Edmonton West):: 1.	392.	*
2.	14.
3.	$175 per month plus cost of living bonus. Former occupations-country elevator operators, travellers and accountants, with one exception who was employed in 'the Manitoba forestry branch, and as farm supervisor.
Questions


PERSONNEL RECRUITED IN ONTARIO FOR QUEBEC REGIMENT SENT TO HONG KONG
Mr. WHITE:: How many recruits, if any, were recruited m Ontario for the Quebec Regiment, sent to Quebec, and later sent to Hong Kong?


Mr. MACDONALD (Halifax):: No recruits vere recruited in Ontario for the Quebec Regiment (Royal Rifles of Canada), sent to Quebec and later sent to Hong Kong. However, 50 men from the Midland Regiment, Ontario, and 104 men from Camp Borden, Ontario, were transferred to the Royal Rifles of Canada. These men were not sent to Quebec but joined the Royal Rifles of Canada on its way to Hong Kong at North Bay, Ontario.


KINGSBURY-RICHMOND, QUE., POSTAL SERVICE
Mr. CARDIFF:: 1.	What is the name of the person who holds the contract for the delivery of mail from Kingsbury post office, Quebec, to Richmond, Quebec?
2.	How long has the presenl holder been in possession of this contract?
3.	Were tenders called for before this contract was awarded to its present holder? If not, why were they not called for?
4.	Has the price for the contract been increased during the term of office of the present holder?


Mr. MULOCK:: 1.	Eric Malboeuf.
2.	Since the 1st September, 1942.
3.	No. Eric Malboeuf secured1 the contract through a regular transfer from Emile Felix Malboeuf, the latter having obtained the contract, dating from the 1st November, 1940, following the invitation of public tenders.
4.	No.


RATIONING-MAPLE SUGAR AND MAPLE SYRUP
Mr. HATFIELD:: 1.	Is the government giving consideration to allowing a ration free distribution of maple sugar and maple syrup?
i	no^'	Provision is being made tokeep the farmers in maple sugar and maple syrup production?


Mr. ABBOTT:: 1.	No.
2.	As a result of numerous discussions with representatives of the maple sugar and maple syrup producers, the following arrangements have been made with a view to keeping the farmers in production.
(a) Effective February 3, the coupon value of maple sugar was raised from one-half pound to 2 pounds, this coupon value to be effective throughout the year; .

(b) During the period February 3 to May 31, 1944, one preserves coupon will purchase 40 fluid ounces of maple syrup, the coupon value reverting to 24 fluid ounces beginning June 1.
The increased coupon value for maple syrup during the period February to May is designed to result in as little interference as possible with producers' normal marketing methods during the period in which the majority of direct producer-consumer sales takes place. Producers will still be able to sell to consumers in gallon containers (1 gallon will cost only 4 coupons), and this type of sale has been further facilitated by advancing the validity date of "D" coupon 16 from March 30 to March 2, so that three "D" coupons will become valid on March 2. In addition, special arrangements have been made under the ration programme for mail order sales, which account for an important part of the production of many producers


GRANITE BAY, B.C., POSTMASTERSHIP
Mr. STOKES:: 1.	Who is the present postmaster at Granite Bay, British Columbia?
2.	When was he appointed to that position?
3.	Who held the position just prior to the. present postmaster?
4.	Why were his services dispensed with?


Mr. MULOCK:: 1.	Henry John Bull.
2.	24th March, 1930.
3.	Mrs. Florence Bull.
4.	Resignation of Mrs. Bull.


VETERANS' LAND ACT-ALBERTA
Mr. SHAW:: 1.	Have any veterans or discharged men been settled under the Veterans' Land Act in the province of Alberta?
2.	Has any land been purchased in Alberta to be used for the settlement of veterans under the Veterans' Land Act?
3.	Is it the intention of the government to purchase large farms and place more than one settler on each such farm?
4.	Have any purchases for the purpose of the type of settlement referred to in question three been made to date?
"Mr. CRERAR:
1.	Yes.
2.	Yes.
3.	No.
4.	No.


MEAT BOARD
Mr. SENN:: 1.	Is the meat board set up under the provisions of order in council P.C. 4187 still in
existence?

Questions
2.	If so, who are its members?
3.	Does the board exercise the power conferred upon it by section 4, subsection 1-C of the above mentioned order in council "to determine the prices which shall be paid to packers or other persons for meat delivered for export"?
4.	Does the board exercise the power conferred upon it by section 4, subsection 1-E of the above mentioned order in council "to fix the minimum price to be paid by packers or other persons for live stock"?


Mr. GARDINER:: 1.	Yes.
2.	Hon. J. G. Taggart, Minister of Agriculture, Saskatchewan, Chairman; S. E. Todd, Managing Director, Industrial and Development Council of Canadian Meat Packers; A. Morin, Associate Deputy Minister, Department of Agriculture, Quebec; L. C. McOuat, General Agricultural Agent, Canadian Pacific Railway.
3.	Yes, for the various classes and grades of meat within the agreements entered into by the governments.
4.	The meat board have never yet deemed it advisable to fix minimum prices for live stock. The board has, however, considered it a primary responsibility to ensure that prices paid to farmers for livestock have been at least equivalent to the prices received by the packers for export product.


Mr. BLACKMORE:: 1.	Who are the members of the meat board?
2.	To what minister are they responsible?
3.	Is it a responsibility of the meat board to purchase from the beef producers the surpluses of beef which might threaten to depress beef prices to the producers?
4.	If so, what classes or grades of beef were purchased by the meat board during the months of December, 1943, and January, 1944, and how much of each grade in each month?
5.	What grades of beef were not purchased by the said board during each of those two months, and why?


Mr. GARDINER:: 1.	Hon. J. G. Taggart, Minister of Agriculture, Saskatchewan, Chairman; S. E. Todd, Managing Director, Industrial and Development Council of Canadian Meat Packers; A. Morin, Associate Deputy Minister, Department of Agriculture, Quebec; L. C. McOuat, General Agricultural Agent, Canadian Pacific Railway.
2.	The Minister of Agriculture.
3.	The meat board stands ready to buy surplus beef at the equivalent of floor prices when it is processed and shipped in accordance with specifications for export.
4.	During December, 1943, 459,466 pounds of cow quality carcass beef were delivered to
the meat board. During January, 1944, 2,048,543 pounds of cow quality carcass beef were delivered to the meat board.
5.	No qualities other than "cow" were purchased by the board, this being all the beef offered to the board in exportable form for shipment during those months.


PUBLIC DEBT
Mr. ESLING:: 1.	What was the total amount of the funded debt of Canada and the unmatured treasury bills as at March 31, 1943?
2.	What was the net amount added to this bj'' the two victory loans in 1943 and by new treasury bills?
3.	What is the total amount of the public debt of the nine provinces of Canada?
4.	What is the total amount of the debts owing to the public by Canadian municipalities?
5.	What proportion of the public debt of each-federal, provincial and municipal-is owing in Canada and what proportion abroad?


Mr. ABBOTT:: 1.	Unmatured funded debt and treasury bills of the Dominion of Canada at March 31, 1943-87,893,478,422.96.
2.	Cash subscriptions-
Fourth victory loan	 81,308,716,650
Fifth victory loan (preliminary)	 81,383,300,000
Increase in amount of treasury bills outstanding... $	30,000,000
Decrease in amount of deposit certificates outstanding	 8 105,000,000
3. The Bank of Canada Statistical Summary estimated that the direct debt (less sinking funds) of the provinces for the fiscal year-ends nearest to December 31, 1942, was
81.892,400,000.
4. The Bank of Canada Statistical Summary estimated that the total outstanding bonded debt and bank loans of Canadian municipalities for the fiscal year-ends nearest to December 31, 1942, was $989,800,000.
5.	Due to the fact that a great part of these securities is in bearer form, it is not possible to state acurately what proportion of the public debt is held in Canada and what proportion is held abroad.


CIVIL AVIATION POLICY-EMPIRE CONFERENCE
Mr. ESLING:: In view of the Prime Minister's announcement that the air policy of Canada was government control of international and transcontinental air lines, has the government considered any change of such policy as a result of the empire conference on air policy as participated in by Hon. C. D. Howe, and the president of the T.C.A.?


Mr. HOWE:: No.
Questions


EMBARGO ON IMPORTATION OF MATERIALS CONTAINING RUBBER
Mr. HAZEN:: 1.	Did the government place an embargo on the importation from the United Kingdom of all marine packing, jointing and insulations containing rubber used by war industries and ships?
2.	Are goods of this kind manufactured in Canada of a sufficiently high standard to meet marine requirements?
3.	Have manufacturers in the United Kingdom of these materials stocks available for shipment to Canada?
4.	If such embargo was imposed, Why was it imposed ? -


Mr. CHEVRIER:: 1.	No.
2.	Yes.
3.	No information.
4.	Answered by No. 1.


RADIO STATION CFAR, FLIN FLON
Mr. NICHOLSON:: 1.	What is the name of the company which owns and operates radio station CFAR at Flin Flon, Manitoba?
2.	What are the names and occupations of the directors?


Mr. HOWE:: 1.	Arctic Radio Corporation, Ltd.
2.	President, Geo. W. Bridgman, lumber merchant, Craigflower Auto Court, Victoria,

Secretary, Joseph R. Cousineau, mechanic, McLeod, Alta.
Directors, Geo. W. Bridgman, Victoria, B.C.; Lily Bridgman (occupation and address not given); J. M. Bridgman, radio engineer, Flin Flon, Man.


SELECTIVE SERVICE AND UNEMPLOYMENT INSURANCE-TORONTO OFFICES
Mr. ROSS (St. Paul's):: 1.	How many local selective service and unemployment insurance offices are there in the city of Toronto?
2.	Where are they located?
3.	What is the grade of each of these offices?
4.	What are the names, positions and home addresses of each of the employees of each of these offices?
5.	What are the salaries and other remuneration of each of these employees?


