1944-02-24

PRIVILEGE, MR. ROSE  ROOM ACCOMMODATION IN PARLIAMENT BUILDING

Mr. FRED ROSE (Cartier):: Mr. Speaker, I rise to a question of privilege. For a month or or more I have been waiting patiently to be assigned a room in this building. I did not want to bring up this matter in this house, believing that there were many more important matters which should be dealt with but I

778	COMMONS
House of Commons-Room Accommodation
have pleaded with you, Mr. Speaker, and with the Clerk of the House without being able to get any satisfaction. I have had the job of mailing out my speeches; I keep my mail in a box somewhere in one of the rooms, but I have no proper accommodation, and I feel that the time has come when I must speak up, since apparently there is no other way of getting satisfaction. We talk about complacency. I have found a great deal of it, with people unwilling to move their desks in order to make it possible for another hon. member to do his duty to his electors, and I am afraid that reflects another sort of complacency among many hon. members here. As I say, I have waited patiently, but now I bring this matter to the attention of the house in the hope that I may get satisfaction. I do not believe it should have been necessary to mention it in this house; the matter should have been attended to the day I arrived here, and I should not have had to wait four weeks without result.


Mr. SPEAKER:: The hon. member has a grievance which I think he has a right to express. I would point out to the hon. gentleman and to the house that I have been endeavouring to see that a room was provided for the hon. member, which would mean that changes would have to be made in the rooms at present occupied by other hon. members of the house. I have met with very little cooperation on the part of hon. members when these necessary alterations were suggested, but now that the hon. gentleman has placed the matter before the house I may state that I shall have to exercise the authority resting with the Speaker of the house, and I expect to receive cooperation from hon. members. There may be some inconvenience, but the hon. gentleman is entitled to the use of a room, and he must get it.



WAR EXPENDITURES

[Stage Direction]
First report of special committee on war expenditures.-Mr. Cleaver.


[Stage Direction]
Hon. CYRUS MACMILLAN (Queens) presented the first report of special committee on social security and moved that the report be concurred in.
Mr. HANSON (York-Sunbury):: Is this urgent? This report was presented only

to-day, and concurrence cannot be moved without consent.


Mr. MACMILLAN:: There is some urgency, because we desire to reduce the number necessary for a quorum. It will make it much easier to get a quorum. If the hon. member
objects, we can let it stand.
Motion stands.



PUBLIC SERVICE


Hon. J. L. ILSLEY (Minister of Finance):: Mr. Speaker, I would like to make an announcement which I think will be of interest to hon. members.
In conformity with the government's announced policy of promoting employee representation in private industry and the improvement of industrial relations generally, the treasury board has decided to provide for the setting up of an employer-employee council in the public service of Canada. In working out this policy the treasury board will accept as its general model, with the necessary adaptations to suit Canadian conditions, the pattern which has been evolved in the L'nited Kingdom through the application of so-called Whitley councils to the British public service. The board is therefore providing immediately for the establishment of a national joint council of the public service of Canada equally representative of the official and staff sides of the public service, but, as it is desirable that the new organization and procedure should evolve as a result of consultation and general discussion rather than being imposed from above in any cut and dried fashion, we are immediately suggesting a tentative constitution of the new joint council and wish to have the council itself give the fullest consideration to all questions relating to its permanent organization and procedure and to make recommendations for a permanent constitution to the treasury board within a specified period.
Initially, the national joint council is to consist of six representatives of the official or employer side of the public service, and six representatives of the staff or employee side. The Civil Service Federation, the Civil Service Association, the Amalgamated Civil Servants, the Professional Institute, and the Dominion Customs and Excise Officers' Association are each being asked to name one representative to the council, and the three organizations which represent the postal employees are being asked to select one representative to

Public Service-Council
represent them. The treasury board will itself nominate six senior civil servants to act as the representatives of the government, included amongst whom will be a representative of the Civil Service Commission.
The national joint council will act in an advisory capacity to the treasury board in all matters affecting the conditions of work in the public service. In certain fields their recommendations may appropriately be made directly to the Civil Service Commission. The council will, of course, not have any executive powers which would impair the responsibility of the cabinet or treasury board or Civil Service Commission, or possibly infringe upon the authority of parliament. While the council's functions will therefore be advisory only, it is clear that if both sides take their responsibilities seriously and endeavour to make the new organization a means of promoting better understanding, improved morale and greater efficiency in the civil service, any recommendations of the council reached by agreement should carry great weight with the treasury board and the Civil Service Commission.
The general purpose of the national joint council will be to secure a greater measure of cooperation between the state in its capacity of employer and the general body of civil servants in matters affecting the civil service, with a view to increased efficiency in the public service combined with the well-being of those employed; to provide machinery for dealing with grievances and for making suggestions for improved efficiency; and generally to bring together the experience and different points of view of representatives of the administrative, clerical and manipulative sides of the civil service.
More specifically, the duties of the national council will be:
(a)	to recommend to the treasury board the best means for securing to the staff a greater share in and greater responsibility for the determination and observance of the conditions under which their duties are carried out, and in particular to consider and report to the treasury board not later than June 30, 1944, on a permanent constitution for the national joint council of the public service of Canada, on the advisability of providing for the establishment of various departmental or district joint councils, and, if such are recommended, on the organization and procedure of such joint councils and their relationship to the national joint council;
(b)	to make recommendations to the treasury board or the Civil Service Commission, as the case may require, regarding the
100-50J	,
general principles governing conditions of service in the public service of Canada, including recruitment, training, hours of work, promotions, discipline, tenure, remuneration and superannuation;
(c)	to recommend to the treasury board or the Civil Service Commission, or both, the best means for utilizing the ideas and experience of the staff;
(d)	to make recommendations to the Civil Service Commission regarding the encouragement of the further education of civil servants and their training in higher administration and organization;
(e) to make	recommendations to the treasury board or the Civil Service Commission, or both, regarding the improvement of office procedures and organization and the provision of opportunities for the full consideration of suggestions by the staff on this subject; and
(f) to make recommendations	to the treasury board regarding proposed legislation in so far as it has a bearing upon the position of civil servants in relation to their employment.
In the tentative constitution which is being provided for the national joint council, provision is being made for the holding of regular and special meetings, for the appointment of a chairman (who shall be a representative of the treasury board) and a vice-chairman (who shall be a representative of the staff side and chosen by the staff representatives), for the filling of vacancies, and for other procedural and organizational matters.
*	DAIRY PRODUCTS



ANNOUNCEMENT OF GOVERNMENT POLICY FOR COMING MILK YEAR

Hon. J. G. GARDINER (Minister of Agriculture) :: I desire to make an announcement of government policy on milk and other dairy products covering the milk year which begins May 1, 1944. and continues until April 30, 1945.
I should like at the outset of my remarks to record the appreciation of the government of the splendid job which the dairy producers of Canada have done and are continuing to do on production in spite of difficulties. The season of 1942-43 was unusually favourable and a record production was secured. The latter half of the season of 1943-44 has been very unfavourable and milk producers have done a remarkably good job in maintaining milk production at high levels.
The chief difficulty beginning in November was related to a short supply of feed in eastern Canada, resulting from the poorest crop which

Dairy Products-Government Policy
eastern Canada has harvested in fifty years. Realizing the danger of a drop in supplies the government increased the subsidies on all dairy products between October 1,1943, and April 30, 1944. This, together with assistance given toward the movement of feed grain from the West, has resulted in fair supplies under extremely difficult circumstances.
It is hoped that weather conditions will be more favourable throughout 1944, although it is recognized that to the extent that grain feed is required an improvement in the position cannot come until a new crop is harvested in the
east. By far the greater part of dairy production will, however, depend upon pastures during the early part of the season, and to that extent costs will be reduced as compared with the winter season.
The new subsidy levels are therefore placed on a lower plane in the first five months than they were during the last seven months of the preceding year, but on most items will be placed at the same level for the last seven months.
The subsidies for the year 1943-44 were as follows:
May 1, 1943 to	Oct. 1, 1943 to
Sept. 30, 1943	April 30, 1944
Fluid milk	 25 cents a hundred	55 cents a hundred (excepting
in certain districts where it
_	is 25 cents)
'Cheese (milk)	
Nil	30 cents a hundredButter	
8 cents lb. butterfat to	10 cents lb. butterfat Jan. 1Dec. 31	to April 30Concentrated whole milk	
Nil	30 cents a hundred
The subsidies for the year 1944-45 will be as follows:
May 1 to Sept. 30,	Oct. 1, 1944 to
1944	April 30, 1945
Fluid milk	 35	cents	a hundred	55	cents	a hundred
(except in certain districts where it will continue to be _	25 cents)
Cheese (milk)	
20	cents	a hundred	20	cents	a hundredButter	
10	cents	lb. butterfat	10	cents	lb.	butterfatConcentrated whole milk	
15	cents	a hundred	30	cents	a hundred
It will be noted that in respect of fluid milk there are some districts where there are exceptions to the subsidies suggested. In certain districts subsidies have been 25 cents throughout the year, and those subsidies will be continued.
We are at present negotiating a contract with Great Britain for cheese, which we hope will provide for Britian to take all the cheese we can provide during the next two years. Any surpluses of butter or canned milk which may result can be marketed in Britain.
We think these subsidies, along with the door under prices already provided through our agreements and otherwise for dairy products, should-result, if weather is favourable, in a record production in dairy products in 1944.
We therefore feel justified in urging the highest possible production of cheese in the cheese producing areas, the highest possible production of butter in the butter producing areas, the utilization of duplex plants for cheese in summer and butter in fall and winter seasons where duplex plants exist, and the

production of whole milk tributary to cities and processing plants turning out commodities desired in our war effort.
We are taking authority through the food board to direct plants to depend upon the same sources for milk supply as in a previous year. We are most anxious that butter and fluid milk supplies should meet domestic requirements, and that cheese should be available for both domestic and allied markets.


Mr. TUSTIN:: Does the twenty cents per hundred for cheese milk apply for the whole year?


James Garfield Gardiner: That is right.


Mr. SENN:: Would the Minister of Agriculture clarify the statement he has just made by saying in what years or under what conditions the subsidy on fluid milk will not be paid?


James Garfield Gardiner: I think that would be too long a statement to make, Mr. Speaker, under any circumstances, but I could not make it at the moment with the information at hand.

Questions



RAILWAY ACT AMENDMENT


[Stage Direction]
Mr. T. L. CHURCH (Broadview) moved for leave to introduce bill No. 6, to amend the railway act.
Some hon. MEMBERS:: Explain.


Mr. CHURCH:: This bill proposes to amend the Railway Act in order to provide certain concessions in railway fares to our soldiers during this war. At the present time the Railway Act does not provide any special concessions for soldiers; it applies only to civilians. The board of transport commissioners has no power to order any special rates for soldiers. During the last war soldiers were carried for half fare during week-ends and during this war they are carried for half fare on all days. However, the camps are located all across Canada and there should be some body such as the transport commission which should have power over it, to see that fares are reasonable, grant any necessary concessions, and eliminate any discrimination against our soldiers.
Motion agreed to and bill read the first time. QUESTIONS
(Questions answered orally are indicated by an asterisk.)



SAINT JOHN-HALIFAX AIR SERVICE

Mr. HAZEN:: 1.	Did the Canadian Pacific Air Lines Limited apply to the government or the board of transport commissioners for permission to institute an air service between Saint John, New Brunswick, and Halifax, Nova Scotia?
2.	If so, when was such application received?
3.	Did the applicants state when the service would be started if permission were granted?
4.	Was an exclusive franchise asked for?
5. Was the request of the company granted?
6. Did the boards of trade of Saint John and Halifax make a joint application to the board of transport commissioners in November last to grant a licence to responsible persons to operate a commercial air service between the two cities?
7.	Did the board of transport commissioners grant the licence?
8.	Has the governor in council named Saint John, New Brunswick, and Halifax, Nova Scotia, as places between which the board of transport commissioners may license aircraft to transport passengers and goods under the provisions of part 3 of the Transport Act, 1938, and if not, why has it not done so?
9.	Is it the intention of the government to establish an air service between Saint John, New Brunswick, and Halifax, Nova Scotia, and if so, when will the service commence to operate?


Mr. HOWE:: 1 and 2. Yes. To the board of transport commissioners, under date November 6, and to the Department of Transport, under date November 11, 1943.
3.	No.
4.	This point was not raised.
5.	No.
6.	Yes.
7.	No.
8.	No. By order in council, P.C. 976, of April 27, 1939, part III of The Transport Act, 1938, was made applicable to transport by air by means of interurban air transport services between "Moneton-St. John-Halifax". Subsequently the Maritime provinces were declared a prohibited flying area under the defence air regulations, and for this reason, said order in council was rescinded by order in council, P.C. 4040, of December 8, 1939.
9.	Trans-Canada Air Lines has been authorized by order in council, P.C. 6256, of August 6, 1943, made pursuant to the "Trans-Canada contract" authorized under The Trans-Canada Air Lines Act, 1937, to establish a service between Blissville, N.B., and Halifax which will be placed in operation immediately upon the completion of a radio range now under construction at an intermediate aerodrome on the route between Saint John and Halifax.



PERSONNEL RECRUITED IN ONTARIO AND SHOWN AS RECRUITED IN QUEBEC

Mr. WHITE:: 1.	Have any persons recruited in Ontario since the beginning of the war to date, and sent to Quebec without being given their regimental number, been shown as recruited from Quebec?
2.	If so, what is the number of such recruits?


Mr. MACDONALD (Halifax):: 1.	See answer to question No. 2.
2.	There are no records which show the number of persons, if any, recruited in Ontario for Quebec or the number, if any, sent from Ontario to Quebec without being given their regimental number.
The records maintained at national defence headquarters do not give the number of men who may have gone from Ontario to Quebec to enlist. An examination of all the enlistment papers in the military districts of Quebec which would involve a tremendous amount of work, and then would not show those recruited in Ontario but would only show the number of those enlisting in Quebec who gave Ontario as their home address and such men would not necessarily have been recruited in Ontario.
7S2
Questions



BOOKLET &quot;THE COMPLETE FLYING COURSE&quot;- N. ROY HARBEN, D.F.C.

[Stage Direction]
Mr. MeGREGOR:
1.	How many copies of the book entitled "The 'Complete Flying Course", by N. Roy Harben, D.F.C., were purchased?
2.	What was the date of the original order, and who authorized the purchase?
3.	What was the cost per copy?
4.	How many copies were distributed, and how was its distribution effected?
5.	By whose authority has the salvage officer, J. C. Kelley, called for tenders for 3,844 copies, as per circular No. G.S.,6066?
6.	What is the official status of N. Roy Harben, D.F.C.?
7.	Was he in the employ of the government?
8.	If so, what salary or remuneration did he receive, and is he in the government service at this time?
Mr. MACMILLAN:: 1.	5,325.
2.	27th January, 1940 by acting air member for organization and training, air commodore now Air Marshal L. S. Breadner.
3.	$1.50.
4.	5,191 copies were distributed according to scale of issue for various schools-75 copies to initial training schools, 60 to elementary flying training schools and 105 to service flying training schools.
5.	By memorandum of 21st December, 1943 from deputy director of publications concurred in by director of staff duties. Eighty per cent of those offered for sale have been returned from units after being used in training.
6.	7 and 8. When this publication was produced in 1938, Mr. Harben was the owner and [DOT]civilian manager of Air Schools Ltd., Derby, England. His company carried on the elementary training of pilots for the R.A.F.
On the outbreak of war Mr. Harben, a reserve officer of the R.A.F., was brought back to active duty as a wing commander R.A.F. and as such carries on his peacetime profession of training R.A.F. pilots in elementary flying.
He has never been an employee of the Canadian government.