Mr. MARTIN:: 
E., $1,800.
[Stage Direction]
R.	M. Walker, E. & C.O., grade 3, 2 Fulton St., $1,800.
M.	C. Trimble, E. & C.O., grade 3, 26 St. Joseph St., $1,800.
A. F. Lougheed, E. & C.O., grade 3, 566 Spad'ina Ave., $1,800.
C. B. MacLean, E. & C.O., grade 3, 644 Christie St., $1,800.
B.	Sauriol, E. & C.O., grade 3, 435 Sherbourne St., $1,800.
A.	G. Galpine, E. & C.O., grade 2, 78 Gros-venor St.. $1,500.
W. Pinkus, E. & C.O., grade 3, 544 Crawford St., $1,500.
G.	A. Booker, E. & C.O., grade 2, 64 Wellesley St.. Apt. 106, $1,500.
W. J. Burrows, E. & C.O., grade 1, 122 Brook-dale Ave., $1,200.
P.	A. Pink, E. & C.O., grade 2, 1031 Dufferin St., $1,500.
E.	G. Gowen, E. & C.O., grade 3, 107 St. George St., $1,800.
H.	J. W. Bromley, E. & C.O., grade 2, 219 Dunn Ave., $1,500.
W. R. McArthur, E. & C.O., grade 3, 696 Dufferin St., $1,800.
H. N. Day, E. & C.O., grade 2, 20 Glen Elm Ave., $1,500.
F.	E. Bonwick, E. & C.O., grade 3, 20 Kenwood Ave., $1,800.
M. D. Sturgeon, E. & C.O., grade 2, [DOT] 343 Cedarville Ave., $1,620.
R.	S. Casburn, E. & C.O., grade 1, 121 Lamb Ave., $1,200.
D.	Monie, E. & C.O., grade 2, 101 Melville Ave., $1,800.
W. R. Pitman, E. & C.O., grade 2, 43 Cambridge Ave., $1,800.
C.	G. MacKay, Clerk, grade 3, 132 Blantyre Ave., $1,380.
E.	L. McDonald, E. & C.O., grade 2, 34 Parkwood Ave., $1,500.
W. J. Brick, E. & C.O., grade 2, 559 Sherbourne Ave., $1,500.
Name-Classification-Home Address-Salary
J. Scouse, E. & C.O., grade 1, 19 Wheeler Ave., $1,200.
E.	J. I. Orchard, E. & C.O., grade 1, 31 Madison Ave., $1,200.
M. O'Brian, E. & C.O., grade 2, 250 Heath St. W., $1,500.
S.	G. Jones, E. & C.O., grade 1, 258 Winona Drive, $1,320.
F.	White, E. & C.O., grade 2, 130 Glendale Ave., $1,620.
A.	M. Ridley, Clerk, grade 3, 2 Bracebridge Ave., $1,440.
F.	Campbell, E. & C.O., grade 2, 321 Lonsdale Rd. Apt. D, $1,500.
M. B. Walsh, E. & C.O., grade 2, 415 Walmer Rd., $1,620.
E.	R. Gregory, E. & C.O., grade 2, 241 Silver-birch Ave., $1,620.
W. D. Dougherty, E. & C.O., grade 1, 387 Sherbourne St. Apt. 205, $1,200.
J. J. Monahan, E. & C.O., grade 1, 192 Rush-ton Road, $1,200.
M. G. Chambers, E. & C.O., grade 1, 8 Silver-birch Ave., $1,200.
M. A. Charbonneau, Clerk, grade 3, 57 Howland Ave., $1,380.
A.	J. Sloane, E. & C.O., grade 1, 370 Concord Ave., $1,320. *
M. E. Roberts, E. & C.O., grade 1, 921 St. Clair Ave. W., $1,320.
F.	E. Fenton, E. & C.O., grade 1, 11 Mount Noel Ave., $1,200.
L. J. Jacob, E. & C.O., grade 1, 354 Russell Hill Rd., $1,200.
R.	M. Gray, E. & C.O., grade 1, 64 Strath-allan Blvd., $1,320.
H. D. Skelton, E. & C.O., grade 1, 261 Vaughan Rd. Apt. 30, $1,500.
L.	H. Stinson, E. & C.O., grade 1, 151 Glen-holme Ave., $1,320.
E. R. Rooney, E. & C.O., grade 2, 97 Durie St., Toronto, $1,620.
B.	E. Marcoux, E. & C.O., grade 1, 88 Coody Ave., $1,200.
W. Van Ark, E. & C.O., grade 2, 241 Albany St., $1,500.
H. W. Cheevers, E. & C.O., grade 2, 18 Freeman St., Toronto, $1,500.
J. E. Burch, E. & C.O., grade 1, 55 Lakeview, Apt. 2, $1,320.
W. Wiggins, E. & C.O., grade 2, 91 Oakwood Ave., $1,500.
J- J- Kelly, E. & C.O., grade 1, 61i Waverley Jtvcl., «pl,o00.
*,^„Plenty' E- & C0" grade 2, 845 College St.,
tpljOOU.
D Stepler, E. & C.O., grade 2, Meadonia Hotel, 252 Bloor St. W., $1,500.
H. Davidson, E. & C.O., grade 2, 124 Erskin Ave., $1,500.
S.	R. Sprung, E. & C.O., grade 2, 76 Wool-frey Ave., $1,500.
J. A. Delahay, E. & C.O., grade 2, 238 Maplewood Ave., $1,500.
T.	Hannaford, E. & C.O., grade 2, 266 Greenwood Ave., $1,500.
R.	M. Brown, E. & C.O., grade 2, 2437 Queen St. E., $1,500.
B.	Smith, E. & C.O., grade 2, 599 St. Clair St. W., $1,500.
M.	E. Stone, E. & C.O., grade 2, 79 Lippin-cott St., $1,500.
W. A. Henderson, E. & C.O., grade 2, 71 Sheldrake Blvd., $1,500.
M. F. Rogers, E. & C.O., grade 1, 62 Appleton Ave., $1,320.
Questions
[Stage Direction]
Name-Classification-Home Address-Salary
C.	I. O'Reilly, E. & C.O., grade 2, 118 Queens-bury Ave., $1,500.
R.	Fawcett, E. & C.O., grade 2, 52 St. Nicholas St., $1,500.
M. Salyerds, E. & C.O., grade 1, 433 Sher-bourne St., $1,200.
M. F. Speers, Steno., grade 2, 849 Bloor St. W.. $1,140.
K.	M. Waddington, E. & C.O., grade 1, 160 Kingston Rd., $1,200.
E. Henning, E. & C.O., grade 1, 327 Wood-field Rd., $1,200.
A.	L. McCutcheon, E. & C.O., grade 1, 95 Kirknewton, $1,200.
S.	G. Sharkey, E. & C.O., grade 1, 717 Eglin-ton Ave. W., $1,200.
P. C. Watson, E. & C.O., grade 1, 247 Manor Road E., $1,200.
M. B. McCausland, E. & C.O., grade 1, 10A Gormley Ave., $1,200.
H. K. Farquharson, E. & C.O., grade 1, 229 Russell Hill Rd., $1,200.
L.	Connolly, E. & C.O, grade 1, 148 Bloor St. W, $1,200.
J. E. Clancy, E. & C.O., grade 1, 405A Ronces-valles Ave., $1,200.
J. Sherriff, E. & C.O., grade 1, 166 Millwood Rd,, $1,200.
C.	Grant, E. & C.O. grade 1, 1 Brookdale Ave., apt. 4, $1,320.
D.	C. McLaehlan, E. & C.O. grade 1, 115 Fermanagh Ave., $1,200.
E.	Carr, E. & C.O. grade 1, 27B Rosehill Ave.,
[Stage Direction]
R.	Boyle, Clerk, grade 1, 307 Castlefield Ave., $780.
J. H. Corbeille, Clerk, grade 2, 72 Hastings Ave., $1,140.
J. M. Stevenson, E. & C.O. grade 1, 50 Briar Hill Ave., $1,200.
E.	A. Ferguson, E. & C.O. grade 1, 46 Glen Road, $1,200.
S.	Campbell, E. & C.O. grade 1, 23 Pavler Cres., $1,200.
R. J. McCoy, Clerk, grade 2, 116 Lyall Ave., $1,080.
T.	Kelly, E. & C.O. grade 1, 573A Vaughan Road, $1,200.
T.	B. O'Donnell, E. & C.O. grade 1, 66 Niagara Street, $1,200.
C.	Sanford, E. & C.O. grade 1, 55 Massey Street, $1,200.
D.	Scantlebury, E. & C.O. grade 1, 589 Markham Street, $1,200.
M.	E. Mulholland, E. & C.O. grade 1, 99 Bel-haven Road, $1,200.
R. C. Crosdale, Principal clerk, 137 Waverley Road, $1,920.
J. McGregor, Head clerk, 554 Millwood Road,
[Stage Direction]
P. Clodman, Clerk, grade 4, 38 Barton St., apt. 18, $1,620.
W. Bagnato, Clerk, grade 4, 1014 Briar Hill Ave., $1,620.
J. J. McCabe, Clerk, grade 3, 142 Northcliffe Blvd., $1,380.
B.	Hahl, Clerk, grade 3, 33 Deer Park Crescent, $1,440.
F.	Berrin, Stenographer, grade 2, 164 Robert Street. $1,080.
F.	W. McGregor, Clerk, grade 3, 959 Broadview Ave., $1,620.
J. H. Willett, Clerk, grade 3, 16 Doris Street, Lansing, Ontario, $1,440.
E.	II. Carr, Clerk, grade 3, 18 Ferrier Ave., $1,380.
(Mr. Martin.]
Name-Classification-Home Address-Salary
C.	A. L. Mintram, Clerk, grade 3, 154 Pacific Ave., $1,440.
F.	M. McGregor, Clerk, grade 3, 897 Avenue Road, $1,380.
H. M. Pitts, Clerk, grade 3, 30 Lansdale Road, $1,380.
D.	Elsam, Clerk, grade 2, 95 Heath Street E., $1,080.
E.	Dowd, Clerk, grade 2, 561 Jarvis Street, $1,140.
H. H. Graham, E. & C.O. grade 2, 114 Malvern Ave., $1,620.
W. B. Major, E. & C.O. grade 2, 408 Roehamp-ton Ave., $1,500.
W. D. S. Fraser, E. & C.O. grade 2, 84 College Street, $1,620.
W. G. Evans, E. & C.O. grade 2, 202 Oak-mount Rd., $1,620.
F.	L. Wright, E. & C.O. grade 1, 137 Madison Ave., $1,320.
F. M. Wright, E. & C.O., grade 2, 61 Albany Ave., $1,620.
M.	M. Clelland, E. & C.O, grade 2, 103 Glendale Ave., $1,500.
N.	E. Graham, E. & C.O. grade 2, 870 Millwood Rd., $1,500.
H. M. Loree, E. & C.O. grade 1, 524 Perth Ave., $1,320.
Geo. Harrington, Clerk, grade 3, 74 Chester Ave., $1,440.
E. E. Bovver. Stenographer, grade 2, 41 Brunswick Ave., $1,080.
R. C. Hill, E. & C.O. grade 1, 1067 St. Clemens Ave., $1,320.
Alpha Ruffell, Clerk, grade 2, 20 Preston St., Birchcliffe, $1,080.
E.	F. Hull, E. & C.O. grade 1, 163 Humbercrest Blvd., $1,200.
L. E. Cawthorpe, E. & C.O. grade 1, 57 Kendal Ave., $1,200.
J. Sorton, E. & C.O. grade 1, 82 Lawlor Ave., $1,800.
M.	M. Clark, E. & C.O. grade 1, 44 Foxbar Rd., $1,200.
M. L. Burke, E. & C.O. grade 1, 303 Russell Hill Rd., $1,200.
F.	Lunan, Clerk, grade 1, 318 Milverton Blvd., $840.
E.	Tompkins, E. & C.O. grade 1, 120 Bloor St. E., $1,500.
G.	Morgan, E. & C.O. grade 1, 77 Winchester St., apt. 8, $1,200.
A.	Whitten, E. & C.O. grade 1, 32 Queen St. E.,
[Stage Direction]
H.	O. Martin, E. & C.O. grade 1, 77 Wellesley St., $1,200.
M. F. Carey, Clerk, grade 1, 14 Glen Morris, $780.
R. J. David, E. & C.O. grade 1, 227 Quebec Ave., $1,320.
D.	Wylie, E. & C.O. grade 1, 11 Kendal Ave.,
[Stage Direction]
A.	Steele, E. & C.O. grade 1, 173 Nairn Ave.,
[Stage Direction]
B.	R. Bromley, E. & C.O. grade 1, 68 Goodwood Ave., $1,200.
M. C. Langford, E. & C.O. grade 1, 48 Maxwell Ave., $1,200.
M. M. Brady, E. & C.O. grade 1, 439 Sher-boume St., $1,200.
G.	O. Lodder, Clerk, grade 2, 119 Woodfield Rd, $1,140.
F.	Ware, Clerk, grade 1, 302 Windermere Ave, $720.
E.	M. McFarland, E. & C.O. grade 1, 24 Beaehview Crescent, $1,200.

Questions
Name-Classification-Home Address-Salary
B .M. P. Shearer, E. & C.O. grade 1, 126 York-ville Ave., $1,320.
A.	E. Atkinson, E. & C.O. grade 1, 265 Dew-hurst Blvd., $1,200.
H.	J. Denton, E. & C.O., grade 1, 477 Bayview Ave., $1,320.
E. Prince, Clerk, grade 1, 547 Roxton Rd., $720.
E. D. Farr, E. & C.O., grade 1, 148 Hampton Ave., $1,200.
B.	Normandy, E. & C.O., grade 1, 102 Tyndall Ave., $1,200.
J. P. Hagerman, E. & C.O., grade 1, 5 Early St„ $1,200.
T.	J. Caffrey, E. & C.O., grade 1, 339 Gladstone Ave.. $1,200.
E.	L. Williamson, Clerk, grade 2, 270 Logan Ave., $1,140.
F. R. Thomson, E. & C.O., grade 1, 273 Runnymede Rd., $1,200.
M.	Hobson, Clerk, grade 2, 214 Westwood Ave., $1,080.
S. M. Simonoff, E. & C.O., grade 1, 518 Markham St,., $1,320.
V.	Moore, E. & C.O., grade 1, 43 Warren Rd.,
[Stage Direction]
J. A. Yilleneuve, Clerk, grade 2, 137 Lee Ave., $1,500.
R. S. Thornton, Clerk, grade 2, 9 Humewood Drive, apt. 6, $1,080.
D.	Dalton, Clerk, grade 1A, 255 Keele St., $960.
T.	J. Cassidy, Clerk, grade 2, 22 Grosvenor' St., $1,200.
G.	Scolnick, Clerk, grade 2, 34 Glenholme Ave., $1,080.
R.	Davids, Clerk, grade 2, 336 Sheldrake Blvd., $1,500.
D.	M. Pidgeon, Clerk, grade 1A, 82 Birch-mount Rd., $900.
L.	Chappie, Clerk, grade 1, 314 Lonsdale Rd., apt. 8, $780.
S.	A. Beresford, Clerk, grade 2, 76 Pembroke St.. $1,080.
N.	Naysmith, Clerk, grade 2, 108 Rosethorn ave., $1,140
A.	Dezenhouse, Clerk, grade 2, 403 Queen St. W„ $840.
B.	H. MacLaren, Clerk, grade 2, 294 Kennedy Ave., Belfour, $1,080.
A. T. Lawson, Clerk, grade 2, 31 Melrose Ave., $1,080.
J. Godfrey, Clerk, grade 2, 291 St. Clements Ave., $1,080.
A. M. Quinn, Steno., grade 2, 153 Hopedale Ave., $1,080.
J. J. Lynch, Clerk, grade 2, 169 Sackville St,, $1,080.
M.	H. Clubine, Clerk, grade 2, 81 Belsize Drive, $1,080.
M. E. Williams, Clerk, grade 2, 142 Wellesley Cres., $1,080.
E.	Dods, Clerk, grade 1A, 6-38th St., Long Branch, $900.
J. Gleave, Clerk, grade 2, 35 Roslin Ave., $1,140.
E. A. Treble, Clerk, grade 2, 32 Dingwall Ave., $1,080.
P. G. Noble, Clerk, grade 2, 159 Castlefield Ave., $1,080.
W.	J. French, Clerk, grade 2, 66 Brookmount Rd., $1,080.
E.	Maughan, Clerk, grade 2, 33 Ascot Ave., $1,080.
F.	H. Puttenham, Clerk, grade 2, 99 Leuty Ave., $1,080.
N. Corcoran, Clerk, grade 2, 59 Charles St. E. $1,140.
J. N. Cornfield, Clerk, grade 2, 52 Grenadiei Rd., $1,140.
G.	Ball, Clerk, grade 1, 163 Arlingt on Ave.
$780.	'
B.	Saunders, Clerk, grade 2, 124 Glen Rd., $1,140.
E. A. Ballantyne, Clerk, grade 2, 636 Danforth Ave., apt. 4, $1,080.
R. W. King, Clerk, grade 2, 101 Hocken Ave., $1,080.
V.	N. Jimpson, Clerk, grade 1A, 265 Boon Ave., $960.
E. McMahon, Clerk, grade 2, 184 Cottingbam St., $1,080.
R. P. Holstock, Clerk, grade 1A, 230 Silver Birch Ave., $900.
I.	Ross, Clerk, grade 2, 387 Dundas St. W., $1,080.
W.	I. Maisonneuve, Clerk, grade 2, 81 Isabella St., apt. 1, $1,080.
H.	Rainnie, Clerk, grade 1, 1143 Davenport Rd., $780.
H.	I. Walter, Clerk, grade 2, 1205 Bathurst St., $1,140.
L.	Wellwood, Clerk, grade 2, 489 St. Germaine Ave., $1,140.
J.	A. Tansley, Clerk, grade 2, 164 Cumberland
St., apt. 10. $1,080.
II. Haig, Clerk, grade 2, 34 Roxborough St. E., $1,080.
M.	L. Wallace, Clerk, grade 2, 528 Russell Hill Rd., $1,140.
E. Johnston, Clerk, grade 2, 84 Willow Ave., $1,080.
J. Tannack, Clerk, grade 1A, 36 Symington Ave., $900.
C.	Burch, Clerk, grade 2, 43 DeForest Rd., $1,080.
I.	L. Mackey, Clerk, grade 2, 91 Inglewood Drive, $1,080.
M. Cudmore, Clerk, grade 2, 1585 Dufferin St,. $840.
E. M. Fleming, Clerk, grade 2, 2297 Gerrard St. E., $1,140.
I.	M. Reid, Clerk, grade 1, 37 Glenview Ave., $780
L.	M. Cain, Clerk, grade 2, 601 Palmerston Ave., $1,080.
C.	Bowman, Switchboard operator, grade 2, 755 Markham St., $1,020.
M.	E. Wideman, Clerk, grade 2, 135 Warden Ave., $1,080.
E.	Turner, Clerk, grade 2, 3015A Dundas St. W„ $1,140.
H. Swift, Clerk, grade 2, 24 O'Haro Ave., $1,140.
R.	W. Morrison, Clerk, grade 2, 251 Ellis Ave., $1,080.
F.	Ross, Clerk, grade 2, 344 King St. W., $1,140.
E. Harrison, Clerk, grade 2, 299 Kenilworth Ave., $1,140.
A. J. Boase, Clerk, grade 1, 205 Booth Ave., $780.
J.	Bannerman, Clerk, grade 1, 138 Merton St., $780.
N.	Rosenfarb, Clerk, grade 1, 357 Queen St., $780.
E. F. Thompson, Clerk, grade 1, 795 Vaughan Rd., $840.
L. Thomas, Clerk, grade 1, 48 Alcina Ave., R.R. 1, York Mills, $720.
S.	Lee, Clerk, grade 1, 29 Ranee Ave., $840.
Questions
[Stage Direction]
Name-Classification-Home Address-Salary
V.	E. Stubbert, Clerk, grade 1, 174 Sunnyside Ave., $780.
S.	R. Greene, Clerk, grade 1, 548A College St., $720.
L.	M. Fairbrass, Clerk, grade 1, 906 Greenwood Ave., $780,
S.	Campbell, Clerk, grade 1, 238 Balliol St., $720.
M.	A. Griffin, Clerk, grade 1, 207 Fern Ave., $720.
E. M. Bond, Clerk, grade 1, 138 Cumberland St., $780.
M. K. Ryan, Clerk, grade 1, 58 Rose Park Drive, $840.
E. E. Heney, Clerk, grade 1, 141 Yorkville Ave., $720.
M. F. Jones, Clerk, grade 1, 250 Oakwood Ave., Apt. 12, $720.
J.	M. Sinclair, Clerk, grade 1, 109 Spring-hurst Ave., $720.
G.	M. Williams, Clerk, grade 1, 270 Balliol
St., $840.
M. G. Hutty, Clerk, grade 1, 138 Broadway Ave., $840.
E. Klein, Clerk, grade 1, 44 Isabella St., $720. A. Cowan, Clerk, grade 1, 217 Greenwood Ave., $720.
J. Archer, Clerk, grade 1, 220 Evelyn Ave., $720.
A.	Smith, Clerk, grade 1, 125 Benson Ave., $720.
W.	Mountjoy, Clerk, grade 1, 7 Belhaven Rd., $780.
M. W. Lawson, Clerk, grade 1, 8 Chambers Ave., $720.
J. Nieklin, Clerk, grade 1, Y.W.C.A., 18 Elm St., $840.
B.	Soltz, Clerk, grade 1, 245 Rusholme Rd., $840.
P. Allen. Clerk, grade 1, 854 Ossington Ave., $780.
R. Coburn, Clerk, grade 1, 77 Geoffrey St., $780.
G.	Nield, Clerk, grade 1, 241 Dunraven Drive, $720.
E.	W. Waltho, Clerk, grade 1, 140 Balliol St., $780.
J.	Haynes, Clerk, grade 1, 54 Raglan Ave., $840.
F.	Walford, Clerk, grade 1, 132 Caledonia Rd., $720.
J.	B. Bardwell, Clerk, grade 1, 76 Hogarth Ave., $780.
F. Latten, Clerk, grade 1, 368 Indian Grove, $720.
L.	Morgan, Clerk, grade 1, 28 Silverbirch Ave., $780.
J. Carter, Clerk, grade 1, 305 Dupont St., Apt. 2, $720.
A.	Buckley, Clerk, grade 1, 23 Harvard Ave., $780.
0.	Kertson, Clerk, grade 1, 1595 Bathurst St., $720.
1.	Blue, Clerk, grade 1, 88 Galley Ave., $780. E. Trunks, Clerk, grade 1, 595 Dovereourt
fed., $720.
P.	A. Wilcock, Clerk, grade 1, 89 Salem Ave., $720.
H.	E. Wells, Clerk, grade 1, 157 Swanwick
Ave., $780.
M.	G. Stephens, Clerk, grade 1, 232 Willow
Ave., $840.
B.	Youell, Clerk, grade 1, 193 Dowling Ave., $840.
I.	Perry, Clerk, grade 1, 199 Elm St., $780.

M. I. S. Gillies, Clerk, grade 1, 132 Rawleigh Ave., $720.
Y. Jackson, Clerk, grade 1, 480 Victoria Park Ave., $840.
D.	M. Duerden, Clerk, grade 1, 78 Grosvenor St., $780.
E.	V. Evans, Clerk, grade 1, 46 Avoea Ave., $780.
L. M. Watson, Clerk, grade 1, 153 Briar Hill Ave., $720.
W. Rogosingki, Clerk, grade 1, 758 Adelaide St. W., $840.
K.	E. Hayford, Clerk, grade 1, 336 Woodfield Rd., $720.
L.	R. McEvoy, Clerk, grade 1, 42 Blandford St., $720.
C.	B. Cormack, Clerk, grade 1, 12 Cherrynook Gdns., $780.
A. Will, Clerk, grade 1, 34 Victoria Park Ave., $720.
E. Matthews, Clerk, grade 1, 16 Wallace Ave., $780.	'
M.	Gerard, Clerk, grade 1, 54 Kalmar Ave., $720.
H.	D. Laurie, Clerk, grade 1, 159 Rosemount Ave., $780.	,
M. W. Dixon, Clerk, grade 1, 497 St. Clair Ave., $840.
E. Dunn, Clerk, grade 1, 62 Pleasant Blvd., $840.
C.	Leach, Clerk, grade 1, 43 Fairview Ave., $720.
E. C. Robertson, Clerk, grade 1, 23 Surrey Place, $720.
M. Nieoletti, Clerk, grade 1, 35 Bowden Ave., $720.
L.	Quin, Clerk, grade 1, 193 Dowling Ave., $780.
H. I. E. Furlong, Clerk, grade 1, 125 Bathurst St., $720.
S.	Burack, Clerk, grade 1, 275 Crawford St., $720.	„	,
M.	J. O'Bryon, Clerk, grade 1, 350 Bartlett Ave., $720.
V. Hamilton, Clerk, grade 1, 72 Pembroke St., $840.
D.	Beallor, Clerk, grade 1, 9 Lippincott Ave.,
$720.	T
E.	L. Baker, Clerk, grade 1, 11 Lmsmore Cres., $720.
J.	Lavis, Clerk, grade 1. 50 Gloucester St., $720.
L. Adams, Clerk, grade 1, 417 Kmgswood Rd., $720.
R. Braithwaite, Clerk, grade 1, 24 Grange Ave., $720.
R. M. Carlisle, Clerk, grade 1, 282 Naim Ave.,
[Stage Direction]
G. M. Dinsmore, Clerk, grade 1, 91 Withrow Ave., $720.
E. Randle, Clerk, grade 1, 218 Keele St., $780.
A.	P. Pierce, Clerk, grade 1, 66 Gledhill Ave., $720.
I. Saiger, Clerk, grade 1, 153 Holland Park Ave., $780.
G. Rappaport, Clerk, grade 1, 16 Springhurst Ave., $780.
I. Murphy, Stenographer, grade 1, 425 Jarvis St., $720.
R. H. Veal, Stenographer, grade 1, 782 Logan Ave., $720.
R. Salome, Stenographer, grade 1, 1 Eaton Ave., $840.
P. A. Lock, Switchboard operator, 76 Woody-crest Ave., $1,020.
B.	B. Thompson, Switchboard operator, 145 Arlington Ave., apt. 4, $1,020.

Questions as Orders for Returns
Name-Classification-Home Address-Salary
G.	E. Greenbury, Switchboard operator, 23 Avonlea Blvd., $1,020.
X.	Lind, Switchboard operator, 196 Eglinton Ave. E., $1,020.
F.	McKinnon, Switchboard operator, 318 Dovercourt Rd., $720.
A R. Phillips, Switchboard operator, 957A Bloor St. W., $1,020.
J.	J. Garnett, Stenographer, grade 3, 113 Walker Ave., $1,380.
M. M. Allen, Stenographer, grade 2, 1055 Logan Ave., $1,320.
C.	J. Myers, Stenographer, grade 2, 316 Kenilworth Ave., $1,200.
M. E. Huntley, Stenographer, grade 2, 181 Pearson Ave., $1,140.
E. Weinbrom, Stenographer, grade 2, 95 Brunswick Ave., $1,080.
E. J. Underwood, Stenographer, grade 2, 43 Peterboro Ave., $1,080.
S. M. Foran, Stenographer, grade 2, 743 Euclid Ave., $1,080.
W. L. Carr, Stenographer, grade 1, 61 Cowan Ave., $780.	.
R. Zener, Stenographer, grade 2, 106 Baldwin St., $1,080.	,r ,
V	Patch, Stenographer, grade 2, 141 Monarch
Park Ave., $1,080.	, „ „„„
Y.	M. Weatherup, Stenographer, grade 2, 329 Brock Ave., $1,080.
I. G. Brisley, Stenographer, grade 2, 1 Glen ForeBt Rd., $1,080.
M. K. Cameron, Stenographer, grade 2, 42 Charles St. E., 1080.
V	N Barrett, Steno., grade 1, 42 Blantyre
Ave., $720.	.
Ann Miller, Steno., grade 1, 102 Glencairn Ave., $720.	.
R C Graziadei, Steno., grade 1, 193 Beatrice St., $840.	„	,
P Goldberg, Steno., grade 1, 18 Borden St., $720.	„
L. V. Wilmot, Steno.. grade 1, 85 Gwynne Ave., $720.	.	.
G.	Pechenick, Steno., grade 1, 38 Lippmcolt
St., $780.	,
B.	L. Johnson, Steno., grade 1, 170 Clinton
St., $720.	_
D.	Wagman, Steno., grade 1, 54 Huron St.,
$720.	.	.L. Worden,	Steno.,	grade	1,	21	Durie	St.,
W Cox, Steno., grade 1, 32 St. Joseph St., $780.
I.	G. Edmonds, Steno., grade 1, 107 Glenayr Road, $840.	„E.	IX. Miller, Steno., grade	1,	88 Carlton	St.,
H D. Rappaport, Steno., grade 1, 93 North-cliffe Blvd., $780.
F.	Cohen, Steno., grade 1, 224 Beatrice St., $720.
C.	E. Birrell, Steno., grade 1, 204 Quebec Ave., $780.
E. Corscadden, Steno., grade 1, 45 Dear-bourne Ave., $720.
P. McIntosh, Steno., grade 1, 16 Roseneath Gardens, $780.
E. C. Turnquist, Steno., grade 1, 100 Vaughan Road, Apt. 20, $800.
B. H. Austin, Steno., grade 1, 1529 Bathurst St., $780.
B. Goldman, Steno., grade 1, 354 Shaw St., $780.
Name-Classification-Home Address-Salary M. M. Korol, Steno., grade 1, 730 Richmond St. W„ $720.	.
M. Nicol, Steno., grade 1, 10 Jillson Ave., $780.
S. Nordstrand, Steno., grade 1, 1844 Davenport Road, $780.
G.	Message, Steno., grade 1, 153 Dowling Ave., $780.
Mrs. M. Williams. Steno., grade 1,	228
Windermere Ave., $780.
U.	D. Lovell, Steno., grade 1, 143 Borden St., $720.
R. Graham, Typist, grade 1, 301 Salem Ave., $720.
R. Lambie, Office boy, 237 Bartlett Ave., $600.
D.	Schleiffer, Office boy, 825A College St., $600. .
C.	Warne, Cleaner & helper, 103 McGill St., $1,080.


Mr. FRASER (Peterborough West):: 1.	(a) How many members of the Canadian army, permanent force, enlisted prior to August 31, 1939, have been commisisonedi as officers;
(b)	Of those commissioned, how many now hold the ranks, acting or confirmed, of (1) captain, (2) major, (3) It.-colonel, and. (4) colonel;
(c)	How many of these are serving in Canada at National Defence headquarters, district camp commands, training centres, and/or other home war establishments;
(d)	How many of these are graded for pay as classified in F.R. & I. as staff or specialist officers?
2.	(a) How many members of the permanent force, not holding commissions, prior to August 31. 1939, have been retired on pension as officers;
(b)	How many permanent force officers commissioned since August 31, 1939, who are below medical category to proceed overseas, have been retained in the service, and why are they retained;	.
(c)	How many in a medical category qualifying them for overseas service have been retained in Canada, and why?
3.	(a) How many such officers, commisisoned as quartermasters or specialists without passing any examinations, have been granted the rank of major or higher, and. on what grounds;
(b) Is it compulsory for officers in the permanent force to undergo regular medical examinations if they have less than fifteen years' service;
(e)	Have any been kept in the permanent
force without regular medical examinations, and if so, what number?	[DOT]


GENERAL ELECTION 1940-RED DEER CONSTITUENCY
Mr. SHAW:: 1.	Who was the returning officer for the electoral district of Red Deer at the time of the general election of 1940?



Questions as Orders jor Returns
2.	What firm or individual was given the contract for the printing of the voters' lists, ballots, etc., in connection with the above electoral district in 1940?
3.	Did the firm or individual referred to in question two have the facilities necessary for doing all the work in connection with the said printing? If not, what part of the work was done by another firm or individual?
4.	Did any firm or individual located outside the electoral district of Red Deer do part of the work in connection with the printing referred to above?
5.	If so, what are their names, and what was the reason for part of the printing being done outside of the electoral district of Red Deer?
6.	Is it the policy of the government to have all the printing of voters' lists, ballots, etc., done within the electoral district concerned provided facilities are available within the district for the handling of such work?


BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS
Mr. ESLING:: 1.	How many boards and commissions have been appointed by each department of the government since Canada entered the war?
2.	How many employees are on the payroll of each board and commission?
3.	What is the total payroll of each board and commission ?


CANADIAN FORCES-UNIFORMS
Mr. CRUICKSHANK:: 1.	What is the cost of a walking out uniform for other ranks in the army and air force, (a) tunic; (b) trousers; (c) shirt; (d) tie; (e) shoes; (f) cap?
2.	How many of each are issued, and at what intervals?
3.	What clothing is issued to a soldier on his discharge?
4.	What is the cost of clothing per annum for each inmate of the penitentiaries?
5. What clothing items are issued to each convict per year?
6. What clothing is issued per annum to A.R.P. wardens; what is the cost of each article?



CANADIAN FORCES


[Stage Direction]
Mr. CRUICKSHANK;
1.	How many members of the armed forces are serving in Canada in the following ranks: brigadier, major-general, lieutenant-general, and what is the rate of pay and allowance in each case?
2.	How many members of the armed forces are serving in Canada in the following ranks: air commodore, air vice-marshal, air marshal, air chief marshal, and what is the rate of pay for each?

Mr. SINCLAIR:: What clothing allowance, if any, is granted to officers of the armed services ,(a) on retirement; (b) on resignation of their commissions?



EMBARGO ON IMPORTATION OF ASBESTOS PRODUCTS

Mr. HAZEN:: 1.	Did the government place an embargo on the importation of asbestos cloth and any other asbestos products from the United Kingdom?
2.	If so, when was it imposed, and why?
3.	Was a survey made to determine what stocks of asbestos cloth and asbestos material were available in Canada for ship repairs and ship construction prior to the embargo being imposed?
4.	What quantity of asbestos cloth and other asbestos materials was there on hand in Canada at the time the embargo was imposed?
5.	Is such an embargo now in force?



MOTIONS FOR PAPERS


Mr. BURTON:: For a copy of all correspondence, reports, recommendations, applications and other documents in the possession of the Post Office Department in connection with the appointment of a postmaster at Dafoe, Saskatchewan, during the past six months.


Mr. MULOCK:: Subject to the usual reservation, Mr. Speaker.


Gordon Graydon: May I ask the minister
what are "the usual reservations"?


Mr. COLDWELL:: I was going to ask the same thing.


William Pate Mulock: So far as this motion is
concerned, the reservation is that the reports of officials in the department are confidential and need not be produced unless it is considered in the public interest to do so. That is a -matter which has been discussed many times in the house.


Major James William Coldwell: It is only confidential
as between the official and the minister, is it not-not between official and official? We would like to have all these documents brought down.


William Pate Mulock: No. That would defeat
the very object of the reservation.


Mr. HOMUTH:: It certainly would.


William Pate Mulock: An official in a district
reports to the district director, who in turn

Motions I or Papers
reports to the assistant deputy minister or the deputy minister in Ottawa, after which these papers are submitted to the minister.


Major James William Coldwell: This is something new,
Mr. Speaker; I never before heard that proviso made to a motion of this kind. The Prime Minister will be able to tell us if it is the' practice.


William Lyon Mackenzie King: One of the
oldest rules of parliament is that correspondence between a minister and officials of his department, or between officials of departments on departmental matters, are confidential and need not be brought down by the minister unless he feels it is in the public interest to have them brought down. I was going to suggest, Mr. Speaker, that we might assume that all orders which are passed are passed subject to that reservation without any specific announcement being made to that effect.


Gordon Graydon: I do not know whether
I am in entire agreement with the Prime Minister on that last statement. Very often ministers say, in assenting to these motions, "subject to the usual reservation," and this question has to be asked. Is there a regulation or rule which applies as the Prime Minister suggests? If there is, I am quite in agreement with him that there is not much use in wasting words in these various discussions and saying "with the usual reservations". I have heard it so often when anybody asks a question.


[Stage Direction]
Motion agreed to.

Mr. DIEFENBAKER:: For a copy of all letters, communications, reports or other documents dated between October 2, 1939, and August 6, 1943, wherein one James Clark, of Toronto, formerly an inspector of or in the employ of the Department of National Defence, and/or the inspection board of the United Kingdom and Canada, alleged or complained that army boots of inferior quality or manufacture were being manufactured for or supplied to the government by the firms named by him. together with a copy of all letters received by the Minister of National Defence, or the acting minister, from the said James Clark, and/or anyone on his behalf, relative to his complaints with regard thereto or requesting an investigation thereof, and the replies made thereto since August 6, 1943, to date hereof.


William Chisholm Macdonald: Stand.


Karl Kenneth Homuth: Mr. Speaker, why should a motion like this stand? It is perfectly obvious what it means. There has been publicity 100-35J
in the papers about it. I do not know why it should be asked that a motion like this should stand.


Mr. SPEAKER:: Stand.


Karl Kenneth Homuth: Of course we have no rights.



ORDERS IN COUNCIL AUTHORIZING CONSTRUCTION OP ALL-WEATHER ROADS IN ONTARIO

Mr. MARSHALL:: For 1. a copy of order in council P.C. 10145, dated November 10, 1942, authorizing the payment to the province of Ontario of a grant for the construction of an all-weather road from, (a) Ramsay, on the Canadian Pacific Railway, to the property of the Jerome Gold Mines Limited; (b) Missanabie, to the property of the Renabie Mines Limited.
2. Copy of P.C. 3197, dated April 19, 1943, authorizing the payment to the province of Ontario for the construction of an all-weather road from Savant Lake Station to the property of the St. Anthony Gold Mines Limited.



POTATOES


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. P. C. BLACK (Cumberland):: I am getting complaints from Nova Scotia that potatoes in the larger centres arc in short supply, and I should like to ask the Minister of Finance or the Minister of Agriculture whether steps are being taken to see that the larger centres in Nova Scotia have an adequate supply or a fairer distribution of potatoes. There was a short crop in Nova Scotia and Prince Edward Island last year, and it is reported that this crop-


Some hon. MEMBERS:: Order.


Percy Chapman Black: -has been largely controlled and held in storage or diverted to central Canada, with rumours of a black market, with the result that centres in Nova Scotia are not getting an adequate supply.


Some hon. MEMBERS:: Order.