WARTIME PRICES AND TRADE BOARD-PROSECUTIONS

Mr. BENCE:: 1.	How many charges were laid in Canada for violation of the wartime prices and trade board regulations and orders, and administrators' regulations and orders in, (a) 1942; (b) 1943?
2.	How many of such charges were abandoned before proceeding to trial in, (a) 1942; (b) 1943?
3.	What was the total number of convictions obtained as the result of such charges in, (a) 1942; (b) 1943?
4.	What was the total amouut of fines collected as the result of such convictions in, (a) 1942; (b) 1943?

5.	What was the total amount of lawyers' fees incurred by the government as result of such charges in, (a) 1942; (b) 1943?


Mr. ABBOTT:: 1.	The number of persons charged in Canada with alleged violations of wartime prices and trade board regulations and orders including administrators' regulations and orders was: (a) in the year 1942, 1,285; (b) in the year 1943, 3,792.
2.	The number of the foregoing charges abandoned before proceeding to trial was:
(a)	in the year 1942, 91; (b) in the year 1943, 206.
3.	The total number of convictions obtained as a result of such charges was: (a) in the year 1942, 1,107; (b) in the year 1943, 3,369.
4.	Total amount of fines collected and deposited to the credit of the receiver general as a result of convictions and charges laid for violation of the wartime prices and trade board regulations and orders was (a) in the year
1942,	$53,633 23, (b) in the year 1943, $185,534.61.
5.	Total amount of lawyers' fees and disbursements paid by the wartime prices and trade board as a result of charges laid for violation of the wartime prices and trade board regulations (a) in the year 1942, $27,483.46;
(b)	in the year 1943, $100,972.54.



ENEMY ALIENS-APPLICATION S FOR NATURALIZATION CERTIFICATES

Mr. SHAW:: 1.	How many enemy aliens have made application for certificates of naturalization since September 1, 1939?
2.	How many such applications have been approved and certificates issued?
3.	How many certificates of naturalization have been issued since September 1, 1939, to enemy aliens who made application for naturalization prior to the outbreak of war?
4.	How many certificates of naturalization have been issued to enemy alien members of the Canadian armed forces since January 1,
1943,	who, (a) made application prior to enlistment; (b) made application following enlistment; (c) made no application?


Mr. McLARTY:: 1.	Statistics are not compiled on the basis of dates of applications for naturalization but only in respect to certificates issued.
2.	See answer to No. 1 above.
3.	For reason stated in answer to No. 1 it is not possible to state what certificates have been issued in respect to applications prior to the outbreak of war. The certificates issued to former nationals of enemy countries are shown in the following statement:

Questions
Sept. 1/39..		Finland	Germany 263
1940..			477
1941..			152
1942..	155	1071943. .	80	146Hungary	Italy	Roumania	Japan362	266	15S	132	222	91	226	126	4.	(a) Finland, 2; Germany, 2; Hungary, 2; Italy, 3; Roumania, 2. (b) Finland, 8; Germany, 5; Hungary, 3; Italy, 6.	(e) None.



METALS CONTROL

Mr. ESLING:: 1.	How many properties in Canada are being operated by the metals control board?
2.	What is the total tonnage recovered as from January 1, 1940?
3.	What is the value thereof?
4.	How many properties in British Columbia were developed by the metals control board?
5.	What was the total expenditure on each of these properties?
6.	For what period was each property operated?


Mr. HOWE:: 1.	Wartime metals corporation have operated or are operating twelve properties.
2.	3,046,355 tons treated to December 31, 1943, to produce 80,943,472 lbs., recoverable metals.
3.	The value of the contained metals at current market prices approximated $10,000,000.
4.	Four.
5.	To December 31, 1943:
Capital expenditure
Twin "J"	 $270,445
Kootenay Florence	181,681
Emerald Tungsten	838,175
Lava Talc	 22,947
6.	Twin "J"-December, 1942, to present; Kootenay Florence-December, 1942, to present; Emerald Tungsten-October, 1942, to September 15, 1943; Lava Talc-October, 1943, to present.



R.C.A.F. AND R.A.F.-CANADIANS DECORATED FOR GALLANTRY

Mr. SINCLAIR:: 1. How many members of the R.C.A.F. have been decorated for gallantry in the present war?
2.	What are' the names and home addresses of the recipients of each of these awards for gallantry?
3.	How many Canadians in the R.A.F. have been decorated for gallantry in the present war?
4.	What are the names and home addresses of the recipients of each of these awards for gallantry?
5.	How many members of the R.C.A.F. and Canadians in the R.A.F. have been decorated for gallantry by allied governments in the present war?
6.	What are the names and home addresses of the recipients of these awards for gallantry from allied governments?


Cyrus Macmillan: In honour of the more than 1,200 young Canadians who have received awards for gallantry, this somewhat extensive information is given as an ordinary answer rather than as an order for return. It is believed that every hon. member would wish to have printed on Hansard the names and home addresses of these gallant young Canadians in tribute to their splendid achievements, of which Canada is so proud.
1.	At 17th February, 1944, members of the R.C.A.F. decorated for gallantry in the present war numbered 1,080.
2.	See appendix "A".
3.	At 17th February, 1944, Canadians in the R.A.F. decorated for gallantry in the present war numbered 164.
4.	See appendix "B".
Note:-The R.C.A.F. can assume no responsibility for the correctness of appendix "B". However, the list has been compiled from official documents provided by the R.A.F. Home addresses are included where available.
5.	At 17th February, 1944, members of the R.C.A.F. and Canadians in the R.A.F. decorated for gallantry by allied governments in the present war numbered 17.
6.	See appendix "C".



APPENDIX &quot;A&quot;

[Stage Direction]
(Bars to D.S.O. & D.F.C. for personnel indicated by *)
George Cross
Number-Rank-Name-Home Address
R97644, LAC Gravell, K. M„ 1585-W. 15th Ave., Vancouver, B.C.
R179314. LAC Spooner, Iv. G., 19 Smiths Falls Ave., Smiths Falls.
Military Cross
J4919, F/O Marting, H. F., 1116 W. 34th St., Indianapolis, Ind.
Distinguished Service Order
J2976, A/W/C *Chadburn, L. V., Aurora, Ont.
C1278, F/L Christie, R. M., 392 MacIntyre St. W„ North Bay.
C1399, A/W/C Fauquier, J. E., 233 Metcalfe St., Ottawa.
Operating
expenditure
[Stage Direction]
Questions
[Stage Direction]
J5795, A/S/L Lane, R. J., 1468 Begbie St., Victoria, B.C.
J5302, F/O Layton, M.S., 1563 MacGregor St., Montreal, P.Q.
J9346, F/O McCarthy, J.C., Three Sister's Rd., St. James, Long Island, N.Y.
J8817, S/L Powell, P. G., Sorrento, B.C.
J9929, A/F/L *Sale, D. J., 89 Forest Hill Rd., Toronto, Ont.
C835, W/C Scott, J. C., 45 Lansdowne Rd., North Galt, Ont.
J17203, A/F/L Sneger, W. J., St. John, N. Dakota, U.S.A.
J8429, A/F/L Stickell, J. H., Gilson, 111., U.S.A.
Distinguished Flying Cross
J9584, F/O Adams, E. A., Omemee, Ont.
J5783, A/S/L Adams, W. H., 4 Dewbourne Ave., Forest Hill Village, Toronto, Ont.
J4889, P/O Ahalt, R. M.. 4808 Middaugh Ave., Downers Grove, 111., U.S.A.
J7460, F/O *Aikman, F. A., 178 Albertus Ave., Toronto, Ont.
J15842, F/O Alcorn, D., 470 Ave Rd., Apt. 15, Toronto, Ont.
J2833, F/L Alexander, R. W., 39 Dumphries St., Paris, Ont.
J17472, P/O Allcroft, F. C., 1112 Harwood St., Vancouver, B.C.
j 16423, P/O Allen, D. F., 2 Warren St., Lennoxville, Que.
J5295, F/L Allen, E. E., 9 Tennyson Grove, Cleethorpes, Lines., England.
J7543. A/F/L Anderson, L. S., 908 Sifton Blvd., Calgary, Alta.
J16379, P/O Anderson, P. M., Union Point, Man.
C1099, A/S/L Anderson, W. A., Suite 12, Whitehall Apts., Osborne St., Winnipeg, Man.
J1355S. F/O Anderson, W. R. W., 315-10tk St. E„ N. Vancouver, B.&
J16350, P/O Angus, T. A., 219 St. Helen's Ave., Toronto, Ont.
J8128, F/L Armstrong, W. A., Carp, Ont., c/o Mrs. J. M. Kennedy.
J16435, P/O Annand, F. C., Milford Station, N.S.
J3508, A/F/L Archer. P. L. I.. Clovelly 8th Ave., Belleville St. Michael, Barbados. B.W.I.
J16907, F/O Ardis, V. D., South Main St., Belfast, N.Y., U.S.A.
J134/0, A/F/L Arnot, D. M., 19 Benlamond Ave., Toronto, Ont.
J17890. P/O Ashton, J. H., Virden, Man.
J15254, P/O Austin, L. F., 78 Jackman Ave., Toronto, Ont.
J10503, A/F/L Avant, A. F., Hughton, Sask.
J6377, F/O Avent, G. H., Apt. 6, 490 Prince Arthur W„ Montreal, P.Q.
J9412, F/O Bain, D. T., Agassiz, B.C.
J6027, P/O Bain, J. D. N., 321 Lonsdale Rd., Toronto, Ont.
J5060, A/F/L Baker, E. D., 39 debar St., Charlottetown, P.E.I.
J5090, F/L Baker, E. S., 630-7th Ave. W. Calgary, Alta.
J5702, F/O Baldwin, D. G., White St., Alexandria, Louisiana.
J15169, A/F/L Baldwin, W. H., 182 Fifth Ave.. Ottawa, Ont.
J16116, P/O Barry, W. A. R.. Russell, Man,
J17784, P/O Basarieh, G., 679-18th Ave. S Clinton. Iowa, U.S.A.
J10594, F/O Batchelor, E. T., 3425 Oxford St.. Vancouver, B.C.
J15187, P/O Beach, A. M., 4474 W. 4th Ave., Vancouver, B.C.
IMr. Macmillan.]
R101280, W/O Beals, W. F., 904 Sully St., Vernon, B.C.
J21277, F/O Beare, B. J., Port Perry, Ont.
<711103, F/0 Beckett, H., 300 South Brodie St., Ft. William.
J6827, F/O Beckwith, I. C., Sturiza 673, D to C, Olivos, Buenos Aires, Argentina,
J10432, F/0 Belanger, M. J., 4479 Blenheim St.. Vancouver, B.C.
J11221, F/O Bell, J. D.. 37 Golding St., Saint John, N.B.
J7020, F/L Bell, J. W., 125 Renfrew St., Winnipeg, Man.
J16345, P/O Bell, J. K., New Glasgow, N.S.
J9673, A/F/L Bell, R. G., 127-W-12th Ave., Vancouver, B.C.
J11564, F/O Beilis, A. R. B., 400-21st St. W., Prince Albert, Sask.
J15035, P/O Benitz. F. M., Estancia "La California" La California F.C.C.A., prov. De Santa Fe, Argentina, South America.
C1376, A/S/L Bennell, R. J.. Hayes Ridge. Oldbury Rd., Nuneaton, Warwickshire, England.
J22565, F/O Benner, K. J., Box 208, Cobalt, Ont.
J15248, F/O Bennett, G., 396 Home St., Winnipeg, Man.
J15826, F/O Beresford, D. A., 47 Edina St., Ottawa, Ont.
J15939, P/O Bernard, S., 410 Crawford St., Toronto. Ont.
J15759, P/O Berry, J. P., 1217 Market St., Parkersburg, Va., U.S.A.
J16128, P/O Berry, R. C., 351 Emerald St. N„ Hamilton, Ont.
JG396, F/O Bertran, R. H., Stevensville, Ont.
J15070, S/L Beveridge, M. W., 3241 Cedar Ave., Westmount, Que.
J9659, F/O Bezer, J. M., 2058 Griffiths Ave., New Westminster.
J17040, P/O Biech, A. T., Gunn, Alta.
J15465, P/O *Bing, L. P. S., Graystone Arms, 383 Assinaboine Ave., Winnipeg, Man.
C775, S/L Birchall, L. J., 170 Princess St., Saint John, N.B.
R60572, WO.l Birkenes, R. H., Armada, Alta.
J7747, F/O Bishop, A. A., Erskine, Alta.
J4551, F/L Blakeslee, D. J. M., Fairport Harbour, Ohio, U.S.A.
R58524, WO Bloom, R. J., 4323 Oxford St., Vancouver, B.C.
J16226, P/O Blumenauer, C. R., Enderby, 33 C
ji7098, P/O Boczar, S., Saskatoon, Sask. (319 Ave. J. South).
J17669, P/O Bodnar, B. O., Fort Frances, Ont.
C1220, S/L Boomer, K. A., 1365 West 11th, Vancouver, B.C.
J17928, P/O Booth, G. G., 453 Somerset St. W., Ottawa, Ont.
C1090, S/L Boulton, F. H., P.O. Box 61. Coleman, Alta.
J17049, P/O Bouschard, A. D., 31 Hamelin Rd., Leicester, Eng.
R76385, WO Boutilier, E. H., Chester, N.S.
J15064, P/O Bowen, R. D., 10748-126th St., Edmonton, Alta.
J6279, F/O Bracken, W. J., Seeley's Bay, Ont.
J5994, A/F/L Bradley, C. W., 4444 Beacons-field Ave., N.D.G., Mont.
C166, W/C Bradshaw, D. A. R., 259 George St., Belleville, Ont.
J7619, F/L Brenner, A. B., 71 Avenue Rd., Toronto.
J2975, A/S/L Bretz, N. H., 2 Playter Blvd., Toronto. Ont.
J17370, P/O Brisbin, L. I., Cold Springs, Ont.