William Lyon Mackenzie King: I am only right in directing the attention of the house to the fact that a practice is growing up which has not prevailed in the past, I will not say, in the very recent past, but which certainly did not prevail in previous parliaments, of hon. members taking advantage of the opportunity there is on the orders of the day to ask a question, to make a speech of considerable length at
Motions for Papers

the time of so doing. That is not in accordance with the rules of the house and should not be permitted, and if His Honour the Speaker rules that a question should be regarded as a notice of a question to be placed on the order paper or should be asked by itself to the exclusion of all else, His Honour should be supported by the house in asserting the rule; otherwise the business of the house is going to be delayed, and what is worse, a state of confusion arise from day to day in the minds of hon. members before we get on with the real business of the house, later in the afternoon. I would ask of hon. members that any questions they wish to ask should as far as possible be handed in to the Clerk and placed on the order paper. Now and then emergencies may arise where obviously there is necessity for an immediate answer to some question, and with the permission of the house the government would in such cases be only too ready to give an answer if it is possible to do so, but advantage must not be taken of the rules of the house to permit of hon. members raising a discussion even before the minister has had an opportunity of knowing what the question is which is going to be discussed, nor should hon. members take advantage of a rule unduly to prolong the business of the house.


Percy Chapman Black: Mr. Speaker, if you will permit me; I wish to respect the rules of the house, but this is a very important matter from the standpoint of consumers, distributors and suppliers.


Some hon. MEMBERS:: Order.


Percy Chapman Black: I made a very short explanation of the question which I was asking, and I sent a copy of it to the Minister of Finance as he took his seat.


William Lyon Mackenzie King: Let it stand as a notice of the question to be answered at another time.


Thomas Vien: In connection with these oral questions, I would observe that during the past two weeks the rule has been abused to a certain extent. Hon. members asking a question must realize that the question which they are asking should be of immediate importance, to which an answer is required immediately, and is asked orally only because, if it were put on the order paper, the opportunity of applying a remedy in respect of the subject matter might in the meanwhile be gone. In Beauchesne, third edition, paragraph 297, it is stated:

A certain number of oral questions are permitted in practice by members, without notice, before the orders of the day are called; but these are merely allowed by courtesy in connection with the business of the house or with very urgent and important matters of public concern. They are always brief, no debate being permitted, and the replies are as concise as possible. The minister interrogated may reply at once or may direct that the usual notice be given. Such questions are governed by the same rules of order as questions of which notice has been given.
And again:
Questions asked orally on the orders of the day being called must not be prefaced by the reading of letters, telegrams, newspaper extracts or preambles of any kind. When a member, on the 18th February, 1936, said: "I should like to ask a question of the Minister of National Revenue based upon a circular letter which was sent out by the . . . company to its dealers in my constituency. This letter is dated at Saskatchewan and reads: x x x." Mr. Speaker said:-"I do not think the hon. gentleman should read the letter; he should put his question directly." The member:	"I
must read the letter in order to make my question intelligible. This is a very short letter." The Speaker:	"I do not think the hon.
gentleman has a right to read the letter. He should put his question directly, as to what government intends to do." (The letter was not read.)
If any hon. member regards a particular matter of such importance as to justify an immediate answer, and wishes to put to the government a question based upon a newspaper article, he should not read the article but should simply use it as the basis of his question. Moreover, he should put his question as concisely as possible. The minister then, if he is in a position to answer the question, may do so; if not, he may take it as a notice. This point has been brought to the attention of the house on several occasions by myself, and though I dislike very much interfering with the freedom of hon. members in asking questions that are of some degree of urgency, I must nevertheless insist upon the observance of the rule.


Karl Kenneth Homuth: Before the orders of the day are called-I trust I shall be in order- may I ask the Minister of Finance whether, in view of the shortage of potatoes in the larger centres of Nova Scotia, the government will see to it that there is a fair distribution?


Mr. ISNOR:: If the hon. gentleman who has just spoken can make reference to this subject-


Some hon. MEMBERS:: Order.


Gordon Benjamin Isnor: -I think I should have the same privilege.

War Appropriation-General McNaughton


Some hon. MEMBERS:: Order.


Gordon Benjamin Isnor: I brought this same matter before the government weeks ago and it received immediate attention so far as Halifax is concerned.


Thomas Vien: The question is prefaced by a statement of fact which may or may not be correct. I do not think it is a matter of such urgency as to require an immediate answer and it should be placed on the order paper.


Mr. GILLIS:: May I direct a question to the Minister of Finance. Is the wartime prices and trade board contemplating any action to relieve the shortage of potatoes in Nova Scotia? This situation has existed for two years and it is serious right now.	_


Mr. ILSLEY:: This is the same question that was put before.


Thomas Vien: The question has been repeated in different forms. It should be placed on the order paper.


Mr. MACKENZIE (Vancouver Centre):: I would point out, Mr. Speaker, that order No. 3 had already been called; the Clerk Assistant had begun to read that order. We had commenced a specific order. These questions are therefore completely out of order if we are to abide by the rules of the house.


Thomas Vien: The hon. gentleman rose to ask the question when the Clerk Assistant had read the order. I would not deprive an hon. member of his opportunity on that ground.


Gordon Graydon: Let us not be too
technical.



WAR APPROPRIATION BILL


[Stage Direction]
The house resumed from Tuesday, February 15, consideration in committee of a resolution to grant to His Majesty certain sums of money for the carrying out of measures consequent upon the existence of a state of war - Mr. Ilsley-Mr. Bradette in the chair.

Gordon Graydon: Yesterday at the request of the Prime Minister, I, with three other members of this house, met him and the three defence ministers, as well as the Under-Secretary of State for External Affairs, in a private conference. At this interview the Prime Minister read to us what we understood to be the
essential parts of the recent correspondence and other documents bearing upon the McNaughton situation.
As leader of the opposition I have certain responsibilities and obligations to this house and to the nation, and I conceive it to be my duty to make my position perfectly clear at this time. The background relevant to this picture extends over more than four years of war. Obviously a review of the more recent events could not place us in complete possession of the facts. We were told enough, however. for me to form the opinion that the Minister of National Defence in the present debate has not told the whole story. In saying that to the members of this committee and to the people of Canada I feel that I am discharging any obligations which I as leader of the opposition may have in this instance.
The responsibility now passes back to and remains with the government as to whether they will disclose the whole story fully to parliament and to the people. They and they alone are fully possessed of the background and facts. The responsibility is theirs and theirs alone. No one can share it with them. I invite the Prime Minister to make known his government's decision on this matter now.


William Lyon Mackenzie King: May I say to my hon. friend, I am only too happy to reply to his request to make known immediately the government's position on what he has described as the "McNaughton situation" or "this matter". The Minister of National Defence (Mr. Ralston), speaking on Friday, February 11, read to the house a statement which had been issued to the press on December 27 with regard to General McNaughton. I am going to read this statement in a moment, but first I wish to say that the statement was authorized by the government, by myself and my colleagues. It was known to the government before the minister gave the statement to the press. The statement, as reported at page 411, was in the following words:
The Minister of National Defence announced to-day that following the recent illness of Lieutenant-General A. G. L. McNaughton. medical authorities have advised that he has developed a physical condition which will necessitate freedom from all military responsibility for an extended period.
General McNaughton has advised the government of his inability physically to carry on and has asked to be relieved as soon as possible.
In these circumstances and in view also of the requirements of impending operations, the minister stated that the Canadian government, with great regret, had decided to grant General McNaughton several months' leave of absence from service and to relieve him of command of the First Canadian Army. The minister paid tribute to General McNaughton's outstanding service to Canada and hoped that after a period of rest and recuperation his unusual talents
550	COMMONS
War Appropriation-General McNaughton
would be available to serve his country in some capacity less exacting than in command of an army in the field.
There is another paragraph but it is immaterial. The minister, at the time he read to the house this press release which had been issued on December 27, continuing to speak in the debate on Friday last, said:
The important points were that medical authorities had advised that the general had developed a physical condition which would necessitate freedom from all military responsibility for an extended period and that General McNaughton had advised the government of his inability physically to carry on and had asked to be relieved as soon as possible, and that the government had decided to grant General McNaughton several months leave of absence from service and to relieve him of command of the First Canadian Army.
The minister went on to say:
The advice of the medical authorities was contained in two reports which were transmitted to the Prime Minister on General McNaughton's direction and were also given to me.
There was also included General McNaughton's letter to Major-General Montague. Having these medical reports before the minister and myself and some of our colleagues, knowing that these reports would be presented to the house and made public, the government felt that it would not be advisable to go behind what was stated in the reports, to bring up other matters which might relate themselves to General McNaughton's relinquishment of command of the Canadian army. What was stated in the reports of the medical officers is perfectly clear, and it was not felt by the government, unless it was obvious that by going into other matters some useful public purpose would be served, that any statement should be made other than the one that was made up to that point.
May I say quite frankly that the Minister of National Defence himself would greatly prefer to discuss all phases of this matter to the satisfaction of every hon. member in the house. Personally, so far as he is concerned he would welcome it, and as I stated the other day he was ready at that time to give an immediate answer. My hon. friend had his immediate answer in his hand, and it was known to me what he had in mind to say. Knowing what might come to be discussed at that time, or what might arise out of the discussion, I felt it was necessary for me to say that I did not believe public policy made it advisable to say . anything further at this time with respect to what has been since referred to as the McNaughton situation. And I gave my reasons for that. May I quote them from Hansard. So that I may make the statement as comprehensive and as completely non-

evasive as possible, I shall begin with the question which was put by the hon. leader of the opposition and which appears at page 450 of Hansard of Monday, February 14:
The question is this: Were there other factors, other than ill health, which entered into the whole problem of the resignation or leave of absence of General McNaughton?
Mr. Mackenzie King: Before the leader of the opposition presses his question further, I desire to say that while I know that the Minister of National Defence (Mr. Ralston) is prepared to answer the question immediately, as Prime Minister I have very grave doubts whether it is not against public policy to discuss further at this time the matter which is raised by the question which the hon. gentleman has asked.
I gave my reasons for that, and they were set out in the course of the discussion. I shall quote one paragraph which appears on page 453 of Hansard. I said:
The government's action in this matter, as I have already said, is entirely begotten of a desire to protect the war effort not only of this country but of the united nations to the fullest extent possible and to protect all parties concerned therewith.
I felt it was owing to this house and to the country that so far as the correspondence was concerned the leader of the opposition and the leaders of the other two parties whom I invited should come and see the correspondence and read it with me. I also invited a former minister of national defence in a previous administration, the hon. member for Yale (Mr. Stirling) to accompany them. I placed the correspondence, or rather read, as the leader of the opposition has just said, the essential parts of the correspondence to them. I have left it to these hon-. gentlemen to act in this matter as their own consciences may dictate. I have placed no restriction upon them with respect to the information they gained at that interview, which lasted for three hours, and in which all that is really essential in what has been described as the McNaughton situation was gone into very fully.
I want to repeat at this moment what I said the other day in replying to the leader of the opposition:
Before the leader of the opposition presses his question further, I desire to say that while I know that the Minister of National Defence (Mr. Ralston) is prepared to answer the question immediately, as Prime Minister I have very grave doubts whether it is not against public policy to discuss further at this time the matter which is raised by the question which the hon. gentleman has asked.
Hon. members of this house know that at the present time preparations are being made on a vast scale for the invasion of Europe. The question that I 'have to ask myself is

War Appropriation-General McNaughton
this: Is any further discussion of what has been referred to as the McNaughton situation likely to have a good or an adverse effect on the war effort of Canada, of Great Britain, of the United States and of other of the united nations. I believe that the morale, not only of the people in the countries I have mentioned but more particularly of the armies not of Canada alone but of the other countries might be very seriously affected were there to be at this time a discussion which went into a number of matters that have taken place in the past. Such a discussion might provoke a very serious condition of affairs if begun at this time.
I want to make it perfectly clear the government has nothing to hide or conceal in this matter. The minister wishes to conceal nothing. Indeed he would prefer, for his own feelings and for personal reasons, to have without reservation matters disclosed which were disclosed to the leaders yesterday; but as Prime Minister I have a great responsibility to safeguard the war effort of all the united nations; and I repeat, I doubt very, very much if it would not be against public policy to discuss the matter further at this time. So far as the government is concerned I intend not to discuss it or have it discussed unless some hon. gentlemen opposite or others outside should, by statements that may be made, render it necessary for the government to make disclosures which up to the present time have not been made.


Mr. COLD  WELL@: As one of those present at yesterday morning's meeting I should like to say that I came away with the impression that it would not be in the public interest at this time to discuss this matter more fully than it has been discussed. I must say. this, however, that the discussion this afternoon by the leader of the opposition and the Prime Minister is bound to arouse in the public mind a good many questions. If those questions arise it seems to me there are two things to be considered. First there is the matter of the public interest, and in that I am in agreement with the Prime Minister. Then there is the viewpoint of the other party concerned, namely Lieutenant General McNaughton himself, a man who has served this country well, whose great talents in organizing the Canadian army I think are recognized by everyone in the house. In view of the fact that General McNaughton has submitted a letter in which he gave as the reason for his request the fact that his health was poor, as apparently it was, it seems to me that we should take into consideration General McNauehton's great service to this country;
and if we wish to pursue this matter further, in my opinion a committee of the house should meet General McNaughton and discuss matters with him.


Mr. RALSTON:: Mr. Chairman, I want to say just one word. I do not know of anyone who is more sensitive, and perhaps wrongly so, to any suggestion of lack of frankness or candour than I am. I have spoken to this committee twice concerning this matter, and in the statements I made I think I endeavoured to state clearly that I was not saying everything there was to be said in connection with this regrettable episode but that I was dealing with the particular matter which counted, namely the question of the granting of leave of absence to General McNaughton and the reasons for it.
It does cut just a little for my hon. friend to proclaim this afternoon, in one short sentence, that he has come to the conclusion that the Minister of National Defence has not told the whole story. I can see that in headlines across Canada. The Minister of National Defence has made it clear to this committee that he has not told the whole story of the McNaughton situation.
The question is whether or not the Minister of National Defence has anything to hide. That is the important thing. My hon. friend has not suggested that there is anything of that kind, and he has had the opportunity to become acquainted with the communications in connection with this matter. Perhaps my hon. friend did not mean anything by it, but to have that statement made as it was does not help, when at page 413 of Hansard of February 11 I said we could go into all these matters, mentioning the rumours, the press reports, the off the record statements, and so on, and then said:
We could go into all of this as well as any other matters relating to the subject. I would prefer not to do so because such discussions can. to say the least, do no possible good, especially at times like these.
Again at page 449 of Hansard I said I did not think the morale of the Canadian people or the morale of the troops in the field would be promoted by the discussion of factors which at the moment and in the circumstances can have no application. A little later I repeated that I would prefer not to discuss any other factors. I only want to say to the committee that if my hon. friend has any suggestion to make that the portion of the story I have not told, and which I indicated I had not told, contains anything which he thinks I desire to hide, I want him to say so now. I would have preferred, as the Prime Minister has said, to go into this matter from
552	COMMONS
War Appropriation-General McNaughton
stem to gudgeon, for the simple reason that it would have prevented any possible suspicion or suggestion that I or the government had anything to hide. I assented to the course which the Prime Minister has indicated this afternoon for the reasons he gave, namely in the public interest, which was concurred in by the leader of the C.C.F. party. The leader of the opposition has made no expression on that point.
I am gratified by the fact that although there has not been a disclosure to the house of the whole situation, the government has indicated that it has no desire whatever to keep the communications within the confines of governmental privacy but has made them available to three hon. members of this house, with no strings of any kind attached except the dictates of their own conscience. Under those circumstances I do submit that it was hardly fair-I do not generally criticize him for this, and I repeat that he may not have intended it in this way-for my hon. friend to say that he had come to the conclusion, as if it were something he had only discovered after seeing these communications, that the Minister of National Defence had not told the whole story. I have said I have not told the whole story; I said that to the committee on two occasions. The purpose of the conference with these hon. gentlemen was to let them know the whole story. I do ask my hon. friend, if he thinks there is anything I have to hide in connection with this matter, to indicate that fact; or if he did not intend the reflection which I feel he cast upon my statement, I ask him to say so.


Gordon Graydon: I had no idea that the
minister was reading into my remarks something which I think upon reflection he will see is not there.