Questions
J17601, P/0 Brousseau, J. H. N., 18 Loranger St., Cap-de-la-Madeleine.
J17162, P/O Brown, E. L., 490 Pembroke St. W.. Pembroke, Ont.
J13055, F/O Brown, H. T., Box 79, Biggar,
* Sask.
R63935, WO Brown, J. A., 48 Keppel St., Buffalo, N.Y., U.S.A.
J11145, F/O Brown, L. N., Paradise Valley, Alta.
J8771, A/F/L Brown, M. G., 2490 Mt. Royal Ave. E., Montreal.
J17907, P/O Brunet, A. G., 22 Arthur St., St. Thomas, Ont.
R110822, WO Bryson, H., Manitou, Manitoba.
J17456, P/O Buchanan, D. J. A., 10533-127 St., Edmonton, Alta.
J15246, A/F/L Buckham, R. A., Box 1036, Vancouver, B.C.
J16558, F/O Burton, G. R., 12308-104th Ave., Edmonton, Alta.
J10420, F/O Campbell, P., Tyra, Claremount St., Londonderry, N. (Ireland)
J15594, F/O Campbell, R. J,, Pawling, New York, U.S.A.
J8198, A/F/L Campbell, R. G., 10711-98th Ave., Edmonton, Alta.
J18179, P/O Card, H. C., Newburgh, Ont. J16480, F/L Carey, D. M., 748-10th St., Brandon, Man.
J4531, F/O Carmichael, D. W., 4373 W. 12th Ave.. Vancouver, B.C.
J17078. P/O Carrere, J. P. H., Cochrane, Ont. G168, W/C Carscallen, H. M., 104 Young Ave. Halifax, N.S.
J15673, F/O Carter, A. R., 713 Dufferin St., Toronto.
dll213, F/O 'Carter, G. H. F., 85 Parkway Rd., Bronxville, N.Y.
J15862, F/O Carter, R. G., Apt. 3, 2 Manor Rd. E., Toronto.
J4432, F/O Casey, G. A., Mitchell, Ont.
J9066, P/O Cavanaugh, L. M., 23 Drake Apts., Calgary, Alta. '
J2976, A/S/L Chadburn, L. V., Aurora, Ont. J15044, A/F/L 'Chisholm, W. L., 18 Orchard Rd., Kentville, N.S.
J15369, F/O Chittenden, F. J., R.R. No. 1, Cansville, Ont.
J17256, P/O Christie, J. O., 2213 Toronto St., Regina, Sask.
J3266, F/L Church, R. D., 338 Elmwood Dr., Rockcliffe, Ottawa.
J6993, F/L Clark, D. H., 526-7th St., New Westminster, B.C.
J15167, A/S/L Clark, J. F. P., 600 York St., London, Ont.
J17004, P/O Clark, R. J., Box 74, Vulcan, Alta.
J10883, F/O Clark, R. J., 11038-81st Ave., Edmonton, Alta.
J15084, A/F/L Cleveland, J. B., 3 Clarendon Ave., Toronto, Ont.
J4470, F/O Clifford, A. W., Gleichen, Alta.
J9501, F/O Cline, R. E., 3224 W. 1st Ave., Vancouver, B.C.
J16202, P/O Clinton, R. S., Whitney Point, New York, U.S.A.
J14011, F/O Clow, W. R., Ill Wellington St. S., Hamilton
J16276, P/O Cobb, N. A., Tillsoniburg, Ont.
J18560, P/O Coburn, G. W., Box 192, Beeton, Ont.
J17277, A/F/L Cochrane, R. H., New Richmond Stn., P.Q.
J2937, F/L Colborne, F. C., 1507-25th Ave. W., Calgary, Alta.
J16833, P/O Coles, M. W., Milton, P.E.I.
J8207, F/O Colledge, W. W., 3699 Osier Ave., Vancouver, B.C.
J6276, A/F/L Cook, R. G., 15 Chicora Ave., Toronto, Ont.
J5083, F/O Coons, H. L., Morrisburg, Ont.
J17003, P/O Cooper, F. C., Foxwarren, Man.
J5023, F/L Conrad, W. A. G., Richmond, Ont.
J16770, P/O Copenhaver, L. B., 109 South Vincent St., Salem, 111.
C299, S/L Corbett, V. B., 760 Upper Lans-downe Ave., Westmount, P.Q.
J15709, P/O Cosburn, S. C., 222-25th Ave., West Calgary, Alta.
J9495, F/O Cowan, I. C., Box 298, Montague, P.E.I.
R67128, WO Cox, J. E., 621 Johnston St., Kingston, Ont.
J15233, F/O Coyne, J. P.. God's Lake, Man.
J16010, P/O Cozens, E. B., 442 Old Lancaster Rd., Haverford, Pa.
J15524, F/L Crabtree, G., P.O. Box 37, Pug-wash, N.S.
C15705, P/O Craddock, G. R., 91 Royal York Rd., Toronto.
J17170, F/L Crew, B. G„ 1764 Lulie St., Victoria, B.C.
J16533, P/O Crimmins, W. D., 94 McDonnell St., Guelph, Ont.
J17501, P/O Crossman, G. T., Saclcvile, N.B.
J12975, F/O Crowther, G. C., 25 Goodwood Ave., Toronto, Ont.
J15153, P/O Croxton, B. D., 3643 Turner St., Vancouver.
J16758, P/O Cuddington, L. F., Crawford Hotel, Carlsbad, New Mexico, U.S.A.
J16384, P/O Cuelenaere, M. R. C., Leask, Sask.
J9754, F/O Cunningham, R. H., 35 Gifford St., Toronto, Ont.
C2645, F/L Curry, J. H., 3719 Miramar Ave., Dallas, Tex., U.S.A.
J9340, P/O 'Curtin, D. J., New York City, N.Y. (208 Alexander Ave.)
J21889, F/O Curtin, J. P., Govan, Sask.
J15807, F/L Cybulski, M. A., 511 Gladstone Ave., Ottawa.
J15531, P/O Cybulski, S. J., 402 MacKay St., Pembroke, Ont.
J15608, P/O Dabbs, H. E., Daysland, Alta.
J15042, P/O Dale, R. G., 84 Woodlawn St. E., Toronto.
J16385, P/O Danahy, S., Riverside, Albert Co., N.B.
J15992, F/O Dark, W. L., 9918-108th St., Edmonton, Alta.
J17211, P/O Dashper, F. B., 506 Langside St., Winnipeg, Man.
C325, W/C Davoud, P. Y., 161 King St., Kingston, Ont.
J11555, A/F/L Day, W. S.. Aylesford, N.S.
J15717, P/O De Bartok, E. A. F., 3152 St. Antoine St., Montreal, P.Q.
J17245, P/O Dearing, G. A., 208 Belsize Dr., Toronto.
J15145, F/O Dehoux, L., 639 Huron St., Toronto, Ont.
J16655, A/F/L Delisle, J. C. H., 6738 St. Denis St., Montreal, Que.
J16008, P/O Dennison, B. C., 1134B Kensington Rd., Calgary.
R88017, WO D'Eon, A. L., South Park St., Yarmouth, N.S.
J16968, P/O Derry, F. C., 48 Lappin Ave., Toronto, Ont.
J15678, P/O Dickson, J. D., Hampton, Kings Co., N.B.
Questions
[Stage Direction]
J15] 23, A/F/L Dierkes, W. J., 3003 Observatory Rd., Cincinnati, Ohio.
J10896, A/F/L Dilworth, L. C., Box 269, Kelowna, B.C.
J3598, F/O Dingle, C. E., 182 Furby St., Winnipeg, Man.
J6011, F/O Dobbin, W. L., Box 500, Kamsack, Sask.
J15740, F/O Dodd, W. G., English River, Ont.
J17608, P/O Dolby, E. G., 3 Western Tee., The Park. Nottingham, England.
J8302, P/O *Donkersley, H. W., Moosomin, Sask.
J15960, P/O Doucette, J. A. T., 94 Cedar St., Sudbury, Ont.
J3710, P/O Dougall, D. C., Box 127, St. Anne de Bellevue. P.Q..
J16027, F/O Dowding, H. J., 162 John St., Sarnia, Ont.
J6008, A/F/L *Dowie, C. S.. Leader, Sask.
J10159, F/O Draper, J. W. P., Apt. 27, 9 Humewood Dr., Toronto.
J17405, P/O Dube, R. A. H., c/o Clark Ruse Aircraft, Moncton, N.B.
J17479, P/O Duffield, G. W., Lloydminster, S&sk
J3116, P/O Duncan, J. A., 124 Church St., Sault Ste. Marie, Ont.
J17017, P/O Dundas, E. G., Miami, Man., Box 52.
J17742, P/O Dungey. E. B., Collingwood, Ont.
J17626, P/O Eager, W. H., 151 Ferndale Ave., Norwood, Man.
.T16274, A/F/L Earl, W. H.. Balcarres, Sask.
J17551, P/O Easson, J. K., 110 Delaware Ave., Toronto.
J9563, P/O Easteott, P., 400 Laurier Ave. E., Ottawa, Ont.
J16077, A/F/L Edwards, J. F., Battleford, Sask.
J17276, F/O Einarson, J. W., Shellbrook, Sask.
J15056. F/L Ellis, R. A., 61 Nelson St., Montreal West. P.Q.
J11442, F/O Ellwood, G. B., Box 673, Portage la Prairie, Man.
J15585, P/O Emberg, C. R. J., 2310 Regent Ave.. Montreal, P.Q.
J15421, F/O Emery, J. A., Ledger Corner, Moncton. N.B.
R57927, WO English, E. T., 3771 Main St., Vancouver. B.C.
J3264, P/O Erly, J. P., 4256 Westhill Ave., Montreal, P.Q.
J16071, P/O Eustace, R. S., 26 Lowther Ave., Toronto.
J17548, P/O Evans, E. R., 601 McIntyre Blk., Winnipeg, Man.
J17183, P/O Ewan, G. M., 883 Dunsmuir Rd„ Esquimalt, B.C.
J17088, P/O Fairley, J. A., 25 Dunbar Rd., Toronto, Ont.
J15734, P/O Falls, F. M., 3740 The Boulevard, Westmount, P.Q.
J16461, P/O Farrell, W. H., 433 Rhodes Ave., Toronto, Ont.
C1399, A/W/C Fauquier, J. E., 233 Metcalfe St., Ottawa, Ont.
C773. S/L *Fee, J. C., Frood Mine, Ont.
J9247, F/O Fee. W. B„ 527 2nd Ave. W„ Swift Current, Sask.
J16787, P/O Fenton, H. W., 278 Second Ave., Ottawa, Ont.
J15790, P/O Fenwick, H. E., Sioux Lookout, Ont.
J16467, P/O Ferguson, D. C., 252-7th St., Weyburn, Sask.
C1351, W/C Ferris, W. D. S., 12704-102nd Ave., Edmonton, Alta.
J1095, P/O Finnie, G. K., 117 Strathcona Ave., Ottawa, Ont. [DOT]
TMr. Macmillan.!
J4690, A/F/L Fisher, G. C., 2332 Montague St., Regina, Sask.
J17232, P/O Flanagan, E. F., 3782 Marcil Ave., Montreal, P.Q.
J2834, F/O Florence, D. S., 9844-113th St., Edmonton, Alta.
J15718, P/O Foderingham, C., 115 Felbrigg Ave., Toronto, Ont.
J4786, S/L Forbes, H. A., Tatamagouche, N.S.
J3712. F/L *Ford, L. S., Liverpool, N.S.
J111S8, F/O Forrest, H. L., 112 Lichfield Court, Richmond, Surrey, England.
J15380, P/O Fowler, G. P., Victoria, Carleton County, N.S.
J15095, A/F/L Fowlow, N. R., 131 King St., Windsor, N.S.
J15609, F/O Foy, J. H., 136 Belgravia Ave., Toronto, Ont.
J8166, F/O Foyston, F. S., Invermere, B.C.
<715758, P/O Francis, J. E., 215 Josephine Ave., Windsor, Ont.
C1283. W/C Fraser, L. G. D., General Delivery, Port Dover, Ont.
J6659, F/O Freberg, P. G., 3719 Willingdon Ave., New Westminster. B.C.
J4752, F/O French, W. M., Fairviewq Alta.
J15331, P/O Francis, A. J., 835 Main St., Saskatoon, Sask.
J17758, P/O Fulsher, J. L., Middlechurch, Man.
C1352, F/O *Fumerton, R. C., Fort Cologne,
P ji7528, P/O Gabel, G. W„ Didsbury, Alta.
J10133, F/L Ganderton, V. F., Ledue. Alta.
J7527, F/L Garbutt, D. A., Duncan. V.I., B.C
J15252, P/O Gardiner, G. P., Merlin, Ont.
R67228, W/O Gardiner, L. H. C., 473 Johnston St., Kingston, Ont.
J15548, F/L Gardiner, R., c/o Mr. John Prues, Elmwood, Ont.
^ J16208, F/O Garland, S. F„ City View, R.R. No. 1, Co. Carleton, Ont.
J9779, F/O Garrett, E. A., McMasterville, P.Q.
J15529, F/L Gattey, H. B., Stettler, Alta.
J2822, F/O Gellner, J., Y.W.C.A., Simcoe, Ont.
J13802, F/O Gerrard, G. E. D., 355 Armstrong Ave., Kildonan, Man.
J6942, A/F/L Gibson, J. V., St. Andrews, N.B.
J9443, F/O Giggey, D. L., 245 Millidge Ave., Saint John, N.B.
J7766, F/O Gill, W. T. H., 56 Lynd Ave., Toronto, Ont.
J17233. P/O Gillis, W. E., Beech St., Sydney Mines, N.S.
C1036, S/L Gilmore, E. G., 125 Robina Ave., Toronto. Ont.
J15890, P/O Gimbel, E. L., 2845 N. Burling Ave.. Chicago. 111.. 7J.S.A.
J5329, A/F/L Glazebrook, E. H., 5600 Hutchinson St., Outremont, P.Q.
C3422, A/F/L Glazer, A. E., 210 Glenayr Rd.. Toronto, Ont.
J17142, P/O Glover, G. L„ 18 Alport Rd.. Whitchurch, Shropshire, England.
J3701, A/F/L *Godefroy, H. C„ 15 Patricia Ave.. Newtonbrook. Ont.
J26272, P/O Godfrey. C. O., Coleman. Alta. J16260, P/O Gordon, W. C., 568 Third Ave. E.. Owen Sound. Ont.
J9359, F/O *Gosling, L. C., Box 39, North Battleford. Sask.
J17018, P/O Gowan, H. A., R.R. No. 1, Jarvis, Ont.
J5982, F/O Grant, D. M., 356 MacLaren St., Ottawa, Ont.
J10401, F/O Gray, K. G., Stoughton, Sask. J15071, A/F/L Green, F. E., 32 Belhaven Ave., Toronto, Ont.
J5683, S/L Grierson-Jackson, W. R. F., 52 Wellington St. E., Guelph, Ont.