Some hon. MEMBERS:: Oh, 'oh.


Gordon Graydon: May I say to hon.
gentlemen to my right that I heard several remarks from that corner imputing motives of one kind or another to the leader of the opposition. I think most hon. members of this house know of my desire to be fair to the government and everyone else. No one understands that better than the minister, I am sure; otherwise perhaps I should be in some state of heated anger over this matter. Instead of that I am trying to discuss it reasonably, and I hope the minister and the committee will understand that. If the minister will accept my statement in the reasonable way in which it was made, I simply said -that we were told enough for me to
fMr. Ralston.]
come to. the conclusion that in the present debate the Minister of National Defence has not told the whole story. It may be that the minister and I are looking at these words and their context in entirely different ways, but I want to tell the minister that what I wanted to convey, and what I think is conveyed as clearly as that could be done, is that after having gone over certain of the correspondence and other documents which were shown to us I came to the conclusion that the whole story had not been told.


James Layton Ralston: That was already clear.


Gordon Graydon: I quite understand that, but I do not understand why the minister makes an issue of this. Both my hon. friend and the Prime Minister made the point clear, when the debate was halted last Monday evening, that there were some facts which the government felt should not be disclosed to the house and the country because of the public interest. All right. Surely it is not wrong for me, after having seen the documents, to come to a conclusion, as I did; and if that conclusion was the same as that reached by the minister, so much the better.


James Layton Ralston: There is just one point
between us; that is, that my hon. friend's statement suggested that he had to see the documents before coming to the conclusion that the minister had not told the whole story. My point is that the minister himself indicated to the committee on at least two occasions that he was not disclosing all the circumstances, and that it did not require the conference, which is the suggestion contained in my hon. friend's statement, in order to give him the information from which he could conclude that the minister had not disclosed everything.


Gordon Graydon: My statement was simfdy an attempt to tell the committee what were my conclusions after having the correspondence read to me. The minister had told us that the full story was not being disclosed, but after all it seemed necessary, the evidence having been presented to me, to form my own conclusions, and that is exactly what I did. I do not want the minister to take umbrage. Perhaps he is a little bit touchy, and perhaps I would be if I were in his position. I do not want him to go away with the idea, and I do not want any one in the house to think that I had some ulterior motive in formulating that sentence. I tried to make it just as fair as I could.

War Appropriation-General McNaughton


The CHAIRMAN:: I believe the committee wants to see this matter thoroughly discussed, although it may not be properly before the committee. Therefore it would be in order for hon. members to rise now and1 speak on what we are discussing at the present time before taking another subject.


Mr. RAYMOND:: A moment ago the Prime Minister referred to the discussion which took place last Monday in connection with the resignation of or leave of absence granted to General McNaughton. That discussion had taken place because of the following question put to the Minister of National Defence by the leader of the opposition:
My question is whether or not any factors, other than that which he mentioned of ill-health, entered into the resignation of General McNaughton.
The Prime Minister intervened in the debate in order to put an end to the discussion, and he said:
I should be pleased to meet with and to show the correspondence to the leader of the opposition and to the leaders of the C.C.F. and the Social Credit parties.
He also added the hon. member for Yale to that group. The Prime Minister completely ignored another group in this house, the Bloc Populaire of Canada. He knows of the existence of this group at least since the by-elections at Stanstead and Cartier. If any group in this house is entitled to information, then all groups should be entitled to the same information. If any member is entitled to any information, then all members should be entitled to the same information. What right has one group to get information which another group cannot get? What right has the hon. member for Yale to get information which other hon. members of this house cannot get? Have we any rights in this parliament? Is this a democratic parliament? Are we not entitled as members of parliament to all information?
If there is some secret about the matter, then close the doors like we have done in the past. I do not want any secrets to be revealed to the enemy, but I think it is unfair when the Prime Minister takes it upon himself to call in the leaders of certain groups and another member who is not a leader of any group in order lo give out information and ignore the others. That is my view, and because that is my view I put this question to the Minister of National Defence. Were there other factors other than ill health which entered into the whole problem of the resignation or leave of absence of General McNaughton?


William Lyon Mackenzie King: I am not sorry my hon. friend' has raised the point as to why hon. gentlemen besides those whom I named the other day were not included in a meeting to discuss a confidential matter with myself as the leader of the government. That brings me back to procedure under the British parliamentary system. That system recognizes the government, recognizes it as the body which has been entrusted by the people to carry on the business of the country, and it recognizes the opposition. The position of the opposition has been recognized by our House of Commons in the enactment, of a statute which gives an official position to the leader of the opposition. The government and the opposition are the two elements of parliament which under the British system are presumed to be the ones to be considered, in the main may I put it, in carrying on the business of the country.
At the time I extended the invitation I did, I asked myself whether I should not confine to the leader of the opposition the invitation I was extending to discuss privately a matter of great public importance. I would have been taking a proper position if I had so confined my invitation. The leader of the opposition himself took exception to the fact that I had not conferred with him earlier. He recognized that he had certain rights as the leader of the opposition to know some matters which were of great public importance but which necessarily had to be kept secret. I gave him the reason why I had not asked him earlier to confer with me. I knew very well that if he had been given certain information in a private way before there was any discussion in parliament he might have felt himself precluded from debating as freely as he otherwise might have wished to do and from giving information to the members of his party.
The reason I extended an invitation to the leaders of the C.C.F. and the Social Credit party is that throughout this entire parliament there has been a recognition that at the time of the last general election those parties were returned in the numbers in which they were. Their leaders in this house have been granted, not as a matter of right but as a matter of courtesy, a certain recognition by the government. It seemed to me that the present was an occasion where it was desirable to invite those hon. gentlemen to a conference. The reason for inviting the hon. member for Yale must be obvious to all members of the house. The hon. member for Yale is a member of the privy council of Canada and has served in the position of minister of national defence under a Conservative administration. I felt that it

554	COMMON'S
War Appropriation-General McNaughton
would help to give confidence to hon. members of the house and to the public if the hon. member for Yale were present at that interview.
But for my hon. friend to say that because a new party has come into existence since a [DOT] by-election, the leader of that party should have the same courtesy extended to him, is I think to take a position that is perfectly ridiculous. If that procedure is to be followed we may expect that any number of hon. gentlemen may suddenly become leaders of parties, whether small in number or not, and claim special rights and privileges in this house. I would have felt that I was making a Very great departure from the proper procedure in parliament if I had gone any further in recognizing groups as a part of the opposition than I did.
May I say that I intend as far as it lies within my power to see that the business of this House of Commons is discussed as between the government and the opposition. If the opposition wish to be divided into groups, that of course is their own affair. I would draw attention to this fact. They are rapidly heading toward the system which developed in France where there was a large number of parties and where the business of the country got into such a state that there was no stability. I think quite sincerely that that condition had a good deal to do with the fate of the world as it is to-day. I do not believe the people of Canada wish to see a lot of parties in this country and I as Prime Minister am not going to do anything to further that trend.


Mr. BLACKMORE:: Before proceeding to say what I had intended to say, I should like to say just one word to the Prime Minister with respect to the formation of parties. The fundamental reason why new parties form is that the men in power signally fail, and the people, feeling absolute frustration because of their inability to get what they want from those in power, form new parties. I tell the Prime Minister that just as long as he fails to give the people of Canada what they want in the way of distribution of goods so that they can enjoy a standard of living commensurate with what their productive power justifies, he must expect to see new parties form ad infinitum in this country, and the one who will be to blame will be the Prime Minister himself. He. cannot escape responsibility by rising and giving eloquent discourses and reading lectures to us every once in a while.
The Prime Minister speaks as though Canada were the only country in which more

than two parties were recognized in parliament. If I am correctly informed, in England at the present time the Liberal party forms the third party and receives recognition. Also, if I am correctly informed, for a time in the mother of parliaments the Irish party formed the third party and was freely granted recognition. Consequently the Prime Minister is not breaking altogether new ground, although we recognize that he has endeavoured to be fair and just in his treatment of the minorities in parliament since he has been leading the government.
With respect to the McNaughton case, I had the impression before it was ever discussed in parliament that it was one which it would be altogether in the public interest for us to leave pretty much alone, leaving it to the government in power which is in a position to know all the details; and my experience yesterday in the meeting to which the Prime Minister referred confirmed me in that belief. I would say now that if we would discharge our responsibility as members of this house we would discontinue the discussion of this McNaughton affair and allow it to work its own way out in time.


Mr. POULIOT:: Mr. Chairman, I have just a few words to say. As a private member I cannot understand the distinction that is made with respect to matters which can be told to the leader of the opposition and the leaders of certain groups in this house but which cannot be told to private members. The Prime Minister was right when he said .that in England there is only one leader of the opposition officially recognized by the government. Then he added that he had extended the courtesy to the leaders of two ' other groups, the C.C.F. group and the New Democracy group, of calling them into his confidence. But if the practice in England is to be followed, the government shall consider only the leader of the official opposition; but if similar courtesies are extended to the leaders of two other groups, that same courtesy should be extended to all members.
I do not see why the leaders of the C.C.F. and New Democracy groups should receive better treatment than my hon. friend the member for Laval-Two Mountains, the leader of the Canadian party, or the leader of the Bloc Populaire, or the member for North Battleford, or the new member for Cartier. They should all be extended the same courtesy as is already extended to two leaders of political groups.
What are the matters that can be told only to the leaders and not to the rank and file? How is it that the rank and file cannot get

War Appropriation-General McNaughton
certain information and that they are not trusted? Last year or the year before I suggested that we should have secret sittings of the house regularly once a week, when the government should take the members "into their confidence and tell them matters that would not be discussed in public. There is news appearing in the press which has a much more disturbing effect on the morale of the Canadian people than the McNaughton case, especially the bombing of those seventeen allied ships at Bari in Italy by German aeroplanes, with no counter-attack from the allies. Those ships were not protected. That story appeared in the press, in every paper. Is not a thing of that kind disturbing to the morale of the Canadian people? Does it not give them the impression that there is something wrong? Those shiploads of ammunition and supplies were for the 8th Army and the 5th Army. Who was punished for allowing the ships to be sunk? Nobody was. Eisenhower was sent to England, and Montgomery had his picture taken with the Minister of National Defence. Nobody was punished. Seventeen allied ships loaded with ammunition bombed at an Italian port by the Germans without retaliation, it must have a disturbing effect on the morale of the Canadian people and of all the allied nations.
When there is something wrong in the Department of National Defence it is often said that the facts cannot be told because it is a military secret. Last year when I fought for the health of those in the Canadian army and wanted to see that the boys who were unfit were discharged because they were a burden to the army as well as to the taxpayers of this country, I was jeered by some members who said they were bored in listening to the dialogue carried on about it. between the Minister of National Defence and myself. Here I must mention that one of our colleagues who deserves special praise is the parliamentary assistant to the Minister of National Defence, the hon. member for Halifax, who has seen that many grievances were redressed.
Another case that is very sad is that of a boy who was unfit for the army. He suffered from angina pectoris. He was first classified "C-2" by his doctor. Then he went to the army and was classified "B." He was called up again and was classified "A." He drilled for a day, fell sick and called for a doctor. That was refused. They found the boy dead the morning after and later on he was buried in my constituency, where he was born. When a man dies under such circumstances the case deserves consideration, and deserves what else? It deserves reform. It is time for reform. We are here to talk about public business, and this is public business.
100-36J
There is also a man in the camp at Barriefield who has to follow a special diet of veal liver and things like that, a regimen recommended by a specialist who knows his case, and he has to go to the restaurant to buy this special food out of his meagre pay. He has fallen off in weight from 142 to 108 pounds, and he is very sick. But he is kept there. He cannot follow the regimen prescribed in camp, but he is kept there just the same. There are many cases like that, and I feel that it is time to consider the health of the men in the army. We should see that the boys in every branch of the army are kept in good health. These are matters that should be discussed.
Why did not the leader of the opposition, the leader of the C.C.F., the leader of the New Democracy group, the leader of the Bloc Populaire and the leaders of all other groups ask the government to explain what happened at Bari and who was responsible there? Was it Montgomery? Was it Eisenhower? Who was responsible for not protecting those seventeen ships loaded with ammunition and food for the 8th Army along the Adriatic coast? Perhaps the reason why the allied advance is so slow in Italy is that those boys did not have the ammunition. It is time to ask the government about it. Is it not much more important than McNaughton's resignation?


Mr. LACOMBE:: (Translation) Mr. Speaker, the first part of the resolution at present under consideration reads as follows:
1. That sums not exceeding $3,650,000,000 be granted to His Majesty towards defraying any expenses or making any advances or loans that may be incurred or granted by or under the authority of the governor in council during the year ending March 31, 1945, for
(a) the security, defence, peace, ordqr and welfare of Canada;
I shall confine my remarks mainly to paragraph (a) of the resolution at present under consideration: "the security, defence, peace, order and welfare of Canada". Here are words which are frequently misused. The government is asking this house to vote $3,650,000,000 to ensure the realization of security, defence, peace, order and welfare, but is it taking the necessary action to achieve this purpose? We shall see. Strikes are breaking out everywhere. Dissatisfaction is rife. Unemployment is increasing, and trouble makers are taking advantage of this deplorable situation which borders upon disorder. Since the mobilization of all our resources for the prosecution of an exaggerated war effort, similar appropriations have been requested each year from parliament for a similar purpose. But, are we not standing still? Nay, we are going backwards. Never has the national debt reached such a high level. Never have taxes weighed so heavily
War Appropriation-Army

upon the taxpayer. The public must put up with restrictions of all kinds. The Canadian family is dealt a heavy blow by the absence of the mother working in war plants. Add to this the insidious propaganda broadcast over the radio in such terms as these: "The woman of the day is the woman in uniform." In spite of the feeling of admiration I have for our women soldiers, I believe, as many others do, that the woman of the day is still the mother, who is especially revered because of the lives she has given and still gives to the nation. Notwithstanding all the sacrifices and the nobleness of the woman in uniform, I prefer to see the woman in her splendid role of guardian of the home, or preparing herself to fulfil such an admirable task.
Where did the popularity of feminine enlistments originate? If I am not mistaken, it started in totalitarian countries, in Soviet Russia, especially. Although such a statement may seem paradoxical, I am not a supporter of order within disorder nor of disorder within order. And what is the worst disorder, if not the breaking up of the family, which is the very foundation of society? I will not support this measure, not only for the reasons I have just indicated, but also because a revolution is in process of preparation in Canada. The government seems to do nothing to prevent its blazing out sooner or later, even before the end of this conflict. Is any evidence required? Only yesterday a party which has assumed a new name held a congress. That party has always been considered as banned in this country.


Mr. GAUTHIER:: They changed their name.


Liguori Lacombe: I agree with my hon. friend from Portneuf. Because that party has assumed a new name while holding the same doctrine, the government adopts toward it a laisser faire policy. Only a few days ago, prominent members of the clergy gave to the authorities of the city of Montreal a solemn warning about playgrounds where communistic propaganda is at work among our young people. They have furnished so much evidence in support of their claims that aldermen of the city of Montreal have asked for an inquiry into the matter. The pursuit of a policy of iaisser-faire has brought us to such a pass. Moreover, after this frightful war, which is engulfing the economy of the nation has come to an end, who will be the cat's-paw? Who will hold sway over all of central Europe? And what will Canada have to offer her sons and daughters whose careers, shattered or in such a state that they must be built up again from scratch, will be to them an

even heavier burden that the wounds they suffered on the battle-fields? Let us first look after our own. Our freedom and our rights as Canadian citizens come first. Away with agitators, with propaganda agents of subversive ideas.
Since the government asks for this sum of
13,650,000,000 to ensure the security, defence, peace, order and welfare of Canada, it is my right and duty to ask that it safeguard without delay our threatened peace, security and social order. Since the government intends to bleed white the Canadian taxpayer in order to defend Christianity, freedom, justice and right, I would ask, in the name of every sacred principle, that it put a stop before it is too late to the insults and mud hurled every day at Christianity and His Holiness the Pope by the advocates of communism and by the sheet called "The Gospel Witness". On page fifteen of its issue dated February 10, this paper ran the following monstrosity:
(Text)
More About Russia and the Vatican
Last week we quoted an article from Izvestia, Soviet newspaper, which asserted that "servility of the Vatican towards fascism has not been confined to Italy," etc.	Izvestia's article is
criticized by the New York Times as being "unjust and intemperate." The press dispatch was as follows:
"New York, Feb. 4.-The attack on the Vatican by the Soviet government newspaper Izvestia is denounced to-day by the New York Times as 'unjust and intemperate.'
" 'Of all the incendiary literary bombs manufactured in Moscow since the Teheran conference and thrown with such light-hearted recklessness into the unity of the allied nations, none is likely to do greater damage,' the Times says. It adds that the 'palpable insincerity' of Izvestia's charges may be judged by the character of one of them.
"The Times asserts that Russia's allies, Britain and the United States, 'have no doubt where the real sympathy of the Vatican lies in this struggle.'
" 'They recognize the inescapable neutrality of the Pope's position,' it says, 'but they have had no difficulty in finding in his eloquent declarations clear evidence of his detestation for those who have violated the rights of little nations, who have committed bestial acts from one end of Europe to the other and who have attempted to elevate the dogma of totalitarianism to the dignity of a new religion.'
"The Times' defence of the Roman Catholic church should not be taken seriously, as it has long been evident that on many matters it takes its orders from the Roman hierarchy in the United States. Like other daily papers, it probably has one or more Romanist editorial writers, and one of them in all probability is responsible for this. Nothing escapes the eye of the propaganda department of the Roman Catholic church. It makes use of the radio and the public press for the dissemination of its views. The Roman serpent is a hydra-headed monster; and every head has a thousand tongues speaking lies and blasphemy.

War Appropriation-Army
(Translation) Neither communism nor this nameless sheet take into account the fact that millions of Roman Catholics and Christians of various denominations fight in the ranks of the united nations. Unless the government stop this propaganda at its very origin, Canada is in for a dismal future. These people will avail themselves of the deep post-war reactions to overwhelm established authorities both religious and civil. Demobilization in the army and the industries will .afford them a fertile field for the dissemination of the most subversive doctrines. On the heels of destitution and unemployment the conflagration will spread to every part of the country. That is why I urge the government to take every necessary step to safeguard security, peace and order in Canada.
After the filthy extract written by a coward, I wish to read a touching description from the pen of a soldier-priest who, among thousands, has fallen a victim to German bullets on the blessed soil of Belgium. This extract is taken from Nouvelles catholiques, issued by the Wartime Information Board, on February 1, 1944:
While Awaiting the Firing Squad
While awaiting to be shot by a German firing squad, Father Joseph Peters, rector of Comblain-au-Pont, Liege diocese, wrote the following letter to his parishioners-a last message from "Your pastor who loves you and will continue to do so in heaven."
Father Peters recalls that every day he has offered the following prayer to Almighty God: "From this day, I accept with all my heart and with perfect joy, any kind of death that it might please Thee to choose for me, with all its difficulties, anguish and sufferings." The letter adds: "The time has come to realize this promise. When you receive this letter, I shall have fallen a victim to German bullets for having served my country as a priest and a soldier.
"I have no time to relate to you how and why I have acted but I shall say that I have no regret for what I have done and would do it again if I could.
"I face death without fear or blame, relying on Almighty God's infinite mercifulness and convinced that He will welcome me to heaven, where I hope to meet my dear parents, my brothers and sisters who have preceded me in the eternal world to come.
"Is it not true that you must know how much I loved you without distinction of age, rank or party, and I have felt, especially from the time of my incarceration, that you loved me as a father. . . .
"Before being called to face my supreme judge, I wish to beg forgiveness from anyone whom I may have offended in any way or toward whom I may have neglected to do any good deed which it was in my power to do. . . .
"My dear brethren, I must leave you in the act of blessing you for the last time . . . and,
for the last time, I shout: 'All for Almighty God and the Blessed Virgin Mary! Long live the Catholic Church! Long live Belgium! Long live Comblain-au-Pont'."
(The Universe, December 17.)
How many times have I urged the government to ban the newspaper The Gospel Witness, sower of hatred and national disunity. This accursed sheet spreads falsehood, calumny and abuse even against the united nations and slings mud at their noblest characters. And the Post Office department welcomes its antinational undertakings by accepting its infamous propaganda for distribution all through the country. That is the pass to which things have come. We are fighting for the triumph of Christianity, freedom, justice and human rights, while in Canada there are two kinds of justice, one for the reviler of Christianity and the heroes of this war, and the other for the man who for a period of nearly four years has languished in an internment camp and was denied a trial. If it is for such a justice that we are sacrificing all our resources and that we are asked to vote again $3,650,000,000, I say that it is indeed not worth while. Therefore, we call upon the government to stop persecuting that outstanding citizen who has been and still is, whatever anyone may think, the former mayor of Montreal -and member for St. Mary in the Quebec legislature.
I shall make one further remark before I conclude. The statement made by the Minister of National Defence (Mr. Ralston) gives little encouragement, as regards our reserve army and the men who have been mobilized. I am very much afraid that conscription for service anywhere and on any war theatre, although now an accomplished fact, will be enforced even more sternly. No one has opposed more than I such a policy: Therefore, I bring once again to the attention of the government the difficulties they will face in the dangerous course they have long since taken. I repeat that I have never approved of that policy, that I condemn it more than ever as forcibly as I can.


Mr. CHURCH:: I am not a leader of a
group like the last1 speaker, therefore I have no speech to read; but I wish to point out to you, Mr. Chairman, and to the government, certain facts about the question which, fortunately or unfortunately, has been raised in this house this afternoon. After all is said and done, we are in the fifth year of the war. I think this country has done splendidly on the land and1 sea and in the air, starting as it did from scratch. I wish to say to the noble seven who sit down in the left-hand corner
War Appropriation-Army

that their province was one of the most exposed of all. In all our eastern provinces as well we were very fortunate that we did not have an invasion with the gestapo, the trampling feet, the loud speaker, the whip, the concentration camps and the deportation of large numbers of the civiliain population to Germany and other places. We were spared all these cruelties and dangers which might have happened to this country.
I believe it is the opinion of .the private members and of people outside the house that the country has responded nobly in this emergency. I am not here to criticize anybody, but I wish to say that the public are paying for the war, and they are entitled to know the facts. I am speaking only as a private member. I do not know anything about it. I was not told anything, and I do not want to be told anything, because I have already heard a great deal of the story from those who have come home from the front. I repeat that when the war broke out the government were confronted, as in the last war, with an emergency 'because we had thrown away our land, sea and air forces and qur friends as well. We had simply disbanded our army, navy and air foroe. The permanent force was laughed at. Look at the men who are leading the armies on the front to-day. Many of them, were then in the permanent force. I remember many of them. When they walked down the streets of the cities they were looked upon by pacifists with derision .and it was said that they should be out of the profession altogether. These men saved us and have done nobly.
I desire to say a word about what was done by the British government in a case like this. As you all know, away back in January last year the war was not going very well in Africa. Mr. Churchill, the Prime Minister, went over to Africa. General Wavell, General Auchin-lech and General Ritchie were transferred, and the march across the desert was placed in charge of General Alexander and General Montgomery. They marched right across the desert, and after Casablanca they met the army coming from America. In the British House of Commons private members rose- some of them just back from the front-and criticized. At the time I gave a copy of the British Hansard to the Minister of National Defence (Army) and it showed that private members in the British House of Commons, many of them generals, many of them from the army, the navy and other places, 'had criticized the conduct of the war. Mistakes will always 'be made in war; but the mistakes which the British have made are as nothing compared with the mistakes which Germany

made and the mistake she made by forcing Japan to attack Pearl Harbor, forcing the United States into the war.
It is all very well for our friends down in the left-hand corner to talk about small nations. We have seen what happened to small nations in Europe. We would have had the same thing happen here if it were not for the mother country and the stand taken by the people of Canada and the government in raising such a noble army, navy and air force. The people want to know the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth about this matter. It was discussed1 after Africa in the British House of Commons and Mr. Churchill told the house the truth. I should like to point out also what they did in Germany and in Russia regarding a similar situation. At Stalingrad the Germans and t'he Russians brought in numbers of new generals. They removed a great many generals. Both the Russians and the Germans brought in managers of departmental stores and others who were civilians. They had learned to drill in two years or less. The new generals did a magnificent job. The Russians under new generals started their march at Stalingrad and they have defeated the Germans all along the line. I point these things out to the committee because it is not an involved question at all. I pointed out yesterday that the commitments which are being made are so vast and the world war is so widespread that it is hard for the average citizen, unless he follows the thing and has been following military matters many years, to know very much about it.
We are a nation and there is no intention on the part of the British government to interfere with our status, our sovereignty or our autonomy. We entered this war voluntarily by a resolution of the house which, with one or two exceptions, had the full support of the members. That resolution told the government to give the full strength and the full power of the nation to the conduct of the war. It was well that Canada decided to do so because she had to start from scratch, and as I say, our forces have done splendid work on the land and sea and in the air.
It do not believe it is the duty of the opposition, as their leader has said, to decide this matter of policy. The onus is on the government of the day as long as they are the government of the day to conduct a total war in a manner that will satisfy the people who are paying the taxes. This war was forced upon the British empire. Nobody wanted it. The empire went to the limit to have peace. It disarmed, threw away all its defences in 1922, 1923 and 1924. It had nothing left when

War Appropriation-Army
the war broke out. In the period of twenty years between the two wars, the most fatal in the history of civilization, we thought we could do without armies, navies and air forces and depend on notes and the result was the British empire was left by the pacifists in a helpless condition. If the people are not allowed to know the facts, if they are allowed to know just what their rulers decide, then we are embarking on a very dangerous course.
Yesterday I referred to what Mr. Eden said in the British House of Commons on December 7, and on December 14, Mr. Churchill having taken sick, he referred to the commitments which had been made at Cairo between Great Britain, United States and China. These nations were represented by Mr. Churchill, Mr. Roosevelt and Chiang Kai-shek. They came to certain conclusions which bound Canada. These conclusions were that in the Pacific so far as the war against Japan was concerned everything that Japan gained at Pearl Harbor in December 1941 would be taken from her; that Japan would also have to give back everything she had acquired in the Pacific in the last two generations. Nobody knows when the war with Germany is going to end. I believe the full facts should be given this afternoon to the people of Canada. We should know the ins and outs of this case. I read in the house last year a statement of Major Markland, V.C., who is serving in this war. He is a member of the British House of Commons. There are forty-six members of the British House of Commons who have lost their lives in this war and all but one or two are Conservatives. Major Markland, Y.C., rose and criticized the conduct of the war in North Africa, whereupon Mr. Churchill gave a full statement to the house, and to the public later on the radio, with regard to the transfer of generals and all that kind of thing. The conduct of the war for Canada is the responsibility of the government and the officers on the field and no one else. I do not want to say anything to interfere with the progress of the war or in any way to impede the work of the government or the minister in that connection; because I think the opposition as a whole has so far given the government splendid support. To ask us to throw out the life-line as to what should be done on government policy now is another matter, when we have nothing to do with it. I am not speaking for any party in this house. I have been nothing but a consistent follower of one party all my life. I have never claimed to be anything else. I have been a supporter of rearmament all along the line, in season and out of
season. I was a voice crying in the wilderness in the period between the two wars, when I said we should not leave the defence of civilization to notes, pacifist doctrines, the Monroe doctrine, and all that kind of thing. I supported, to the best of my ability, the expenditure of money on our defences, and in 1935, when I was sitting on the other side of the house, I opposed the reduction in the defence estimates that was made by my own . government before the election of that year.
I regret the stand that the government has taken regarding a great "soldier, statesman and patriot" whom I have known since he was a student at McGill university. I do not know anything about the conduct of the war in Italy except what I have heard, though I believe there is one matter which might well be mentioned here. In this world war there has been too much dependence upon those who have graduated from staff colleges. I understand some of the best men in the field in this war are men who have been connected with the militia all their lives, men who have gone up the ladder from the bottom to the top, and in connection with our army, navy and air force I think it might have been better if that principle had been followed in this war a little more liberally than has been the case so far.
That is about all I have to say. I believe this is a matter for the government to decide, and I am sorry it has gone as far as it has because I believe the people are entitled to know the truth. Mistakes will always be made during a war. Mistakes have been made in connection with the Germans all down through history, and mistakes will be made in the future. Many more mistakes will be made before the end of this war unless this House of Commons reasserts itself. Talk about parliamentary control over the war! The private members of this house might just as well pack up and go home if we are just to take somebody's say-so in connection with the conduct of the war. I am strongly opposed to the stand taken by the Prime Minister and the government in this matter. I believe the people are entitled to all the facts. All the cards should be laid on the table; if that is done we will strengthen the morale of the people of Canada and of the troops at the front, who cannot say anything because they have lost their civilian status. They can say nothing at all; their civilian rights have been taken away, and it is up to us to protect our men in the field and the people at home. After all, wars are won by soldiers, sailors and airmen at the front, and not by home defence. I suggest to the noble seven down at the far end of the chamber that there is no such thing
War Appropriation-Army

as home defence, as the small nations of Europe found out to their sorrow. The mechanized hordes rolled right over the small nations. Canada has to stand with the mother country in this fight; we have to hang together or we shall hang separately, because none of the dominions is able to go it alone.


Mr. MacNICOL:: I should like to ask the minister a question on the first item in his estimates, if am in order now. If my question is not in order I shall not expect the minister to answer it now. Yesterday in Toronto I found a good deal of excitement being caused by the calling up for service of eighteen year old lads going to high schools and collegiates. A man whom I know very well, who has one son nineteen years of age now in the air force and another lad nearly seventeen, called me up in reference to his neighbour's son. This boy is just past eighteen, and a day or two ago he received a call to report to military headquarters. My question is this. Has it come to that stage, that lads in Toronto and perhaps elsewhere, eighteen years of age, are being called to report to military headquarters, to be taken into the service?


James Layton Ralston: My hon. friend has me at the moment; I did not know they were being called up at that age. I am afraid I have not the informations here just now, but I will have it within twenty minutes and will tell my hon. friend.


John Ritchie MacNicol: If the Minister of
National War Services had been in when the house opened I would have asked him the question on the orders of the day.


James Layton Ralston: The case my hon. friend refers to was a call for military service?


John Ritchie MacNicol: Yes, for army service.


Mr. NOSEWORTHY:: I should like to bring two matters to the attention of the minister. The hon. gentleman who has just taken his seat has drawn attention to the calling up of eighteen year old boys. Could the minister tell us just what the policy of the government is with regard to the calling of conscientious objectors. I know these people are not very popular in the country and one does not court popularity by speaking in their behalf, but it appears that the government is intent upon calling every conscientious objector of military age, regardless of his occupation or of how essential he may be in agriculture or some other industry.
I was surprised yesterday when the minister informed us that men have been detailed from the army back to agriculture and other industries, while at the same time these conscien-
tious objectors, who because of their religious scruples simply will not fight, are constantly being taken out of agriculture and industry, where they are doing a good job of production; and when they refuse to go to labour camps they are even sent to gaol, where they produce nothing but are an expense and liability to the country.


John Ritchie MacNicol: And their wives and children are the sufferers.


Joseph William Noseworthy: That is correct. I have two instances that came to my attention last week, both of which I have brought to the attention of the Minister of Labour, under whom the selective service operates. Apparently nothing can be done, however, to prevent these people from being sent to gaol.


James Layton Ralston: To prevent what?


Joseph William Noseworthy: Apparently nothing can be done to prevent their being sent to gaol. In the first instance this man tells me he is employed in a shoe factory. His employer asked for his postponement, stating that it would be impossible to replace him and that production would suffer if he were called. Notwithstanding that, the man was instructed to go either into the army or into a labour camp. He refused to do either, and apparently he must go to gaol. The second case is that of a man who farms 150 acres of land, with 23 head of cattle, 35 hogs and 6 horses. I have verified these facts. He also has a tractor, which he uses in work for other farmers as well. His father is sixty years of age, and will be unable to carry on the farm if his son is taken away. Yet' that man was haled into the army and, since he was a conscientious objector, was offered the opportunity of going into a labour camp, which he refused. I am told that his case was adjourned for a week to give him a chance to change his mind, but when he still refused to do so he was sent to gaol.
The point is that these people object to paying for the war under compulsion. One of .these men tells me that if he had consented to pay $2 a week to the Red Cross he could have avoided going to gaol or going into the army. I have his statement here to the effect that he was offered the choice of paying $2 into the Red Cross or going into the army. I should like to know the government's position on that matter. On the surface it looks as though there is a prejudice against these men because of their religion. That religion may seem peculiar to some of us, but there would seem to be that prejudice.