Questions
J22090, P/0 Grudzien, J., 603 Northern Ave., Fort William, Ont.
J3741, F/O Gubb, A. W„ Kingsmere, P.E.I.
J22541, F/O Hackctt, D.. 69 Ordnance St., Kingston, Ont.
J26846, P/O Haddlesey, E. F. G., 865 Water St.. Peterborough, Ontario.
J9656, A/F/L Hagerman, D. C., Surbiton, Saskatchewan.
J8601, F/O Haines, A. R., 1238 Vista Heights, Victoria, B.C.
R101669, W/O Hales, A. R., Box 173, Virden, Manitoba.
J18149, P/O Hamilton, W. B., 599 Homewood Ave., Peterborough, Ont.
J17229, P/O Hammond. H. W. E., 1418 Davenport Rd., Toronto. Ont,
T15539, P/O Hammond, L. S., 639 Lansdowne Ave., Toronto, Ont.
J10116, F/O Hanton, F. E. W, 616 Third Ave. S., Kenora, Ont.
.J167O0 P/O Harding, A. C., Galetta, Ontario.
J18021 P/O Harding, M., Norris Point, Nfld.
J4691 F/O Hardingham, R. J., Surrey, England (Lerryn, The Chase, Kingswood.)
C16909 P/O Harling. R., 192 Honue St., Winnipeg, Man.
J16415, P/O Harrower, H. G., 804-6th Ave., N.W., Moose Jaw, Sask.
J8419, F/O Hartman, P. A„ R.F.D. No. 2, Readfield, Me., U.S.A.
J16420, P/O Harvey, H. K. C., Kamsnck, Saskatchewan.
J9521, F/O Haugen, E. J., Pelly, Sask.
J15707, P/O Hay, H, B., 82 Rice St., Ed-mundston, N.B.
J16801, P./O Heaton, P., 2656 W. 5th Ave., Vancouver, B.C.
.J1Q788, A/F/L Helmsley, A. F., 56 McNairn Ave., Toronto. Ont.
J15093, A/F/L *Henry, D. W., Kincardine, Ontario.
J17441, P/O Henry, R. A., 38 Poueher St., Toronto, Ont.
J18175, P/O Heselton, G. W., 2461 East 21st Ave., Vancouver, B.C.
J6720, A/S/L Hess, C. B., Iroquois, Ontario.
J17979, P/O Hewson, K„ 43-10-44 St., Long Island City-4, New York, N.Y., U.S.A.
J70S0, P/O Higham, J. B., Assiniboia, Sask.
.115522, P/O Hill, H. S., 10606 Sacred Heart Ave., Montreal, P.Q.
J8345, F/O Hilton, W. J., 19 Edgerton St„ Brantford, Ont.
C807, W/C *Hodson, K. L. B., 2050 Barclay St., Vancouver. B.C.
J15427, P/O Holmes, G. A., 2340 McIntyre St., Regina, Sask.
.117343, P/O Hoover, II. C., Yeoman, Sask.
R62459, W/O Horan, J. M., 2040 University St., Montreal, P.Q.
J15033, P/O Hosea, R. L. G., Miami, Man.
J4887, F/O Houle, A. U., Box 54, Massey Station, Ontario.
JS971, A/F/L Howell, A. B., Boissevain, Manitoba.
J15514, F/O Howey, E. L., Exeter, Ontario.
J15061, A/F/L Hudson, J,, 2012 Oak Bay Ave., Victoria, B.C.
J11498, F/O Hunt, R. G. F., 236 Brock Ave., N., Montreal W., P.Q.
J3994, F/O Hunter, A. G., 254 Kenilworth Ave., S. Hamilton, Ont.
R68534, W/O Hunter, A. R., 530 North Brodie St., Fort William, Ont.
J5445. A/F/L Hutchinson, R. T., Box 700, New Liskeard, Ontario.
J15652, P/O Hynam, G. S., 1044 Dayton St., Akron, Ohio.
J3525, F/L Imrie, A. A. T., 2001 Bloor St. W.. Toronto, Ont.
J4771, F/O Ingalls, R. B„ Danville, P.Q.
,J 13372, F/O Ingram, K. E., 193 Pim St., Sault Ste. Marie, Ont.
.721204, F/O Jackson, B. G. D., 2 Pigeon Hill Rd., Weston, Mass., U.S.A. '
.T15950, P/O Jackson. L. T., Riverside, Ont.
C1629, S/L Jacobs, D. S., 78 Lynwood Ave., Toronto, Ont.
,13500, A/S/L Jacobsen, G. F., 108 Lansdowne Ave., Winnipeg, Man.
.T16817, P/O Jennings, H. J., 117 Glendenan Ave., Toronto, Ont.
,73117, P/O Jennings, W. L., 93 Eastbourne Ave,, Hamilton, Ontario.
J17291, P/O Jensen, M. G., Woolford, Alta.
J18070, P/O Johnson, J. A. L., R.R. No. 1, Box 8, Ponoka, Alta.
R78489. A/W/O Johnson, L. A., St. Paul, Minn., U.S.A. (130 E. Cook St.)
,715429, F/O Johnston, B. E., 523 Stiles St., Winnipeg, Man.
.715430, F/O Johnston, J. D., River Hebert, Nova Scotia.
,T 15327. F/L Jones, F. E., Abbotsford, B.C.
J14034, A/F/L Jones, J. A. L., 1428 Queen Anne Ave., Seattle, Wash., U.S.A.
.76016, F./O Jones, T R., 203 South Norah St., Fort William, Ont.
J7433, A/F/L Jost, B. N., 55 S. Bradford St., Dover, Delaware.
J6366, F/O Jowsey, M. E., Box 17, Aylmer E.. P.Q.
,716191, A/F/L Julian. T. A., 621 Travis St., Shreveport, Louisiana, U.S.A.
C1075, T/S./L **Hill, G. U„ Box 55, Shu-benacadie, N.S.
J6494, A/F/L Kallio, O. C., Box 76, R.R. No. 2, Ironwood, Michigan, U.S.A.
J15337, P/O Kay, F. A., 4191 Melrose Ave., N.D.G., Montreal, P.Q.
J12824, A/F/L Keddie, W. N., Evelyn Grove, Southall, Middlesex, England.
J5022, F/L Keefer, G. C., 167 Euston St., Charlottetown, P.E.I.
.717489, P/O Keen, G. F., 114 Robert St., London. Ont.
,115654. F/O Iveene, N. A., White Rock, B.C.
,715374. F/O Keith, G. N., Taber, Alta.
J16326, F/O Kelly, G. J. F., 52 Dragon Rd., Harrogate, Yorks, England.
.17455, F/L Keltie, I. G. S., 10022-116 St., Edmonton, Alta.
J6648, A/F/L Kendall, E. C., Brentwood Auto Court, Brentwood Bay, B.C.
J15273, F/O Kennedy, I. F., Cumberland, Onit.
C4801, A/S/L Kenney, D. H., 93 Colborne St., Lindsay, Ont.
J8441, P/O King, W. E., Alton, Ontario.
J15250, A/F/L *Klassen, W. C., Lilac, Sask.
.72972, S/L Kelly, F. W., 85 Braemar Ave., Toronto, Ont.
JX6824, P/O Ker, E. A., Fonthill, Ont.
J17067, A/F/L Klufas, W. J., Radway, Alta.
J17037, P/O Knapp. K. R., 100 N. Negley Ave., Pittsburg, Pa., U.S.A.
J16251, P/O Knights, J. K., 1415-25A St. W., Calgary, Alta.
J8341. A/F/L Koester, G. D. S., 2146 N. Court House Rd., Arlington, Virginia, U.S.A.
Questions
[Stage Direction]
J17723, P/O Kohut, J., Parkerview, Saskatchewan.
J7931, P/O Kropf, L. E., 4 Fisher St., New Hamburg, Ontario.
J15595, P/O Ivusdar, G. W., 24 McDonald St., Mimico, Omt.
J17674, F/O Laiberge, J. A. R., 1929 Des Erables Ave., Montreal, P.Q.
R88754, W/O Lafnance, J. F., Lock No. 1, Trenton, Ont.
J4896, F/L Laird, G. J., 168 Eglinton Ave., W., Toronto, Ont.
J1326, A/F/L Lambert, A., 187 Germain St., Saint John, N.B.
J15596, P/O Lancey, G. W., 46 Albany Ave., Toronto, Ont.
R93370, W/O Landale, C. W., 24 McDonald Ave., Mimico, Ont.
J5795, A/F/L Lane, R. J., 1468 Begbie St., Victoria, B.C.
J15834, A/F/L Lane, T. H„ Austin, Manitoba. J18169, P/O Lang, J. C., 4493 W. 12th Ave., Vancouver, B.C.
J4772, F/O *Langstaff, W. C., Holloway, Ontario.
J22525, P/O Laskey, D., 271 Regent St., Fredericton, N.B.
J16969, P/O Lauckner, I., 102 Wellington St., London, Ont.
J20434, F/O Lauro, J. W., 6008 So. Wood St., Chicago, 111., U.S.A.
J6409, F/O Lawrence, A. G., Box 110, Bowsman River, Man.
J16669, P/O Laws, J. R., 393 Savoy St., Sarnia, Ont.
J17478, A/F/L Leddy, G. B., 701-3rd Ave.,
J20727, F/O Lees, J. S., Box 9, Chilliwack, B C
J3756, F/O Legge, H. T., 134-30th Ave. N.E., Calgary, Alta.
„ J15201, P/O Leith, P. E. M„ c/o Royal Bank, Yonge & Richmond St., Toronto, Ont.
J14788, F/O Lenihan, J. F., 15 Victoria St. W., Saint John, N.B.
J16111, P/O * Lewis, T. W., 257 W. Miller Ave., Akron, Ohio, U.S.A.
J10317, F/O Lewis, F. E., 390 Rutland St., St. James, Manitoba.
J11224, F/O Lewis, J. F., 77 Wilson Ave., London, Ont.
J4762, A/F/L Lindo, H. L., New-Hall Bog-Walk, Jamaica, B.W.I.
R79065, W/O Lindsay, G. A., 556 Victoria Ave., Westmount, P.Q.
J17U0, P/O Livingston, R. A., Rosebank, Man.
J18385, P/O Love, J. N., 2935 Regina Ave., Regina, Sask.	[DOT]
J15409, P/O Lovelace, J. C., 155 Argyle St., Sydney, N.iS.
J16130, P/O Loving, L. R. B„ 87-3rd St., Box 40, Mission City, B.C.
J16573, P/O Lymburner, J. A. L., 7085 Boyer St., Montreal, P.Q.
01359, S/L Logan, L. E., 47 Lee® Ave., Ottawa, Ont.
R86155, W/O Lumgair, R. O., Thornhill, Man. J16310, P/O Macdonald, A., R.R. No. 1, Angus, Oat.
J14691, A/F/L Macdonald, D. A., Rockglen, Sask.
_J15644, A/F/L Macdonald, H. B., Sackville, N.B.
J15467, A/F/L *Macdonald, H. D, 30 Croydon Ave., Toronto, Ont.

J8170, F/O Macintosh, C. E., 655 Sherbnook St., Winnipeg, Man.
J11962, F/O Macintosh, I. F., 160 William St. N., Lindsay, Ont.
J5998, F/O MacIntyre, D. P., No. 7 Orange
St., Saint John, N.B.
J10976, P/O MaeKenzie, A. R., 3831 Melrose Ave., Montreal, P.Q.
J5050, F/O MaeKenzie, K. A., 16 Heather St., Toronto, Ont.
J15492, F/O MaeKenzie, M. G., 225 Main St., Ivenora, Ont.
J17755, P/O MaeKenzie, R. E., Ste. 14, Sellar
Block, Regina, Sask.
C1107, F/L MacLean, J. A., Beaton Mills, Lewis, P.E.I.
JI7712, F/L MacLean, R. S., Box 685, Summerside, P.E.I.
C15711, F/L MacMillan, A., 157 Mallifont St... Cardiff, South Wales.
J18337, P/O MacMillan, G. J. S., Coleville,
Sask.
J5975, F/L Magwood, C. M., 414 Dovercourt Rd., Toronto. Ont.
C1635, A/W/C Mair, A. C., 81 Nelson St., Brantford, Ont.
J15521, P/O *Malkin, H., 422 Argyle Ave., Verdun, Que.
C1072, S/L Malloy, D. G., 251 Gladstone Ave., Toronto, Ont.
J8779, F/O Maloney, G. H. E., 180 Carrie St., San Jose, California, U.S.A.
J15638. P/O Mann, L. R., 11 Centre St., Truro, N.S.
R77063, W/O Marcotte, J. H. A., 7163 St. Hubert St.. Montreal, P.Q.
J15643, A/F/L Marsh, F. P., 30 Sighthill Ave., Toronto, Ont.
J15225, P/O Martin, S. S., 1225-12bh Ave. W.. Calgary. Alta.
J8628. F/O Martin, T. J., 2992 Marine Drive West. Vancouver, B.C.
J17624, P/O Mason, J. H„ 312 E. 5th St., North Vancouver, B.C.
J8428. P/O Mathews, W. H.. c/o Devoe & Raynolds Co., Inc., 44th St. & First Ave., New York, N.Y.. U.S.A.
J17114, P/O Maxwell, W. M., Leamington, Ont.. R.R. No. 2.
J17536, P/O Meilleur, J. A. F., 2716 Beaubien St., Montreal, P.Q.
J18989, P/O Metheral, R. K., Wapella, Sask. J11069, F/O Merrifield, L. A., 3334 Yonge
St., Toronto, Ont. .
J15683, P/O Metheral, K. J., North Edmonton, Alta.
J18559, F/L Midgley, D., 21 Capron St., Paris, Ont.
J16720, P/O Miesen, J. J., Judsonia, Arkansas. U.S.A.
J6946, F/O Miles, H. T., 8 Idyllwood Crescent, Toronto, Ont.
J17077, P/O Miller. E. V., 2154 Windsor Rd., Oak Bay, Victoria, B.C.
J17195, F/L Mills, J. G„ 6101 La Salle Blvd., Verdun, Que.
J10255. S/L Millward, J. B., 155 Victoria St., Sherbrooke, Que.
J18923, P/O Mitchell, H. W., 55 Saunders St., Fredericton, N.B.
J16799, F/L Mitohner, J. D„ 221-5th Ave.,
Saskatoon, Sask.
C1170, S/L Moffit, B. H., Apt. 105, 50 Gloucester St., Toronto, Ont.
J18042, P/O Montgomery, D. A., Box 786, Weyburn, Sask.
J17897, P/O Morabito, A. B., Creston, B.C. C1063, A/S/L Moran, C. C., R.R. No. 4, Trenton, Ont.

Questions
J17527, P/O Morey, C. L., Box 102, Cumberland, B.C.
J17009, P/O Morgan, E. E., 98 Ruskin Ave., Ottawa, Ont.
J7021, F/O Morgan, O. H., 1034 Battle St., Kamloops, B.C.
J7459, F/O Morris, J. A., 84 Clifton Hill, London, N.W.8, England.
J15475, A/F/L Morrison, D. R„ 634 Millwood Rd., Toronto, Ont.
J15523, P/O Morrison, J. R., 143 Canora St., Winnipeg, Man.
t J9764, F/O Morrison, R. G., 1858 W. 1st Ave., Vancouver, B.C.
C1238. A/S/L Morrow, R. E. E., c/o Mrs. C. Bishop. 599 Besserer St., Ottawa, Ont.
J16333. P/O Morton, E. F., Three Mile Plains, N.S.
J16482, A/F/L Morton, J. A., Delisle, Sask. J15927. F/O Mossip, H. T, 70 Madrid Rd., Baines, S.W.13, London, Eng.
J16247, P/O Moyer, R. C., 329 Earl St., Kingston, Ont.
J4757, A/F/L Mulhall, V. A., Weyburn,
Sask.
C16708, A/F/L Mulligan, E. H., 42 Riverside Drive, Sudbury. Ont.
J17499, P/O Munro, J. F„ Fitzroy Harbour, Ont.
J15366, A/F/L Murehie, B. D., St. Stephen, N.B.
J7228, F/O Murphy, K. C., 575 Lisgar St., Ottawa, Ont.
J16832. P/O Murphy, M. J„ 10 Rix St., Falconbridge, Ont.
J15476, P/O Murray, G. B„ 61i Victoria Pd„ Halifax, N.S.
R79421, W/O Murray, G. F. D., 2365 Hampton Ave.. Apt. 10. Montreal, P.Q.
J16203. P/O Murrell, S. L„ R.R. 6, Gainsville,
Tcxrs U S A.
R58214, W/O Mylrea, F. H., 432 Government St.. Victoria. B.C.
J4761, F/L 'McAuley, V. C., Centreville, Carleton Co.. N.B.
T6661. A/F/L. Mc-Caffery, E. H., Miami, Man. J14907, F/L MeCaig, L. N., Ormstown Sta.. Que.
J9346, F/O McCarthy, J. C.. Three Sister's Rd., St. James, Long Island, N.Y, U.S.A.
J15104, P/'0 McCarthy, J. P., 160 Midland St.. Toronto, Ont.
J5078, F/O McCaul, J. L., 224 Bloor St. W., Toronto, Ont..
P,75461, W/O McClelland, R. C., Herbert,
Sask.
J9737, F/O McClure, A., 167 Ross St., Welland, Ont.
J15505. F/O McClure, J. E., 37 Victor St., London. Ont.
J6134, A/F/L McCormack, J. E., Estevan, Sask.
C15018, F/L McCrae, J. S., 119 Lewis St., Winnipeg, Man.
J15174, A/S/L McCullach, M. R., Rocky Rapids. Alta.
J15174, A/S/L McCutcheon, J. T., Hudson, Que.
J17898, P/O McDaniell, H. H. L., 3557 W. 6th Ave., Vancouver, B.C.
J16989, P/O McDonald, C. P., 1384 King St. W„ Toronto, Ont.
J5059, P/O McDonald. J. G., Islington, Ont. J7978, P/O McDonald, J. R., 631 Langford St., Victoria, B.C.
J8812. F/O McDougall, T. R., 373 Klock Ave., North Bay, Ont.
J7230, F/O McElroy, J. F., 196 St. Paul St., Kamloops, B.C.
J17116, P/O McGavock, J. J., 680 St. John's
Ave., Winnipeg, Man.
J9482, A./F/L McGee, P. D„ 27134 Beverly Rd., Inkster, Mich., U.SA.
J6843, F/O McGladrey, G. G., 657 Broadview Ave., Toronto, Ont.
C936, W/C McGregor, G. R„ R.R. No. 1 W. Rd., Sidney, B.C.
J16889, F/'0 McGregor, W. K., 103 Peter St, Port Arthur, Ont.
J3596, F/O Mclver, B. G, 440 Bay St, N. Hamilton, Ont.
J11107, F/O Mclver, M, 151 Mortimer Ave, Toronto, Ont.
J17371, P/O McLaren, F. E, Ste. 7, 705 Westminster Ave.. Winnipeg, Man.
J17691, P/O McLellan, W. G, Economy, Col. Co, N.S.
J4012, A/F/L 'McLeod, H. W, 2311 Garnet St, Regina. Sask.
R50824, W/O McLeod, R. A, 825-4 St. N.E, Calgary. Alta.
J17117, P/O McMenemy, G. S, Apt. 2, 1041 Main St. E.. Hamilton, Ont.
J17955, P/O McMillan, D. J, Landis, Sask.
J10231, F/O McMillan, L, Miami, Man.
J6005. A/F/L McMills, C. R, 7215 Seward Park Ave, Seattle, Wash, U.S.A.
C134, W/C McNab, E. A, 706 Melrose Ave, Saskatoon, Sask.
J9201, A/F/L McNeill, J. G„ R.R. No. 4,
J9405, F/O McRae, D. F, 7679 Fraser Ave, Vancouver, B.C.
J17664, P/O McSorley, B. F, 160 South Grand Ave, Baldwin, Long Island, N.Y, U.SA,
J0389, F/L McQuoid, D. J, Summerberry, Sask.
J4745, S/L "McNair, R. W, 1462 Edward St, N. Battleford, Sask .
C1640, F/L Neal, E. L, 26 Richardson St, Beauharnois, P.Q.
J5293, F/O Neilson, A. R, 397 Grove Ave, Windsor, Ont.
C1327. S/L Nesbitt, A. D, 1296 Redpath Cresc, Montreal, P.Q.
J16193, P/O Newitt, R. M, 1537 Haro St, Vancouver, B.C.
C983, S/L Newson, W. F. M, 1092 Transit Rd, Victoria, B.C.
R76180, W/O Nicholl, A, 23 Radford Rd, Leamington, Spa.. Warwickshire, England.
J9647, F/O Nielsen, E. L, 921 E. 14th Ave, Vancouver, B.C.
J17729, P/O Nixon, R. W, 306 Salem Ave, Toronto, Ont.
J15088, S/L 'Northcott, G. W, R.R. 1, Box 47, Minnedosa, Man.
J7206, F/O Nutter, W. S. G, 17J Rosewarne Ave, St. Vital. Man.
J15311, P/O O'Connell, L. J, Box 279, Middleton, N.S.
J15059, P/O O'Connell, W. J. J, 205 Henderson Ave, Ottawa, Ont.
J17770, P/O O'Handley, J. J, George's River Station. N.S.
J4735, P/O Oleinek, P. J, 10127-95th St, Edmonton. Alta.
J5028. P/O Ormston, I. C, 119 Kenaston Ave, Montreal, P.Q.
J16022, F/O Owens, K. H„ 495 Metcalfe St, Ottawa. Ont.
J16778. P/O Paddock, C. W, 122 Hargrave St.. Winnipeg, Man.
J6007. P/O Paige, E. F, Bridgeport, Ont.
J15818, P/O Palmer, C. W.. Dundalk, Ont.
J12982, F/O Palmer, R. W, 294 Second St, Nanaimo, B.C.
Questions
[Stage Direction]
J15087, S/L Parker, F. W., 295 Scotia St., Winnipeg, Man.
J7544, P/O 'Parks, W. F„ Verwood, Sask.
J16704, P/O Parry, A. W., Ste. 2, Eaton Blk., 734 Broadway St., Saskatoon, Sask.
J17328, P/O Parsons, W. C., Cayuga, Ont.
J17080, P/O Patterson, J. W., 198 Davenport Rd., Toronto, Ont.
J9918, F/O Patterson; E. W., Moose Jaw, Sask.
C957, S/L Pattison, J. D., 38 Crescent Rd., Toronto, Ont.
J1G114, P/O Paulton, E. A., 423 Bruce Ave., Windsor, Ont.
J4780, S/L Pearson, G. T., 135 Atlas Ave., Toronto, Ont.
J5303, F/O Peel, R., 1630 O'Connor Drive, Toronto, Ont.
J15979, F/O Perkins, C. D., Fontliill, Ont.
J3512, F/L Peters, H. P„ 9548-105th St., Edmonton, Alta.
J15000, P/O 'Peterson, H. V., 2517-16A St., Calgary, Alta.
J15517. F/L Pettit, W. R„ 57 Murray St„ Brantford, Ont.
J16060, F/L Pettit, M. W„ 291 Glenholme Ave., Toronto, Ont.
J16145, F/L Phillip, R. D., 207 Strathmore Blvd„ Toronto, Ont.
J9648, F/L Phipps. R. T„ Strome, Alta.
J8608, F/O Pierce, T. W„ Box 233, Brace-bridge, Ont.
J9694, P/O Pledger, T. 0., 86 Kenilworth Ave., Toronto, Ont.
J16530, P/O Pool, G. R., Edrans, Man.
R94737, W/O Porter, G. H„ Saltcoats, Sask.
J15339, P/O Powell, L. W„ 19 Fry St., Rice Care, Darlington Co., Durham, Eng.
J8817. F/L Powell, P. G., Sorrento, B.C., (Notch Hill Stn.).
J15527, F/O Philpotts, L. E., 69 Hawthorne Ave., St. John,.N.B.
J16259. P/O Price. J. R.. Indian Head. Sask.
C920, S/L Price, L. B. B., 64 Fordin Cresc., Westmount, P.Q.
J17739, P/O Pridday, R. G., Port Carling, Ont.
J16848, P/O Probert, R. H., 929 Alder Ave., Moose Jaw, Sask.
J6150, F/O Proctor, C. S. W., Apt. 5, 248 Heath St., W., Toronto, Ont.
J16969, P/O Quinlan, B. A., 19th Ave., W., 21 Athlone Apts., Calgary, Alta.
J16157, P/O Quinn, R. N., Bromptonville, P.Q.
J15493, F/L Rae, J. A., 760 Spadina Ave., Toronto, Ont.
^ J12973, F/L Ramsay, D., Box 53, Alberni,
J10982, F/L Rawson, B. F. N., 51 Robinson St., Hamilton, Ont.
J16268, P/O Reeves, T. H„ 669-13th Ave., New Westminster, B.C.
J9750, F/O Reneau, G. L., 13 Newmarket Ave., Toronto, Ont.
J15356. P/O Reynolds, J. W. B., 418 Isabella St., Pembroke, Ont.
J8421, P/O Reynolds, J. A., 165 Montrose St., Winnipeg, Man.
R93698, W/O Ritchie, J. W., Ste. 20, Derwas Court, 121 St., Edmonton, Alta.
J15098, F/L Roach, N., 2039 West 47th Ave., Vancouver, B.C.
J10302, F/L Robertson, 0. B., Innerkip, Ont. J12571, F/O Robin, C. E., South Hazelton, B.C.
J9200, F/L Robinson, E. L., 975 Bute St.. Vancouver, B.C.

J10676, F/O Rolfe, V., 101 Queen Victoria St.. London E.C. 4, England.
J6166, F/O Roper, F. A.. 4212-201 St., Bav-side. L.I., N.Y.	'
J23524, P/O Ross, W. D. F„ 2419-14 A. St., W.. Calgary, Alta.
J16574, P/O Rowe, A. G., 623 Pape Are.,
Toronto, Ont.
C1362, S/L Roy, G. A,, 322 Roslyn Ave., Westmount, P.Q.
J16411, P/O Rubin, H. B., 261 Bannerman Ave., Winnipeg, Man.
J16205, P/O Rublee, W. O., Wilkie, Sask. Jl2980, F/O Rudeen, H. M., Parkbeg, Sask. C1319, S/L 'Russel, B. D„ 607 Clarke Ave., Westmount, P.Q.
J8972, P/O Russell, A. H., Box 123, Tofield, Alta.
J15160, F/O Ruttledge, A. J. D., Box 202, Simeoe, Ont.
J3519, F/L Sabourin, J. J. P., St. Isidore
de Prescott, Ont.
J16791, F/L Sandgren, H. W., c/o Pioneer Sash and Door Factory, Vernon, B.C.
J21942. F/O Sattler, M., 811 Victoria Ave., Regina, Sask.
J9149, S/L Saunders, H. L., Fort Qu'Appelle,
Sask.
J13415, F/L Savage, C. R., 1514-22nd Ave.,
S. W. Calgary, Alta.
C1664, S/L Savard, J. L., c/o Robin Hood Flour Mills Ltd., 300 St. Sacrament St., Montp Q
J7336, F/O 'Schmidt, D. W„ Millet, Alta. J18121, P/O Schmitt, W. H., Arborfield, Sask. J15092, F/L Schoales, R. A., Ste. 3, Donald Block. Fort William, Ont.
J16359, F/O Schultz, R. D., Bashaw, Alta. J10224, F/O Scott, D. G., 79 Barnesdale St. N., Hamilton, Ont.	'	*
J15509, S/L Semple, G. C., 275 Hastings Ave., Toronto, Ont.
J17203. P/O Senger, W. J., S*t. John, North Dakota, U.S.A.
J7224, F/O 'Shapiro, H., 4865 Queen Mary Rd., Apt., 36, Montreal. P.Q.
J8405, F/O Shemilt, G. L., Keewatin, Ont. J16137, P/O 'Sherk, W. S., Emerson Rd., Fort Erie South, Ont.
J7035, P/O Shoemaker, A. A., 11 Richmond Ave., Kitchener, Ont.
J13018, F/O Shuttleworth, D. D., 29 Newell Apts. Regina, Sask.
J15700, P/O Sibbald, W. J., 36 Grenadier Rd., Toronto, Ont.
J11110. F/O Simpson, D. W., 4899 Dundas
St. W„ Islington, Ont.
R137108, WOl Simpson, W. J., 1383 Cadillac Blvd., Detroit, Mich., U.S.A.
C1491, S/L Sinton, C.B., North Shore, Pembroke, W., Bermuda, B.W.I.
J16999, P/O Skilleter, E. A., 506 Vaughan Rd., Toronto, Ont.
C1379, F/L Small, N. E., 4524 West 11th, Ave., Vancouver, B.C.
J16325, F/O Smart, D. S., 13 Roslyn Ave., Ottawa, Ont.
J15771, P/O Smith, A., Fairport Beach Rd., Dunbarton, Ont.
J15203, F/O Smith, A. I., Box 167 Islington, Post Office, Ont.
J5690, F/L Smith, F. D., 936-19th Ave. W„ Calgary, Alta.
J17639, F/L Smith, F. S., Lake Ave., Selkirk, Man.
J6960, P/O Smith, J. G., Guatemala, C. A. (Finca Moeo, Guatalon,).