War Appropriation-Army


Mr. FRASER (Peterborough West):: There is no reflection upon the Red Cross?


Joseph William Noseworthy: No, not in the slightest. It was simply that the officers were trying to offer this man an easy way out.


Mr. WOOD:: In what district was it that this man who had 150 acres and 23 cows' was refused postponement?


Joseph William Noseworthy: Airound Brampton.


George Ernest Wood: That would be the Toronto district?


Joseph William Noseworthy: No. I am doubtful if this man would have been called from the farm had he not been a conscientious objector.
I have been given the particulars of many farmers who were granted leave to remain on their farms and who to all intents and purposes were no more needed than this man. The second matter I wish to bring to the attention of the minister is the one we were discussing when the committee rose last night at eleven o'clock, the matter of dependent mothers.


James Layton Ralston: I should like to appeal to the committee in connection with this discussion. I have pointed out to the committee that we have been over two days on item 1 and I do not think ten per cent of the discussion has related to that item. However. I felt that this was the time to permit lion, members to deal with the special things they had in mind or with general topics in connection with the department. My hon. friend has dealt with conscientious objectors. May I say to him with all respect that that matter does not come under the army at all. It has to do with the Department of Labour and national selective service. The next matter he proposes to take up is dependents' allowances which comes under item 2. I wonder if the committee would be prepared to pass item 1, or else confine the discussion to that item so that we may make at least that much progress. The next item will call for a long discussion since it covers pay and allowances which take in a good deal.


Joseph William Noseworthy: I brought this up because it was under discussion last night, but I am quite prepared to wait.


James Layton Ralston: I am trying to get the procedure in the groove, as it were. Does the hon. member for Yale, who is representing the leader of the opposition, think there should be any more discussion on this item?


Mr. STIRLING:: I think the difficulty arises from the fact that we have adapted ourselves to a course of action which is not strictly in accordance with the rules. We have chosen to adopt this method of clarifying the situation and permitting a great latitude of discussion, but the fact remains that these items have not been committed to the committee. We are scarcely within the rules as we would be if it were a matter of the estimates.


James Layton Ralston: I believe the Minister of Finance put them on Hansard when he made his speech.


Grote Stirling: But they have not been committed to the committee in the same way as the items of a money bill would be. We have had to devise our own methods of handling this matter, and I am sure the apposition will be ready to accommodate itself to whatever method of conduct may be adopted with the consent of the committee. Considerable discussion has taken place on item 1, but I think a certain amount of latitude was agreed to. I should imagine that most of the questions hon. members would want to ask would fall within the succeeding items.


Mr. LOCKHART:: May I be permitted to bring a matter to the attention of the minister?


James Layton Ralston: Is it under 1?


Norman James Macdonald Lockhart: I have given consideration to what the minister said about item 1 and perhaps item 2. I am referring to a situation which has developed within the last few days. It has to do with the housing of the wives of soldiers and their dependents. I cannot find any item in the list which would cover this except item 4, which covers construction, and that certainly is not the matter with which I wish to deal. I shall not hold up the committee any longer than possible, but what I have to say is supported by a strong resolution, copies of which I believe have reached the hands of the Minister of Munitions and Supply and will probably work back into the Department of National Defence.
I intend to deal with the matter of housing as it affects the families and dependents of soldiers who have gone overseas, as well as soldiers who have returned and their dependents. Many of these are unable to work and they require housing. I ask the minister or his assistant to take note of one or two things. When the wartime housing scheme was first started the Minister of Munitions and Supply did his best to provide housing for soldiers and their dependents by making available in some centres a small number of
War Appropriation-Army

houses which had been built by Wartime Housing Limited. However, when the pressure of production increased, the minister had some difficulty in meeting the demands made upon him.
I think the situation has changed to some extent, if not in all areas at least in my own constituency. I know of one plant the production of which has been reduced to the minimum. Hundreds of men have been laid off in other plants. As the minister has described it, it is now a case of maintenance rather than production. Soldiers and their dependents in this highly industrialized area have suffered considerably. Now that the pendulum is swinging back, the council of my city has taken the matter definitely in hand. As I say, I wish to bring two points to the minister's attention.
I ask him to be good enough to confer with the Minister of Munitions and Supply in an endeavour to have more latitude given to these dependents, and more particularly to those men who are coming back bruised and battered, both mentally and physically, by the war. In order to make my position clear I intend to refer to a resolution passed on Monday night by the council of my city. I shall not attempt to spread the whole text of this resolution upon the record, but I shall read just enough to give the minister the position. Will he just give me his attention? It was moved and seconded:
Whereas this council is definitely of the opinion that members of the armed forces, who have returned from overseas service or from active service in Canada and who have received their discharge papers, should have the opportunity of securing housing accommodation for themselves and their families, by means of rental of wartime housing dwellings.
I repeat, the peak of production in that area has been reached; the pendulum seems to be swinging back so that it is now more or less of a maintenance proposition. The council in its resolution goes on to point out that the dwellings erected by Wartime Housing Limited were put up originally to take care of an emergency situation and that they are not available for members of the armed forces who have been discharged from military service. The resolution goes on to say:
Now therefore this council hereby resolves that the dominion government be petitioned to amend the present regulations governing Wartime Housing Limited dwellings and to provide that members of the armed forces who have returned from duty overseas, or who have been honourably discharged from military service, should be eligible to secure Wartime Housing dwellings for themselves and their families; and that those whose families have been residing in Wartime Housing Limited dwellings during the period of their absence on military service be permitted to continue their occupation of these dwellings.

There is also a reference to unpaid rent accounts. I have searched the records in vain to find anything covering that point; accordingly, I telegraphed to the corporation for instructions, and I received in reply this telegram:
St. Catharines, Ont.
N. J. M. Lockhart, M.P.
St. Catharines paid to Wartime Housing Limited three accounts for rentals unpaid by occupants amounting to a total of $118.12, and has also paid water rates $8.65 and electric light account $6.29.
Herbert H. Smith,
City Clerk.
I can find nothing in the law or regulations that gives Wartime Housing Limited the right to demand a guarantee from a municipality for the payment of rent for a soldier and his dependents. I think it is an unfair imposition to kick that back on to the municipality, because this housing accommodation is being used in some cases for the protection of the wives and families of soldiers who have gone overseas and returned. I suggest that in this matter the minister ask the cooperation of his colleague the Minister of Munitions and Supply to see if something cannot be done to rectify the present situation. In that area there are some 800 houses put up by Wartime Housing and there are many soldier families who have not been able to get decent housing accommodation. Some of them are living in hovels. Surely we can do something for the wives and dependents of soldiers who have returned to that area.


James Layton Ralston: I think the quickest way for me to deal with the matter would be to get the letter which was written by the Minister of Finance to the mayors of Windsor and Hamilton, I think it was, setting out the whole arrangement. I shall then give the particulars to my hon. friend. At the moment I would say that what is done is to call to the attention of the municipalities that the matter of housing is not a federal responsibility but a municipal and community responsibility. Notwithstanding that, Wartime Housing Limited has given to the municipalities the use of a certain number of houses which they may want particularly for soldiers' dependents, to be used until other housing is obtainable, and the municipalities looking after the collecting of the rents. . The soldier and his dependents are receiving pay and allowances for the purpose of paying rent. This is just a temporaiy arrangement which was made at the request of the municipalities in order to assist them in carrying out the usual obligations of municipalities in helping to provide housing for their citizens. In Windsor and Hamilton, particularly, the community associations are

War Appropriation-Army
very active in looking up housing accommodation for soldiers' dependents and in indicating or requesting, if necessary, housing of this kind from Wartime Housing Limited. Wartime Housing Limited has put at the disposal of different municipalities a certain number of houses. I have given this information to my hon. friend in advance. I will give him to-morrow the letter written by the Minister of Finance to the municipalities.


Norman James Macdonald Lockhart: May I add in all fairness to the Minister of Munitions and Supply that there is an acute housing situation in that area, which is probably the most highly industrialized in Ontario.


James Layton Ralston: That is St. Catharines?


Norman James Macdonald Lockhart: Yes, including Merritton.


James Layton Ralston: Hamilton too.


Norman James Macdonald Lockhart: Hamilton is also highly industrialized. There was a time when I felt extremely sympathetic toward the Minister of Munitions and Supply. I know that he simply could not give houses that just were not there, and the demand for munitions at that time was so great that munitions had to come first. But now the peak of production has passed in that area. I was in the national selective service office last Saturday morning and I saw at least seventy-five persons arranging for their transportation out of the city. Hundreds have already gone, and I know of several married couples who are planning on moving out because they see production tapering off.


James Layton Ralston: Moving out of Wartime Housing?


Norman James Macdonald Lockhart: Yes, I know of three or four cases personally. The resolution passed by the city council of St. Catharines does not give specific cases. It deals with the problem generally. I could give the minister specific cases of men who have come back from overseas broken down in health who are now on hospital leave from Christie' Street hospital and who just cannot get accommodation for themselves and their families in the St. Catharines area. There is a number of such cases. I am asking the minister to cooperate with the Minister of Munitions and Supply in relieving the housing shortage in that area for members of the armed forces who have returned from overseas and their dependents. I draw to the attention of the minister the situation of the returned men in that area. The city council has been doing its best to search all over for housing for a returned soldier who is mentally unbalanced on account of his war service. Here is an opportunity for Wartime Housing Limited
to give returned men and their dependents some little preference in its housing accommodation.


Mr. GREEN:: Yesterday	the minister
promised to give certain information. He said he would tell us, for example, how many men had been detailed for work in shipbuilding yards and other industries. When he is giving us that information, he could perhaps give us further details of the plans with regard to the men called up under N.R.M.A. Just two days ago the minister said that there were about 70,000 men in Canada who had been called into the army under the N.R.M.A. and that of that number
50.000	could be sent abroad to fight; in other words, there were 50,000 fighting men. That same figure of 50,000 fighting men was given also about a year ago by the minister, on May 14, to be exact. At that time he said that there were 50,000 men called up under the N.R.M.A. who could, if the government chose, be sent abroad to fight. A year has passed; 25,000 more men have been called up under the N.R.M.A., and yet to-day we have only 50,000 men, the minister says, fit to fight. I would ask the minister why it is that with this additional 25,000 called up there has been no increase in the number of those who can be sent abroad to fight. The plans for the coming year are that another
12.000	shall be called up. I should like to know whether it is the intention to have any larger number available for fighting, or whether these 12,000 who are to be called this year are simply to be replacements, so that a year from now we shall find, again, that we have only 50,000 N.R.M.A. men who are in a category such that they can do any fighting.


James Layton Ralston: First, with regard to the matter of the men for the shipyards, no soldiers have been detailed for duty with the shipyards. At the request of the Department of Munitions and Supply, in November, commands and military districts were authorized to grant six months' leave without pay and allowances to sixty soldiers who were qualified electricians and who volunteered for employment with the Burrard Dry Dock Company, Limited, Vancouver, on electrical work in connection with the conversion of certain vessels into aircraft carriers. Is that what my hon. friend is referring to?


Howard Charles Green: Yes. Where did these men come from?


James Layton Ralston: Soldiers granted this leave were issued with a free transportation warrant to Vancouver, British Columbia. This expenditure is recoverable by the Department of
War Appropriation-Army

National Defence from the Department of Munitions and Supply, who in turn will recover it from the Burrard Dry Dock company. Transportation on termination of employment is issued under the same conditions. Sixty soldiers volunteered and were released for this employment, reporting to Austin C. Taylor, Wartime Merchant Shipping, Limited, Vancouver, for interview and placement with Burrard. The report shows that recently fifty-seven of these men are still employed, three having terminated their employment due to ill health or other reasons.
I have not information here as to the districts they come from. My hon. friend will notice that commands and districts were authorized to grant six months' leave. They ' were specially trained electricians, and probably would come from quite a number of districts. I will find out.


Howard Charles Green: Were these men N.R.M.A.
men?


James Layton Ralston: I cannot tell. I will find out.


Howard Charles Green: Will the minister find out
where they were sent from?


James Layton Ralston: Yes.


Howard Charles Green: I understand that some, at
least, were sent from eastern Canada.


James Layton Ralston: My hon. friend understands they were volunteers for the work and were given leave.


Howard Charles Green: Is it possible, then, for a
soldier, if he wishes to go into a shipyard, to get leave and go away from the army for an indefinite time?


James Layton Ralston: This was a special case, a special request from the Department of Munitions and Supply to see if we could find them sixty electricians for special work, and we made an order authorizing the districts and commands to give leave to not more than sixty men in the aggregate for the purpose of taking on this work. And they got sixty men.


Howard Charles Green: Is there any similar provision to allow men to go away on leave to work in other industries, war industries or otherwise?


James Layton Ralston: No. Yesterday I read to my hon. friend all the leaves that I know about: coal mining, railways-no, I think it was, detailed for duties on railways-farming, lumbering. I do not know of any others.
With regard to the N.R.MA. personnel strength, the strength as of March 31, 1943, as given to me, was approximately 65,000 enrolled
[Mr. Ralston.1	. .'<( jj$
in that time. My hon. friend said 30,000, did he not? Nineteen thousand is what I have here.


Howard Charles Green: What year is that?


James Layton Ralston: I beg pardon-enrolled
during nine months up to December 31, 1943, 19,000; making 84,000.


Howard Charles Green: Of course the minister cannot state the figures for the full year.


James Layton Ralston: No, I cannot tell my hon. friend yet. Then, to general service, 3,000; that is to say, men who enrolled and afterwards enlisted for general service; discharges, desertions, deaths, 8,000; making 11,000; leaving the strength as of 31st December, 1944, 73,000, and on leave under these different leaves, about 5,000; leaving the effective strength
68,000.	It is estimated that about 50,000 of these are of a category suitable for overseas. At that rate, taking in the 12,000 planned for this year, I would not think there would be very much increase in the number eligible for overseas; there might be some by taking in the 12,000. The wastage here was 11,000 for the year; at least, the reductions from N.R.M.A.: 3,000 men enlisted and there were
8,000	desertions, discharges, deaths.


Howard Charles Green: How many were discharges
and how many desertions?


James Layton Ralston: I cannot tell.


Howard Charles Green: Can that information be
obtained?


James Layton Ralston: Certainly.


Howard Charles Green: Then the policy is that the number of real fighting men in Canada called up under the N.R.M.A. will not be increased?


James Layton Ralston: What I said was that our provision this year is intended for maintenance. The strength may be increased; that is, if casualties are not in accordance with calculations; if they are, less; or it may be reduced if there are more casualties or if there are some other wastages that we do not know about. But the policy is-and that is what my hon. friend wants-to provide men on a maintenance basis for the present strength.


Howard Charles Green: There is one other question on which I should like the minister to give further information. It has to do with the retirement of officers; he has mentioned it once or twice already in the course of discussion but not in any detail. I think it is a very, very serious question, and I realize that it is a very difficult question. Apparently a large number of officers who have served, many of them since the beginning of the war,

War Appropriation-Army
and some of them overseas, with distinction, and have done good work, are now either being retired or being kept around the depots, told to report back once a week or just keep in touch, not knowing what is going to happen to them, not knowing whether they will be able to do anything further in the army, not knowing whether they should be getting busy about finding some place to earn their living in civilian life; and I think there should be a clear-cut announcement by the minister with regard to these men. It seems to me a tragedy that men can be brought along over this period of time, given many courses, trained until they are efficient officers, and now find that there is no use for them at the present time.
It is true that Canada has not done a great deal of fighting, and casualties-fortunately- have not been very heavy. Probably it will only be a short time until we are having heavy casualties and shall need some of these men. I think the policy regarding them should be given further consideration by the minister. Sometimes I wonder whether the department has not gone too far in the direction of arbitrarily ruling men out at a certain age. Personally I know of many cases where men have gone into the army at great sacrifice and done a good job and now are just hanging around, not knowing what is going to happen to them, becoming disgruntled, and, I think, being treated unfairly. I know the minister would not do that intentionally, but that is the result. These men feel that they are being treated unfairly. Is there not a place for some of them, at any rate, in the administration of the conquered countries, the countries which have been overrun? I believe that we have a course in which Canadian officers are trained for administration work in the overrun countries. Is there not scope here for some of these men? The situation is very serious, and the minister should give further consideration to it, not just say, "Oh, we are modernizing our army and these men have to get out; we thank them for what they have done, but they had better get busy and return to civilian life." That may have to be the answer, but it just does not seem good enough to me under present conditions, in the state of the war at the present time. If this is to be the policy in training these men there is a great deal of money as well as experience being wasted, and I doubt whether the governmental policy at the present time is a wise one. I should like to have an answer.