Questions
J15959, P/0 Smith, K. C. A., 438-6th St.,
Saskatoon, Sask.
J16734, F/L Smith, N., Arnprior, Ont.
J17080, P/O Smith, R. F., 175 W 10th Ave., Vancouver, B.C.
J4561, F/L Smith, R. I. A., 3052-18th Ave., Regina, Sask.
J16159, F/O Smith, S. T., 10313-124th St., Edmonton, Alta.
J15257, S/L Snider, J. D., 20 Haddon Ave.
S..	Hamilton, Ont.
C18909, P/O Sondergaard, A. C., Ponoka, Alta.
R70517, W/O Sorsdahl, C. E., Midale, Sask.
J16825, P/O Souch, G. A., 104 Wolverleigh Blvd.. Toronto, Ont.
J15722, F/O Spanner, F. G., 7 Ridout St., Toronto. Ont.
J27366, P/O Spence, C. E., 1115 First Ave., Verdun, P.Q.
J3995, F/L *Spence, J. A., 95 Gordon St., Guelph, Ont.
J16535, P/O Spence, P. E., 95 South Bentinck St., Sydney, N.S.
.T18223, P/O Steinberg, O., 4007 Marlowe Ave., Montreal, P.Q.
J5831, P/O Sterne, J. R„ 10159-llSth St., Edmonton. Alta.
J5306, F/O Sterns, W. M., 63 Cartier St., Ottawa, Ont.
J17321, P/O Stevens, G. A. H., South St., Bridgetown, N.S.
J5104, F/O Stevens, W. J., 490 Broadview Ave., Ottawa, Ont.
J18013, P/O Stewart, D. K., 1825-1J Ave., W.. Prince Albert, Sask.
J15536, P/O Stewart, H. W., 7064 De L'Epee Ave., Montreal, P.Q.
.T8429, P/O Stickell, J. H., Gilson, 111., U.S.A.
J8418, F/L Stinson, H. K., 64 Bond St., Lindsay. Ont.
J13597, F/O Stovel, A. B., 124 Grenfell Blvd., Tuxedo, Winnipeg, Man.
J16835, P/O Stovel, C. C., 44 Hindes Rd., Harlow, Middlesex, Eng.
J8760, F/O Striebel, J. H. Jr., 5802 London Rd. Duluth, Minnesota, U.S.A.
J16178, P/O Stutt, R. A., 792 Bloomfield Ave., Outremont, P.Q.
J18830, P/O Suarez, E. H. J., 146 Sherbrooke St., Winnipeg, Man.
J15131, S/L Suggitt, W. R. 250 Cedarvale Ave., Toronto, Ont.
J3722, P/O Sutton, R. H., 10246 Wadhurst Ru.. Edmonton, Alta.
J8420. F/O Sutton, W. W., Gibsland, Louisiana. U.S.A.
J9783, F/O Sweany, G. A.. Myrtle, Manitoba.
J15176. F/L Swetman. W. H.. c/o A. M. Dewar, Metropolitan Bldg., Toronto, Ont.
J15119, P/O Swingler, J. E., 351 Wolseley St.. Port Arthur, Ont.
J16507, P/O Symons, J. H., 138 Parkview Ave., St. James, Man.
J16688, P/O Taerum, T. H„ 334-15th Ave., Calgary. Alta.
J16517, P/O Tait, G. B., 2598 W. 33rd Ave., Vancouver, B.C.
J10715, F/O Taschereau, J. L.. 68 Maison-neuve Ave.. Quebec, P.Q.
J15535, P/O Taylor, R. W., 87 Cambridge St.. Victoria, B.C.
J15223, P/O Tett, J. K.. 29 Classic Ave.,
Toronto. Ont.
J10506, F/L Thompson, W. R., P.O. Box 214, Fraser Mills, B.C.
J17743, P/O Thomson, J. S., 1775 Blanca St., Vancouver, B.C.
J16938, P/O Thornton, G. M., 532 Spence St., Winnipeg, Man.
J9525. F/O Thorp, N., Ste. 18, Linwood Court, St. James, Winnipeg, Man. *
J15011, P/O Tilley, R. F., Clearwater, Florida, U.S.A.
J7343. F/O Tilson, H.. 17 McCallum Block,
Regina, Sask.
.117133, P/O Towse, J. F. W., 82 Coldwater Rd. W.. Orillia, Ont.
J5678, F/L Trickett, R. I., Box 123, Humboldt, Sask.	.
J10163. F/O Trilsbeck, T., 58 Pauline Ave., Toronto. Ont.
J17603. P/O Tripp, P. C. H., 5483 Boundary Rd., Vancouver. B.C.
J15777, F/L Troke, G. W„ Wolfville, N.S.
J17428, P/O Tupper, B. H„ 902-10th St., Saskatoon, Sask.
.T17533. P/O Turenne, D. J., St. Pierre, Man.
J6663, F/L Turnbull, H. B.. 208 South Mitton St.. Sarnia. Ont.
J6211, F/O 'Turnbull, J. H„ 109 Stanley St.. St. Thomas. Ont.
J7326. F/O Turner, G., Minaki, Ont.
,118430, P/O Usher, C. J.. 5949 Willingdon Place. Vancouver, B.C.
C873, W/C Van Camp, W. C., 113 Rennies' Mill Rd.. St. Johns, Nfld.
R69035, W/O Van Rassel, A. J. G., Box 164, Arnprior, Ont.
,117326, P/O Vandekerckhove, G. P. C., Stoney Mountain. Man.
R56103. W/O Vanexan. W. C., Box 75, Smiths Falls. Ont.
,117099, P/O Vinish, G. A., Box 229, Wakaw, Sask.
J17351. P/O Vogan, G. L., Millbank, Ont.
C827. W/C Waddell, R. C. A., Box 1055, Peterborough. Ont.
J5080. F/L Waggett, H. A. S.. 80 Roslin Ave., Toronto. Ont.
J14553, F/L Wagner, R. J.. Spruce Grove, Alta.
J15457, F/L Wainwriglit, L. A., 20 Woodcroft Crescent, Toronto. Ont.
J3205, F/L Walker, B. R„ 189 John St., London. Ont.
J15336, F/O Walker. D. R., Blairmore, Alta.
R74078. W/O Walker, H. A.. 98 Hamilton Ave., Ottawa, Ont.
.13199. F/L "Walker, J. E„ 10804-98th St., Edmonton, Alta.
R107273. W/O Walsh. C. A.. 52 Union Terrace, Gilly-Gate. Yorkshire, Eng.
J18398. P/O Warren, M. W„ Geraldton, Ont.
R102093. W/O Warne, D. E.. Kennedy, Sask.
J7520, P/O Waterbury, O. R„ Birtle, Man.
J6362, F/O Waterman, F. C. E., Princeton, B.C.
.15689, F/O Waterman, T. J. D., 4553 W. 14th Ave., Vancouver, B.C.
.15300. F/O Watts, A. I.. Brentwood Auto Court, Brentwood, V.I.. B.C.
J4688, F/L Watts, J. V., 150 Catherine St., Hamilton, Ont.
J4956, F/L Webster, A. E., 1210 Harwood St.. Vancouver, B.C.
J11598, F/O Webster, M. D., 5421 Hutchison St.. Montreal, P.Q.
J10519, S/L Weedon, P. G., Paddockwood, Sask.
J10822. F/O Weiser. W., 1475 Grant Concourse, Bronx, N.Y., U.S.A.
J6650. F/L Westerman, C. F., 1236 Athol St., Regina, Sask.
J4813, F/L Wheeler, A. B., Leedstown, Morton, N.Z.
Questions
[Stage Direction]
J15484, F/L White, P. B., 9 Lyndale Ave., London, England.
J16419, P/O White, W. J„ 223 Kilbride Ave., Winnipeg, Man.
J15281, F/L Whitham, J, 11121-125th St., Edmonton, Alta.
J17846, P/O Whyte, G. B., 19 Central St., Battle Creek, Mich., U.S.A.
J17957, P/O Wilby, P., Pyramid Mountain Lodge, Jasper, Alta.
J15138, F/O Wilby, T. R., 81 Regent St., Fredericton, N.B.
J10026, F/O Wilhelmson, S. W. R., Elbow, Sask.
J6026, F/O Wilkin, R. P., 10304-123rd St.. Edmonton, Alta.
J6991, F/L Williams, D. J., 1874-W-10th Ave., Vancouver, B.C.
J15604, P/O Williams, J. W., 548 McConnell Rd., Chilliwack, B.C.
J17821, P/O Williams, R. J., Knowlton, P.Q.
J9577, F/O Williams, V. A., 132 Cavell Ave., Hamilton, Ont.
J9871, F/L Wilson, C. A., 4 Melbourne St. W.. Lindsay, Ont.
J15542, P/O Wilson, D. C., 41 Strath Ave., Kingsway Park, Toronto. Ont.
J17520, P/O Wilson, L. G., 489 Philip St., Niagara Falls, Ont.
^ J15778, P/O Wiseman, I). R„ 895-4th Ave., N.E., Moose Jaw, Sask.
C1653. S/L Woods, W. B., 69 Wychwood Park, Toronto, Ont.
J15195, P/O Wright, J. G., Liverpool, N.S.
J7233, F/O Wright, J. G.. 18 Tormey St., Ottawa, Ont.
J17434, P/O Yackman, F. W., 191 College St., Sudbury, Ont.
J16906, P/O Young, G. W., 7 Westmoreland Ave., Toronto, Ont.
J17392, P/O Young, W. J., 522-21st Ave. West, Calgary, Alta.
J17230, P/O Zee, J. A., 53 Slater Ave., Jewett City, Conn.
Distinguished Flying Medal Number-Rank-Name-Home Address
R90244, F/Sgt. Aitcheson, G. D., R.R. 3, Stratford, Ont.
R58623, F/S Alexander, E. S., 3519 26th Ave. W.. Vancouver, B.C.
R64131, Sgt. Anderson, H. J., 120 Robinson St.. Hamilton, Ont.
R101990, Sgt. Anderson, L. L., 547 Sherbrooke St.. Winnipeg, Man.
R86915, Sgt. Anderson, M. B., General Delivery. Calgary, Alta.
R76463, F/Sgt. Anthony, E. H., Port Williams. N.S.
R95996, F/Sgt. Armstrong, H. T. B., 201 Powell Ave.. Ottawa. Ont.
R72341, F/Sgt. Back, S., 39 Wolsely St., Toronto, Ont.
R69847, F/S Baker, J. B., 16 Balsam Ave., Toronto. Ont.
R83899, F/Sgt. Balkwill, S. H„ 974 College St.. Toronto, Ont.
R85860, F/S Ballantyne, J. H., 1529 Bathurst St.. Toronto. Ont.
11620. F/S Banks, J. S., c/o Mrs. N. Mar-chant. East Angus, P.Q.
R67788. Sgt. Barrick, J. F., P.O. Box 3267, Odessa. Texas. U.S.A.
R104782, F/Sgt. Barsalou, J. A. J., 2770 St. Catherine Rd.. Montreal, P.Q.
R68061, Sgt. Bebensee, D. G., Bothwell, Ont.
R9I903, Sgt. Beckwith, H., 436 McLeod Ave., East Kildonan, Man.

R61216, F/S Bell, H. C. D., 11231 St., Albert Rd., Edmonton, Alta.
R76955, Sgt. Bell, R. G., R.R. No. 1, Victoria, B.C.
UK83055, F/S Bent, W. T., Sikeston, Miss.
R107194, Sgt. Bergey, E. K., Guernsey, Sask.
R106299, Sgt. Berven, B. M., Fort Qu'Appelle,
Sask.
R92610, F/Sgt. Betty, J. W., Box 32 Hanna, Alta.
R93566, F/Sgt. Bigoray, W. W., Redwater, Alta.
R76038, F/Sgt. Bishop, A. A., New Mines, Kings Co., N.S.
R95321, F/S Bissett, J. M., 25 Rosewarne Ave., St. Vital, Man.
R56057, Sgt. Blanchet, J. P. G., 853 Cloutier St.. Three Rivers, Que.
R64618, F/S Boucher, L. J., Grand Falls, N.B.
R77285, Sgt. Bouvier, J. M. L., c/o Miss Moise Handheld, Vercheres, P.Q.
R124853, Sgt. Bowlby, A. T., Wilmot, Annapolis Co., N.S.
R110387, Sgt. Boynton, B. D., 1505-15st East, Calgary, Alta.
R128254, Sgt. Booth, R. J., 1319-8th Ave. N., Saskatoon, Sask.
R78203, Sgt. Bray, C. L., 40 Ilazelton Ave., Toronto, Ont.
R104908, Sgt. Breakwell, G., Dannevirke, N.Z.
R71563, F/Sgt. Brichta, P. S. O., Sutton West. Ont.
R60150, F/S Broomfield, J. O., Turner Valley Alta.	'
R54826, Sgt. Bruyere, G. J. R., 7154 Nancy St.. Montreal. Que.
R79195. F/Sgt. Bullock, C. II., 17A-20th Ave., Lachine. P.Q.
R76052, Sgt. Burke, J. R. A., 128 Arthur St., Truro, N.S.
R82285, F/Sgt. Burpee, L. J., Ill Powell Ave.. Ottawa, Ont.
R92979, Sgt. Burton, J. R., Acton, Montana, U.S.A.
R66602. F/Sgt. Burton, R. J., Box 2, Smooth Rock Falls, Ont.
R72557, F/Sgt. Butler, C. T., Yorke Point, P.E.I.
R88361. Sgt. Butts, Nolan, Mira Gut, Cape Breton. N.S.
R97038, Sgt. Carleton, E. B., 58^ De Grassi St.. Toronto, Ont.
R79113, Sgt. Carlon, T. E., 6406 Henri Julien St.. Montreal. P.Q.
R127907, Sgt. Canter, W., 252 Grace St., Toronto, Ont.
R115419, F/Sgt. Charters, R. B., 60 Scott St., Brampton, Ont.
R117497, Sgt. Chepil, M., Edwin. Man.
R69511, F/S Chrisholm, D. A., 332 Spadina Rd., Toronto, Ont.
R83457, Sgt. Chretien, G. T., 10 Wolfe St., Penetanguishene, Ont.
R134085, Sgt. Collins, L. G., Marchwell, Sask.
R126312, F/S Connell, P. F„ 77 St. James St., Saint John. N.B.
R80203, F/S Cook, B.. Arden. Man.
R102446, Sgt. Cornish, D. M., Scout Lake, Sask.
R84492. F/S Craft, R. G., 14 Bowes Ave., Brantford, Ont.
R54334, Sgt. Craig. K. W., Citv View. Ont.
R74224, F/S Craig, W. D„ R.R. No. 1, Westboro, Ont.
R64432. Sgt. Creeden, J. W., 100 Grand River
St., Paris, Ont.

Questions
R654G5, F/S Crosby, K. E.. R.R. No. 1, South Ohio, Yarmouth County, N.S.
R84062, F/S Crozier, D. M., Walkerton, Ont.
R58307, F/Sgt. Cumberland, D. A., Britannia Beach, B.C.
R56257, Sgt. Curtis, R. E., 251 Preston St., Ottawa, Ont.
R5G902, F/S Dagg, F. G., 121 Ethelbert St., Winnipeg, Man.
R60726, Sgt. Dalphond, M. H. J., Morinville, Alta.
R67606, F/S Darby, C. E., Harrow, Ont.
R90395, Sgt. Davey, R. R., Durham, Ont., R.R. No. 2.
R117353, F/S Davis, K. G., 38 Munro Park Ave., Toronto, Ont.
R55311, F/S Delany, C. E., 11 Murray Ave., Quebec, P.Q.
R87600, F/S De Marco, F. V., 507 Ewen Ave., New Westminster, B.C.
R88360, Sgt. DeMone, H. E., Bridgewater, N.S.
R110183, Sgt. Dempster, J. M., 1657 Barclay St., Vancouver, B.C.
R140064, F/S Dennis, P. W., 1407 Murray Ave., Fort William, Ont.
R95950, F/S De Silva, D.. 49 Hadfield St., Georgetown. British Guiana, S.A.
R73246, F/S Dickson, J. D., Rothesay, N.B.
R96009, F/S Dimma, T. W., 436 Albert St., Ottawa, Ont.
R72835, F/S DockendorfI, G. G., North River, P.E.I.
R69718, F/S Donahue, C. J., 60 Lindsay St., Lindsay, Ont.
R71704, W/O Donelly, T. H., 304 Silverthorne Ave., Toronto, Ont.
R111079, F/S Dorie, J. E„ 536 Bedford St„ Cornwall, Ont.
R80737, F/S Dorland, R., 14 Rotfield, Islington, Ont.
R75287. F/S Drechsler, W. W. A. J., 48 Lake Shore Rd., Mimico, Ont.
R114911. F/S Dubois, R., Coderre, Sask.
R64743, Sgt. Duffield, H. C., Woodstock, N.B.
R125456, Sgt. Duval, J. P. A. J., Gracefield, P.Q.
R75188, F/S Edwards. J. F.. Battleford, Sask.
R87920, F/S Egri, W. E., R.R. No. 2, Abbotsford. B.C.
R87302, F/S Einarson, J. W., Shellbrook,
Sask.
^90093. Sgt. Elliott, R. C., 194 Gamble Ave., Toronto. Ont.
R113675. Sgt. Ellis, R. W., Rothesay, N.B.
R114226, F/S Evans, J. H., Waterloo, Ont.
R62201, Sgt. Falloon, G. H.. 1160-4th St., Brandon, Man.
R101037, F/S Fast, A. P., R.R. No. 1, Brown Rd. N., Langle# Prairie, B.C.
R61629, F/S Fav, A. E., Lebret, Sask.
R117536, Sgt. Ferrell, G., 117 Beach St., Belleville, N.J., U.S.A.
R71000, Sgt. Finlayson, S. F., Broadview, Sask.
R107186. Sgt. Finnerty, G. P., Rosetown, Sask.
R82738, Sgt. Fisher, C. A., Iroquois, Ont.
R62101, Sgt. Fisher, D. S., Biggar, Sask.
R70951, F/S Franciscone, A., 2058 MacTavish St.. Regina, Sask.
R157764, F/S Fussell. A. C. W„ 3614 Turner St.. New Westminster, B.C.
R64480. Sgt. Galloway, J. E., Milton, Ont.
R120080, Sgt. Gaunt, S., 10 High St., Paseoag, Rhode Island. U.S.A.
R122162, F/S Gibb, A. P., 1939-W-42nd St., Vancouver, B.C.
R64935, F/S Gill, H. L., South Devon, Ybrk County, N.B.
R93824, F/S Gillmore, J. H., Picardville, Alta.
R70096, F/S Goodall, G. L., 12 Helen Ave., Brantford, Ont.
R66493, F/S Goodwin, H., 168 Fernbrook Ave., Wyncote, Penna., U.S.A.
R139157, Sgt. Goudy, C. M., Campbellford, Ont.
R106620, F/S Gray, M. F„ 2892-W-28th Ave., Vancouver, B.C.
R56500, Sgt. Greenshields, J., Senneville, Que.
R86893, F/S Halkett, A. M., Peace River, Alta.
R85430, F/S Hamilton. F. F.. Mazenod, Sask.
R92421, Sgt. Harris, W. F., 4369 Cypress St., Vancouver, B.C.
R111540, Sgt. Harrison, A., 134 First St. West, Cornwall, Ont.
R67197, F/S Haunts, L. W„ 412 Albert St., Kingston, Ont.
R135881, F/S Hicks, R. B., Pierrepont Manor, New York, U.S.A.
R78427, Sgt. Hiley, F. S., 80 Courcelette Rd., Toronto, Ont.
R98109, F/S Higgins, F. J.. Amhersfcburg, Ont.
R87742, F/S Hill, W., 1320 Government St., Penticton, B.C.
R123276. F/S Hill, W. L. H., 1115 Wellington St., Ottawa, Ont.
R101822, F/S Hinke, E. A., 1830 Daisy Ave., Long Beach, Calif., U.S.A.
R75448. F/S Hobson, D. P., 621-6th Ave., North Saskatoon. Sask.
R87652. Sgt. Holland, J. S., 829 Obispo Ave., Coral Gables, Fla., U.SA.
R96080, Sgt. Holtby L. M. M., Hawkesbury, Ont.
^ R76770, F/S Horne, A. M., 11902-94th St., Edmonton, Alta.
R72099, F/S Horricks, G. E., 265 Withrow Ave., Toronto, Ont.	„
R70985. F/S Hosick, B. B., Webb. Sask.
R175947, F/S Hughes, R. F., 1235 Kelowna, Vancouver, B.C.
R83615, F/S, Humphrey-, L. W., 1 Clarendon Ave., Toronto, Ont.
R151677, Sgt. Hurst, R. N., Box 332, Duncan, B.C.
R109784. Sgt. Jackson, F. M„ Jr„ 419 Venable St.. Apt. 71. Atlanta, Georgia. U.S.A.
R130765, F/S Jackson, W. C., 10123-123rd St., Edmonton, Alta.
R88329. F/S Janes, A. J., 19 Inglis St., Halifax, N.S.
R55378. F/S Keane, W. II., 20 Julia St., Quebec. P.Q.
R86106, Sgt. Kernaghan, S. J., Cartwright, Man.
R53757, F/S Kerr, H. J. F„ Russell, Ont.
R91887, F/S King, D. B., 259 Kitson St., Norwood, Man.
R149596, Cpl. Knelson. H.. Bladworth, Sask.
R86096, F/S Kruger, F. C., Bede, Man.
R87727. F/S Lancaster. G. H., 21 Preston Rd., Queen's Park. Bedford, Eng.
R94742, F/S Larson, F. H., 2310 8th St. W„ Calgary, Alta.
R103284, F/S Laughland, A. M., 9 University Ave., Guelph, Ont.	*
R72828, Sgt. Leavitt, W. H. C., Alberton, P.E.I.
R133390. Sgt. Leckie, J. C., R.R. No. 1, Osoyoos, B.C.
R98963, Sgt. Ledford, W. H., 2138 Lome Ave., Saskatoon, Sask.
Questions
[Stage Direction]
R122464, Sgt. Lee, J. P„ Box 221, Cashmere, Wash., U.S.A.
R77120, Sgt. Leet, R. J., 420 Grosvenor Ave., Westmount, P.Q.
R77184, Sgt. Lepine, J. H. C. A., 84 Rue Ste. Anne, Ste. Anne de Bellevue, P.Q.
R56328. F/S Lewis, W. T., 6133 Sherbrooke St. W., Montreal, P.Q.
10083, F/S Lockhart, R. C., Newport, N.S.
R63680, Sgt. Long, E. R., 246 Thames St. N., Ingersoll. Ont.
R105598, Sgt. Low, G. H., 11428-87th St., Edmonton, Alta.
R96467, F/S Lowans, E. J., 182 King St, E., Gananoque, Ont.
R87366, F/S Lundeen, C. P., Preeeeville, Sask.
R68535, FS MacDonald, D. M., 424 N. Marks St,, Fort William, Ont.
R140676, Sgt. MacDonald, R. J., Basswood, Manitoba.
R92109, FS MaeFarlane, R. E., 295 McSween Rd., Chilliwack, B.C.
R78574, FS MacKenzie, A. G., Lucknow, Ont.
R83959, FS MacKenzie, G. T., 44 Oakwood Ave., Toronto, Ont.
R112723, FS MaeLean, D. A., Ill Wallace Ave., Toronto, Ont.
R70978, FS MacLennan, I. R., Gull Lake, Saskatchewan.
R83335, FS MacMonagle, W. D., 875 Ardmore Ave., Akron, Ohio, U.S.A.
R64116, FS MacNab, B. C., Milton, Ont.
R74901, Sgt. Maitland, W. J., 4489 Angus Drive, Vancouver, B.C.
R70100, FS Marsh, C. S., R.R. 3, Milton, Ontario.
R64125, Sgt. Martin, D. C., 46 Balfour St., Brantford, Ont.
R101644, FS Matheson, S. G., Stonewall, Manitoba.
R103101, FS Matthews, J. L., 486 St. Patrick Sq.. Port Arthur, Ont.
R103566, Sgt. Matthews, L. W., 1228-13th Ave. W., Calgary, Alta.
R55325. FS Meagher, J. M., Mulgrave, N.S.
R110157, Sgt. Mellin, A. A., Jaynee Rd., Duncan, B.C.
11104847, FS Merchant, J. F., Sturgeon Falls, Ontario.
R83305, FS Merrick. W. T., 318 S.E. 8th St., Evansville, Ind., U.S.A.
R80314, Sgt. Mitchell, B. E., 579 Rathgar Avenue, Winnipeg, Man.
R74313, Sgt. Mitchell, G. E., 74 Clarence St., Sydney, N.S.W., Australia.
R124098, FS Mitchell, P.D., Kamloops, B.C.
R54030, Sgt. Morin, P. E., c/o Bank of Montreal. 144 Wellington St., Ottawa, Ontario.
R79681, Sgt. Moritz, F. J., Gull Lake, Sask.
RC9362, FS Moroney, B. H., 344 Elm St., W., Sudbury, Ont.
R54068, FS Morris, A. W., Merrickville, Ont.
R80521, Sgt. Morrison, D. R., 634 Willwood Ave., Toronto, Ont.
R100533 Sgt. Morrissy, H., 512 Ryers Ave., Cheltenham. Pa., U.S.A.
R101074, FS Morton, C. L., 3039 Deakin St., Berkeley, California, U.S.A.
R69580, Sgt. Moss, D., 261 Keewatin Ave., Toronto, Ont.
R61626, FS Mullen, R. G., Canora, Sask.
IMr. Macmillan.]
R77162, FS McArthur, E. M., 17 Lake Avenue, Strathmore, P.Q.
R107825, FS McAvoy, J. K., 761 Broadway, Ave., Winnipeg, Man.
R128527, Sgt. McBeath, H. L., c/o Mrs. Wilson, 3236 W. 10th Ave., Vancouver, B.C.
R74814, FS McCabe, D., 1039 Foul Bay Rd., Victoria, B.C.	[DOT]
R98555, FS McCoy, D. J., Carruthers, Sask.
R97376, FS McDonald, C. P., 1384 King St. West, Toronto, Ont.
R67064, FS Mcllquham, T. O., Carleton Place, Ontario.
R82852, FS McIntosh, W. P. M., St. Andrews West, Cornwall, Ont.
R81480, FS McKinnon, L. M., Box 560, Revelstoke, B.C.
R101601, Sgt. McNamara, R., Carman, Man.
R61684, FS Neale, K. F., 1025 Downing St., Winnipeg, Man.
R83384, FS Nitz, A. F., 317 East St., Flint, Gennerso, Mich.
R87404, FS Nutting, S. H., Radisson, Sask.
R114949, Sgt. Oancia, S., Stonehenge, Sask.
R51831, FS Oates, R. J., 31 Grove Road, Leighton Buzzard, Beds., England.
_ R95724, FS O'Connor, H. J., 16 Jenkins St., Kingston, Ont.
R85461, Sgt. Osier, E. E., 2238 Montague St., Regina, Sask.
R64466, Sgt. Paige, B. C., P.O. Box No. 146, Bridgeport, Ont.
R65307, FS Parker, D. H., Lower Granville, Anna. Co., N.S.
R11.3939, Sgt. Parker, D. F. G., Dalhousie, New Brunswick.
R93694, FS Patch, Harry Eugene, 169 Beacon Rd., Broadstairs, Kent, England.
R98024, FS Paulton, A. C., 423 Bruce Ave., Windsor, Ont.
R86900, FS Pearce, D. R., 11138-70th Street, Edmonton, Alta.
R10036S. FS Peck, C. W. W., Suite 201, St. George's Manor, Port Arthur, Ont.
R55241, FS Pichette, J. E. R., Restigouche, Bonaventure County, Que.
' R58718. FS Pierce, E. M., 2401 Alberta St„ Vancouver, B.C.
R134204, FS Pollock, J. R„ 235 Avenue J North, Saskatoon, Sask.
R58432, FS Porritt, W. J., 8707 French St., Vancouver, B.C.
R84592, Sgt. Price, E. G., Canterbury, N.B.
R79417, Sgt. Price, G. R., 2664 Moreau St., Montreal, P.Q.
R136383, Sgt. Quesnel, J. H. L., Orchard Ave., Port Credit, Ont.
R64433, FS Quinn, C. J., Box 106, Liberty, Sask.
R55373, FS Rainville, G. H., Grande-Allee, Quebec City, Que.
R66130, Sgt. Ratcliffe, J. T., R.R. No. 2 Thor-old Road, Welland, Ont.
R67906, FS Reid, D. G., 69 Hanna St. East, Windsor, Ont.
R68070, Sgt. Reinhart, W. L., 148 Rebecca St., Stratford, Ont.
R101393, FS Richardson, H. H., 523 Rosedale Ave., Winnipeg, Man.