James Layton Ralston: Let me give the figures with regard to the break-down of the 8,000: 6,500 were discharged, 1.500 deserted.


Howard Charles Green: That is, 1,500 N.R.MA. deserted in the nine months of the present fiscal year?


James Layton Ralston: Yes.


Howard Charles Green: Are these 1,500 still missing?


James Layton Ralston: They may be missing and other men may be picked up. There has been a more or less even flow in the last three months.


Howard Charles Green: That is a very high percentage of desertions.


James Layton Ralston: There have been 11,000 in the four and a half years of war-a net loss of 11,000. In reference to officers, my hon. friend has spoken on a- subject regarding which he is quite right in assuming that I have a very particular interest. I appreciate all that he has said and I considered all that before the present policy was put into effect. The situation is this. We must be realistic and face the hard fact that there are many officers who, as compared with other officers, are not advantageously employable; that is to say, there are officers who can better do the job and whose services are available. What is being done, therefore, is to have these boards sort out the officers, appraise their qualifications, and endeavour to find the best men for the job. That means that there is a substantial reduction in officers, and will be.


Howard Charles Green: Does the minister mean that there are younger officers?


James Layton Ralston: There are some younger officers too. In the last week I have signed ten retirements for officers from twenty-one to thirty. The term- "not advantageously employable" was used, but it meant that those particular officers simply could not do the job and it was felt that they ought to serve somewhere else.


Howard Charles Green: In most cases it is a matter of age.


James Layton Ralston: It is a matter of age and also a matter of the job being abolished. The majority of cases are those of age. Here is the number, and perhaps this will contradict what I said. In the three months from October to January 26, 1,077 officers have been retired, and of that number 212 were recommended for retirement for reasons of age. Of the others, the 800, many were probably seniors-not senior officers but senior in point of age.


Howard Charles Green: Replaced by younger men?


James Layton Ralston: Yes.
War Appropriation-Army


Mr. ADAMSON:: How many retired at their own request?


James Layton Ralston: I have not that statement at the moment. I do not want to refer to what anyone else is doing, or to give that as an excuse for what we are doing, but I have heard no statement which the Minister of National Defence for Air has made this year which has been received with as much applause as the statement he made with regard to the reduction in the number of officers.


Howard Charles Green: You cannot judge policies by applause in this house.


James Layton Ralston: Nevertheless I thought it rather indicated that the policy was a sound one. Someone said to me, "Does that affect you?" I said, "It affects me to this extent that tihe army started ten months ago"-


Howard Charles Green: Do not pay too much attention to applause.


James Layton Ralston: -and I was told that it was a good example to follow. The same situation exists in the United States. They announced a surplus of 65,000 officers and subsequently, through reorganization, the number has been reduced by about half. That is the situation. It is the same in munitions plants, and with executives who have been helping in the war effort. The time has come when we are on a maintenance rather than on a capital basis and the result is a distinct lowering in the number of jobs available. The system we have may not work perfectly, but I do take some pride in it. These officers have personal interviews, and the officers at the depots are in most cases men to whom it could be said at once, "out". At the same time, however, these boards are doing their level best to be sure that there is no job for these men before they are allowed to go. Men come to me frequently and say, "I want an answer yes or no"; but they do not want no. It is the same with these officers. Each individual case is considered by the board an'd passed on by the adjutant general and by the military secretary, whom I regard as the officer's friend. He goes over the cases himself, and it is only after all that is done that the retirements take place. There is a regular procedure and a notice is sent to the officer. Only this morning I gave instructions to see if we could not make that notice a little more human.
M.r. GREEN: It is not very human now.


James Layton Ralston: It is a mimeographed notice that goes to the officer, and after he has held a post for some time it is not a

particularly welcome document. We want to make it as human as we possibly can. The notice is given and the man has an opportunity of making a complaint or a protest or pointing out where he might be used. That is considered by the board, and they make a recommendation as to whether or not the representation shall be entertained, or whether that particular occupation or post which the man suggests might be made available to him. It is only after all that is done that the discharge is made. I take a view opposite to that of my hon. friend. I think officers ought to be discharged faster than they are.


Howard Charles Green: Ought to be what?


James Layton Ralston: I say there should be more speed in connection with the discharge of officers, and I am afraid that the slowness is due to the fact that the board is working at what is an impossible task, nameljy, that of finding employment for all these men. The point is that these men are much better off going back to civil life now than when the rush comes. This is an opportunity for them to go back, and what is detaining them is the pride which they feel in the fact that they have worn the uniform during the war, have helped to build up the army, and have trained men, and feel, therefore, that there should be some place in the army for them while the war lasts.
There was a man of forty-nine in my office the day before yesterday. He has two boys overseas with good service in this war, and he was overseas himself; yet we sent one of these notices to him. The notice took a somewhat more human and intimate form than is usual, but he made an appeal to the minister, as it is his right to do under section 42. I am sending him a letter, as I am bound to, to tell him that I cannot find employment for him. These are tough cases-this is a particularly tough one because there are many that have not nearly the merit it has. I should like to be able to tell the committee that I will try to reconsider the policy, but I cannot reconsider it if administration is to be carried on. It would mean that we would be loaded up with a lot of officers on the payroll, and they would be at least lulled into the security of thinking there is a job for them, only to find, some day, sooner or later, that they have to be cut off. There will have to be many more retirements yet, as there have been in the United States. As regards age, in the United States they are retiring them if over thirty-eight and putting them on the inactive list. We are retiring them at sixty; that is the automatic retirement. I do not say that

War Appropriation-Army
in the United States they automatically retire those over thirty-eight, but those are the only ones taken into account. They look over the men of thirty-eight and see how many can be retired. We are taking them much lower than that, from between thirty and thirty-five. There are not many of these, though there are some.
That is the policy with regard to officers and it is working. That is the machinery we have set up. * We have not just one board for Canada but four boards.- These boards have gone out and got acquainted with these officers intimately in order to assess their qualifications and at the same time to be in touch with the districts to find out what posts there are into which they may be fitted.


Howard Charles Green: About how many officers are facing retirement? How many will have to be retired?


James Layton Ralston: I cannot tell my hon. friend, for this reason: You take officers in the bulk. We might have what may be regarded, as a reserve-this figure is a rough one-of six thousand or something like that in other words, subalterns, a great many officers who have been recently commissioned. It includes older officers as well. You have to keep a substantial reserve, and I cannot say how many of these would be facing retirement. I am not going to make any guess at the moment. Speaking of officers, I should like to make an announcement to the committee before it is made to the press. This is an announcement which will take up the slack in connection with a number of these junior officers, the men who have just graduated or who are in training centres. We are making an arrangement with the British to lend them a certain number-I am not going to say the number, but it is a substantial number-[DOT]
Mr. GREEN. Junior officers?


James Layton Ralston: Junior officers, yes. Under the plan a large number of junior officers, largely of the infantry corps, the Canadian army, are to be lent on a voluntary basis to the British army for service in the European and Mediterranean theatres of war. The plan will permit many captains and lieutenants trained in infantry for overseas duty and physically fit, who otherwise would be unlikely soon to see service abroad, to gain further valuable experience with the British army. The plan is to go into effect immediately. For security reasons the number of officers permitted to go into action with British units under this agreement cannot be disclosed, but a definite limit will be placed on the number to be accepted. The great strength in reinforcement officers which has gradually been
built up in Canada since the outbreak of war makes it improbable that all officers eligible for overseas service will see early action with the Canadian army overseas. The loan plan offers an opportunity to serve with the British forces in the field. Junior officers of the Canadian army in order to take advantage of this plan must, of course, volunteer for this service; that is to say, officers will be given the option of volunteering to go to the British under this plan. They will be on loan for a minimum period of three months. However, their recall has been provided for as and when it is desirable; that is to say, recall by the Canadian government.
One effect of that scheme will be to create for the Canadian army a pool of experienced and, in many cases, battle-trained platoon and company commanders and'potential junior staff officers. The Canadian officers who volunteer for service with the British army will continue to receive their pay and allowances from the Canadian government and at regular Canadian rates, as in the case of the Royal Canadian Air Force crew serving with the Royal Air Force. They will also continue to wear "Canada" badges on their shoulders while serving with the British army. It is pointed out that by volunteering under this plan, Canadian junior officers do not forego opportunities for normal promotion, but while on loan their promotion will be subject to British recommendation and confirmation by Canadian authorities. During the last war many Canadians served as officers in British units in a number of theatres of active operation. The contacts made between the Canadian officers volunteering for this service and the British army should prove invaluable in cementing the cordial relations and understanding already existing between the Canadian and British armies. The loan plan was termed by a senior British officer-that is, in correspondence with the department-as a great contribution to the united war effort. [DOT]
I am afraid there is not very much more I can give in the way of details of the plan. I have already said that they are volunteers. With regard to the ranks of officers we are lending, they are ready to take one captain for each eight lieutenants. They can be recalled at any time. They are to be kept for a minimum of three months. We are asking the officers to agree not to ask for a return to Canada for at least three months. There will be special cases, of course-


Howard Charles Green: Are they going from England or from Canada?


James Layton Ralston: Practically all from
Canada. Pay, allowances and pensions will be paid by Canada. In reference to discipline,
War Appropriation-Army

we want to be particular about that. All adverse reports will be submitted to Canadian military headquarters in London before action is instituted thereon; that is to say, Canada feels that we should keep our hand on that particular feature of the service, particularly since they are on loan. They are subject, of course, to British military law, but in case of a court martial-and I hope there will not be any-sentence must be confirmed by Canadian authorities. We are planning to have a liaison officer at the war office to do nothing but look after postings of these officers and generally watch their interest and the Canadian interest in connection with this plan. I mentioned promotion. It will be to acting rank on recommendation of the British. Normally these would be confirmed by Canadian military headquarters after six months.


Grote Stirling: Is this open to officers of all infantry units in the Canadian active army in Canada at the present time?


James Layton Ralston: I do not know. The adjutant general is working on it to-day. I do not know exactly whether he is making it to apply to other than those who are actually at corps training centres or at Brockville taking advanced refresher courses, or in camps. I rather think it might be made pretty generally open unless it is a case where in the exigencies of the service a man cannot be spared. My own feeling would be-I was talking to the adjutant general this morning-to give a chance to all junior officers who can be spared. If a man wants to volunteer let him go and substitute for somebody who does not. I may say also I do not think there is any objection in the way of security to saying this. The understanding is that the service is to be restricted to the European and Mediterranean theatres in order to facilitate return in case we should want to recall them.
This is a plan which -I think bids fair to provide some outlet for the energies of a number of junior officers who at the present time are viewing with some concern the prospects of getting overseas soon, and at the same time it provides them with training.


Howard Charles Green: Would it not be wise to make the same provision for some of our officers to be trained with the Australians in the Pacific area? Sooner or later Canada will be fighting the Japanese. It is vital that there should be trained men in that type of warfare. Why are we not giving our men an opportunity to get that training?


James Layton Ralston: Do not let my hon. friend assume we are not. I am not making any 
statement in regard to that at the moment. There are some arrangements along that line in hand.


Jean-François Pouliot: Just a minute ago, the
hon. member for Vancouver South, who asked a few questions, mentioned N.R.M.A. soldiers. I have in my hand the Canada Gazette of October 30, which contains the National Resources Mobilization Act, army regulations 1943. It is National Resources Mobilization Act army. By virtue of the mobilization act there are two kinds of regulations, those enforced by the Department of Labour and1 those enforced ;by the Department of National Defence proper. These regulations are something like a schedule to an act, and there is a paragraph which I intend to read to show the importance of the regulations and to Show also that by virtue thereof the Department of National Defence has a priority over all.essential industry. This means, therefore, that national selective service is the bunk. Here is the paragraph which is of the utmost importance; listen to this:
In the event of any inconsistency between the provisions of these regulations and the provisions of any other statute or any orders or regulations made thereunder, the provisions of these regulations shall govern.
This is contained in order in council P.C. 7898, which was passed on October 14, 1943, and it means that the regulations established under the order in council for the Department of National Defence have priority over the regulations, also passed by order in council, administered by the Minister of Labour. This has been drafted in an ingenious way. A volunteer is no longer a volunteer according to these regulations; he is a G.S. soldier, under subparagraph (c) of paragraph 6 of the appendix to the order in council I have just mentioned. One would wonder just what is a G.S. soldier; no one ever heard of him before, but it means "general service." The provision reads:
A "G.S. soldier" is a soldier who has voluntarily enlisted for general service during the continuation of the state of war now existing and for the period of demobilization thereafter and who has been taken on the strength of the Canadian army (active) and appointed to a corps placed on active service under section 64 of the Militia Act.
That is the act by virtue of which we have conscription for overseas, but this is the definition of a volunteer; a volunteer is a GB. soldier. Now, what is a N.R.M.A. soldier? That means nothing. He is a draftee, a conscript or a recruit, who has not volunteered as yet. The regulation reads:

War Appropriation-Army
A "N.R.M.A. soldier" is a soldier who has been enrolled and who is undergoing training or performing service or duty under the N.R.M.A. or regulations passed pursuant thereto.
So that a N.R.M.A. soldier is one who has been called by virtue of the regulations giving authority to the Department of Labour. Then amendments were made to this order, but I have only the French copy of the war orders of December 20, 1943, containing the amendments to the army regulations, which were published in the Canada Gazette. I would ask the minister to be kind enough to complete the amendments made by order in council P.C. 9372 of December 7, 1943. I hope that to-morrow he will be able to give us a summary of the amendments to those regulations, which are of the utmost importance.
What I find wrong in this amendment is that it refers to the Army Act, which is not included in the Revised Statutes of Canada but is published in another book. It seems to me that the proper way to legislate is to pass amendments which are complete in themselves, and for the understanding of which it is not necessary to go through the whole library. This amendment contains the definition of a man who reports to a training centre following receipt of an order under the authority of national selective service, and it includes also the definition of a person. Then there is a reference to paragraph 10 of section 176 of the Army Act, and further on there is another reference to the Army Act. May I suggest that the minister tell the office of the judge advocate general that the sections of other acts referred to should be included in amendments affecting any of these orders in council. We have these war orders and regulations, but they mean nothing if each amendment or each order is not complete in itself. I am a layman; I cannot understand the meaning and purpose of that amendment of December 7, and there may be others. It seems only right that members of parliament should be familiar with the regulations affecting the boys in the army or those who may be called by the registrars, and the effect of the call. At the present time it is impossible to inform anyone; we have to write to the department, disturbing the minister or his parliamentary assistant or the other officials, to secure the information we are entitled to have at hand all the time.


James Layton Ralston: I can give my hon. friend the information. That particular amendment just strikes out two words in section 26, if he and I are looking at the same thing.


Jean-François Pouliot: If the minister will pardon me, I am referring to order in council P.C.
9372 of December 7, 1943; it is one of the first orders in council contained in the war orders which were published on December 20 last. It takes thirteen and a half lines in French.


James Layton Ralston: I thought my hon. friend was asking me what was the effect of P.C. 9372.


Jean-François Pouliot: Yes, and I should like to know what is the definition of a person according to the Army Act, as well as the meaning of the two references to the Army Act in that order in council.


James Layton Ralston: I think I can give my hon. friend the effect of order in council P.C. 9372 on what I have marked here as order in council P.C. 7989 and the regulations attached thereto. Is that what my hon. friend is dealing with?


Jean-François Pouliot: No; what I am asking for is the text of the references to the Army Act which are included in order in council P.C. 9372 and other amendments, if any, to order in council P.C. 7989.
Progress reported.


[Stage Direction]
At six o'clock the house adjourned, without question put, pursuant to standing order.
Thursday, February 17, 1944