Questions
R55971, Sgt. Rivard, J. J. N., 14 Scott St., La Tuque, Laviolette Co., Que.
R60727, Sgt. Roach, M„ 2039 W. 47th Ave., Vancouver, B.C.
R115536, Sgt. Roach, W., R.R. No. 2, Duncan, B.C.
R133383, FS Roberts, F. J., 2906 W. 36th Ave., Vancouver, B.C.
R54188, Sgt. Robillard, J. L. G., 15 Elm St., Ottawa, Ont.
R65749, FS Robinson, C., 2043 Belgrave Ave., N.D.G., Montreal, P.Q.	.
R65063, FS Robson, C. A., 72 Chamberlain St., Ottawa, Ont.
R95492, FS Ross, A. L., Holland, Man.
R58820, Sgt. Runner, J. M., Treheime, Man.
R64894, FS Rutledge, E. E., Canterbury, N.B.
R61810, FS Schauenberg, B. L., Verwood, Sash.
R9S788, Sgt. Schofield, N. L., 833 Ave. C., N. Saskatoon, Sask.
R128113, Sgt. Schmidt, E. F., Herscliel, Sask.
R70877, Sgt. Scott, C. G., Bowness P.O., Calgary, Alta.
RS0023, FS Shannon, R. A., Suite 2, 189 Kel-win St., Winnipeg, Man.
R84134. Sgt. Shellington, W. R., 82 Erie Ave., Brantford, Ont.
R79864, FS Shirley, C. A., Carlyle, Sask.
4190NP, Sgt. Skebo, T. H., 164 Bertrand St., Winnipeg, Man.
R79352, FS Skillen, R. L., Saguenay Inn, Ar-vida, P.Q.
R112604, Sgt. Smale, J. L., 118 Pacific Ave., Toronto, Ont.
R91243, Sgt. Smith, A. G., 232 Bain Ave., Toronto, Ont.
R106305, Sgt. Smith, D. M.. 380 Vernon Rd., St. James, Man.
R70152, Sgt. Smith, D. V., 25 Sandford Ave., Toronto, Ont.
R83451, FS Smith, J. F., 134 Lome Ave., Chatham, Ont.
R60902, Sgt. Smitten, L., 9912-84th Ave., Edmonton, Alta.
R121611, FS Sneddon. J. A., 12218-80 St., Edmonton, Alta.
R95447, FS Soderquist, D. D., Washburn, North Dakota, U.S.A.
R78542, FS Spence, R. L., Highgate, Ont.
R86855, FS Spraggs, L. A., Didsbury, Alta.
R67059, FS Stephenson, W. II., 105 Great St. James St., Belleville, Ont.
R116291, Sgt. Stevens, L. C., Rapid City, Man.
R69116, FS Stewart, A. W., 138-5th St„ Noranda, P.Q.
R86828, FS Stewart, E. C., Camrose, Alta.
R77295, FS Stewart, W. E., 14 Newton St., Sherbrooke, Que.
R80154, FS Stewner, R., 625 Belmont Ave., Westmount, P.Q.
R86215, FS Storms, D. W., Emerson, Man.
7812, FS Strutt, G. J., Shawville, Que.
R85849, FS Sutherland, F. A., 1344 Mount Pleasant Road, Toronto, Ont.
R86095, FS Sutherland, G. G., ,802 Governor Ave., Winnipeg, Man.
R77522, FS Swanson, M. L., 9852-81st Ave., Edmonton, Alta.
R87620, Sgt. Switzer, A. W„ Revelstoke, B.C.
R81075, Sgt. Taylor, E. A., 7544 Heather St., Vancouver, B.C.
R60723, Sgt. Taylor, H. A., Halkirk, Alta.
R98213, FS Taylor, R. E., R.R. No. 6, Boon-ville, Ind., U.S.A.
R61012, FS Templeman, T., 7726-107th St., Edmonton, Alta.
R92293, FS Thomas, E. H., 715-16th Ave., New Westminster, B.C.
R88221, Sgt. Thomas, L. I., Hillcrest Ave., West, Richmond, Va., U.S.A.
R65039, Sgt. Thomson, G. H., 369 Brunswick St., Fredericton, N.B.
R64242 FS Tice. H. F., Grimsby Beach, Ont.
R91742, Sgt. Tod, R. E., Lot 39, St. Vital Rd., St. Vital, Man.
R71763, Sgt. Townley, W. B., 49 St. Clair Ave. West. Toronto, Ont.
R62971, FS Trask, W. P., Carleton, Yarmouth County, N.S.
R69565, Sgt. Trebell, J. G., 180 Geoffrey St., Toronto, Ont.
R128945, Sgt. Tribe, D. F., P.O. Box 33, Courtney, B.C.
R62270, FS Tumour, N.C., c/o Mrs. Thom, 2930 Heather St., Vancouver, B.C.
R120945, FS Trotter, E. J.. Tuberose, Sask.
R86544, FS Tutton, F. M„ 12121-94th St., Edmonton, Alta.
R61603 Sgt. Turnbull, R. S., Govan, Sask.
R79229, FS Vaclion, E. T., R.R. No. 2, Ayer's Clifi'e, P.Q.
R67655, FS Vander Dasson, W. L., 710 Giles Blvd. E., Windsor, Ont.
R114511, Sgt. Warren, E. F., 2133 Rae St.,
Regina, Sask.
R66150, FS Watlington, H. F., Hamilton, Bermuda.
R117523, Sgt. Watts, J. D., 4406-West 8th Ave., Vancouver, B.C.
R53903, FS Weatherall, R. L., 33 Ann St., Eastview, Ontario.
R83374, Sgt. Weaver, C., 1201 N.W. 38th St„ Oklahoma City, Okla., U.S.A.
R115098, FS Welch, H. R., 303 McDonald Ave., Belleville, Ont.
R134479, FS Werbiski, M. N., Rorketon, Man.
R70619, Sgt. Wertzler, E. E., Red Deer, Alta.
R59107, FS Wheatley, R. J. A., 115 Furley Street, V'innipeg, Man.
R8474S. FS White, M. E., Centreville, N.B.
R82447, FS White, R. J., 24 Harvy St., Perth, Ont.
R62400, FS Williams, G. E., 1202-13th St.
East, Saskatoon. Sask.
R99773, Sgt. Williams, J. M. M., 150 Henderson Ave., Ottawa, Ont.
R75610, FS Withington, T. D., R.R. No. 4, Kitchener, Ont.
R149155, FS Wobiek, H. A., 822-7tk St. S., Lethbridge, Alta.
R54201, Sgt. Woodburn, J. D., Cyrville, Ont.
R87951. FS Wooley, J. R., Cottage Inn, Whytecliff P.O., B.C.
R83562, FS Wortley, W. H., 330 Gladstone Ave., Toronto, Out.
R 75288, FS Wright, R. W., 903 6th Ave. N., Saskatoon, Sask.
R67165. FS Yates, G. P. A., Delta, Ont.
R53177, Sgt. Yule, A. C., 102 McPherson Ave., Toronto, Ont.
R90297, FS Zulauf, F. R., Milverton, Ont.
Questions
[Stage Direction]
Conspicuous Gallantry Medal
R107483, Sgt. Bailey, J. C., 1390 Granville St., Vancouver, B.C.
R94567, PS Brown, K. W., 106 Hochelaga St. E., Moose Jaw, Sask.
R70142, Sgt. Cardy, W. H., Centre Road, Port Credit, Ont.
R90883, PS Barden, A. W. J., 100 Perguson St., North Bay, Ont.
R191205, Sgt. Meadows, G. W., Bowsman River, Man.
R120651, FS Russell, J. V., R.R. 2, Speers, Sask.
R107665, Sgt. Williamson, L. F., 2204 McIntyre St., Regina, Sask.
George Medal
R54730, Sgt. Baily, F. M., 4572 W. 2nd Ave., Vancouver, B.C.
R78103, FS Coates, D. M„ R.R. 2, Wood-bridge, Ont.
J15822, P/O Jenner, R. deF Ottawa, Ont.
C8721, F/L Lindsay, E. J. Hendry, Drayton, Ont.
J11843, F/'O Link, H. D., Current, Sask.
9867, Sgt. Lummis, F. B.. Fr R82698, Cpl. Lyon, G. F. Street, Ottawa, Ont.
C2201, F/L McCombe, R Avenue. Dorval, P.Q.
R64816, Sgt. Miller, T. B„ Ave. West, Saint John, N.B.
R75862, FS Moore, D. C., St., Durham, Ont.
R139022, Sgt. Pudney, C. L Belmar, N.J., U.S.A J13042, P/O Williams, J. F., R.R. 3, Port Dover, Ont.
., 30 Melgund St.,
A., c/o Gordon
Box 687, Swift
[DOT]ankford, Ont. W., 155 James
J., 4 Martin
26 Beaeonsfield
Box 137, Albert
-., 306-15tli Ave.,
c/o O. Fletcher,
Military Medal
r	McDonald, C. E., Shreveport,
La., U.S.A.
Supplementary List of Awards Recently Announced
Distinguished Flying Cross Number Rank-Name-Home Address
R82627, W/O Abbey, J. E., 7 Fifth Ave., Ottawa, Ont.
TTrJl°o0(i- p/? Armstrong, W. N., Box 137, West Summerland, B.C.
„ m536Jv ,F/0 Moody, V. K„ West Middle Sable, Shelbourne County, N.S.
J17785, F/O Cameron, T. H., Sylvan Lake, Alta.
J19308, P/O Macintosh, B. A., Not available. J18812, P/O Spink, T. B., 5251 Hoy St., Vancouver, B.C,
J9863, S/L Strachan, W. W„ 2246 Daniel St„ Trail, B.C.
J21435, F/O Allen, E., 215 S. Normandie Ave., Los Angeles, Calif.
R96703, W/O Coulombe, J. A. R., Not available.
J6857, S/L Taylor, C. J. W., Box 3010, Winnipeg, Man.
J6002, F/L Kerrigan, H. F., Ridgewood Park, Goderich, Ont.
J22545, F/L Matthews, H. L., Comox Rd, Courtenay, B.C.
[Mr. Macmillan.1
C626, W/C Richer, D. B., 5854 Durocher Ave.. Montreal, P.Q.
J11552, S/L Epps, R. F„ 306 Parkview St.. St. James, Man.
C4002, F/L McKay, D. K., Kintail, Ont.
J3523, F/L Patterson, D. S., 337 S. Archibald St., Fort William, Ont.
J17945, F/O Miller, K. S., 739 Roslyn Ave., Montreal, P.Q.
J20394, F/O Mitchell, T. M. L„ 33 Chester Hill Rd., Toronto, Ont.
J18597, P/O Rowe, E. L. L„ 475-8th St. E„ Owen Sound, Ont.
J18198, P/O McIntosh, J., 1163 Balmoral St.. Medicine Hat, Alta.
J18986, P/O Coutlee, M., 9 Norwich Ave., Woodstock, Ont.
R109505, W/O Hawks, E. S., 73 Victoria Ave., Leamington, Qnt.
R99253, W/O McLeod, E. T., 66 Metcalf St., Saint John, N.B.
J12855, F/O Banks, H. C. C., Ste. 6, Colgrove Apts., Calgary, Alta.
J10313, F/O Cloutier, W. B. B., 35 Parkway Ave., Toronto, Ont.
J17793, F/O Craddock, B. A., Not available.
J16306, F/O Drimmie, R. G., 1547 Comox St., Vancouver, B.C.
J11113, F/O Massey, C., 530 E. 7th St., Plainfield, N.J., U.S.A.
J16135. F/O Keane, H. W., 20 Julia St., Quebec, P.Q.
.114578, F/O Simpson. D. H„ Little Langdale. East Horsley, Surrey, England.
J22570, F/O Wheeler, E. F., 418 Adolphus St., Cornwall, Ont.
J14783, F/O Pritchard, L. T„ 229 High St. E„ Moose Jaw, Sask.
J18143, P/O Brown, J. F. C., 185 St. Cyrille St., Quebec, P.Q.
J18127, P/O Coburn, L. G., 400 Ketchen St., Temiskaming, P.Q.
C18596, P/O Johnston, F. E., 283 Besmarehais Blvd., Verdun, Que.
J18381, P/O Mayou, F. D., 5427 York St., Montreal, Que.
J19161, P/O Davidson, A. M., Not available.
J19034, P/O Middlemiss, K. R., Hearne, Sask.
R134906, W/O Farmer, A. C., Box 93, Pine Falls, Man.
J22778, F/L Laing, G. H., 351 Assiniboine Ave.. Winnipeg, Man.
J13112, F/O Thomson, D. C., Fort Assiniboine, Alta.
Distinguished Flying Medal
R181818, Sgt., Qualle, R. E.. Beverley, Sask.
R142144, F/S Coiberry, E., 753 Rea St., Regina, Sask.
R69999, F/S Irwin, R. B., South River, Ont.
R132080, F/S Hyde, R. C., R.R. No. 1, Manor, Sask.
R121529, F/S Hardy, A. V., Not available.
R136215, F/S Della Stua, A., Not available.
R136237, F/S Moriaritv. J. E., Not available.
R128227, F/S Weaver, H. D., c/o R.R. Oliver, R.R. No. 1, Victoria, B.C.
R71968, Sgt. Ireland, G., 52 Stewart St., Toronto, Ont.
R153882. F/S Angus, J., 66 De Grassi St., Toronto, Ont.
Distinguished Service Order
J12483, F/O Shulemson, S. S., 5150 Decarie Blvd., Montreal. P.Q.

Questions
Appendix "B"
Canadians in R.A.F,
Gallantry Awards
Number1-Rank-Name-Home Address-
40281, F/O Angus, A. B., McCreary, Man., D.F.C.
39012, F/L Arnold, K. F., Saskatoon, Sask., D.F.C.
W/C Atkinson', L. V. E., D.F.C. and Bar.
37929, S/L Avent, J., Kartney, Man., D.F.C.
755030, Sat. Bain. J., Hamilton, Ont., D.F.M.
S/L Banks, D. K., Nova Scotia, D.F.C.
02268, p/o Barnes, C. A., D.F.C.
39928, F/L Bartlett, C. S., Fort Qu'Appelle, Sask., D.F.C.
37664, S/L Barton, R. A., Penticton, B.C., D.F.C. and Bar.
118131, F/L Bazalgette, I. W„ D.F.C.
42788, F/L Bigelow, A. E., D.F.C.
1267053, ,Sgt. Beurling, G. F., Verdun, P.Q., D.FM. and Bar, D.F.C., D.S.O.
39778, F/L Bissett, R. C., Edmonton, Alta., D.F.C. and Bar.
37715. W/C Blatchford, H. P., Edmonton, Alta., D.F.C.
37079, S/L Booking, A. L., Winnipeg, Man., D.F.C. and Bar.
42095, F/O Boudoux, E. L., Stellarton, N.S., D.F.C., D.S.O.
37033, S/L Brown, A. C., Winnipeg, Man., D.F.C.
37904, F/L Brown, M. H., Glenboro, Man., D.F.C. and Bar.
798506, F/O Brown, R. W., D.F.C.
978860, Sgt. Burgess, E. J., D.F.M.
F/L Burnett, W. J., Fredericton, N.B., D.F.C.
102986, S/L Campbell, C. F., Margaree Forks, N.S., Can., D.F.C. and D.S.O.
41252, S/L Campbell, G. C., D.F.C.
P/O Campbell, H. D. R. L., Vancouver, B.C., D.F.C.
39492, F/O Campbell, J. A., Nelson, B.C., D.F.C.
37835, F/L Campbell, W. W., Victoria, B.C., D.F.C.
42672, F/L Carlyon, P. W. W., Cumberland, B C DFC
139386, F/O Carmichael, F. E. G., Sudbury, Ont., D.F.C.
F/L Carriere, J. C., Montreal, P.Q.. D.F.C.
937815, F/S Challen, G. S. W., D.F.M.
36918, F/O Charles, E. F. J., Lasbburn, Sask., D.F.C. and Bar, D.S.O.
40081, F/L Christie, G. P., Westmount, P.Q., D.F.C. and Bar.
43106, P/O Clark, H. P., Brandon, Man., D.F.C.
41664, F/O Clayton, A. C. P., Victoria, B.C., D.F.C. and Bar.
51212, Sgt. Cleland, C. C. E., Montreal, P.Q., D.F.M.
42195, F/L Cochrane, A. C., D.F.C.
40991, F/L Cochrane, H. P., Vernon, B.C., D.F.C.
40892, P/O Connor, C. A. H., Toronto, Ont., D.F.C.
39211, F/L Corbould, K. B., New Westminister, B.C.. D.F.C.
33133, W/C Coventry, H. R.. D.F.C.
Sgt. Cox, A. B., Halifax, N.S., D.F.M.
41000, F/O Crispin, K. V. D., Dundas, Pelly, Sask., D.F.C.
40678, P/O Crooks, D. A. C., D.F.C.
44054, W/C Crooks, L., D.S.O.
580647, Sgt. Deyell, D. K., Alameda, Sask., D.F.M.
S/L Donaldson, E. M., D.S.O.
37414, F/L Donaldson, 0. R., Revelstoke, B C D p c
39073, F/O Dyer, J. P., Minnedosa, Man., D.F.C.
41566, F/O Edy, A. L., Winnipeg, Man., D.F.C.
43830, F/O Elliot, G. A. L., Salt Springs Island, B.C., D.F.C.
F/L Ellis, L. E., Sioux Lockout, Ont., D.F.C. 37763, S/L England, D. L., Goderich, Ont., D.F.C.
43032, S/L Fawcett, R. E., Dunoan, B.C., D.F.C.
40380, F/L Fleming, J. ,G., Calgary, Alta., D.F.C.
39975, W/C Fleming, M. M., Ottawa, Ont., D.F.C., D.S.O.
37280, S/L Fletcher, A. W. C„ Lethbridge, Alta., D.F.C. and Bar.
41573, S/L Forsythe, K. C., Fort Garry, Man., D.F.C.
62271. F/L Foulis, M., D.F.C. and Bar.
S/L Fowley, F. A., Kelowna, B.C., D.F.C.
42212, F/O Fraser, C. V., Claresholm, Alta., D.F.C.
612282, AC1 Frost, E. R. C., Quebec City, P.Q.. G.C.
905015, Sgt. Frost, S. R., Vancouver, B.C., D.F.M.
994224, F/L Frowde, R., D.F.C.
37095, W/C Fulton, J., Kamloops, B.C., D.F.C., D.S.O.
Sgt. Gardiner, F. J., Halifax, N.S., D.F.M.
37632, S/L Gaunce, L. M., Derwent, Alta., D.F.C.
80446, P/O Gaunt, D. B., D.F.C.
37776, S/L Gibbs, S. R., Calgary. Alta., D.F.C.
37348, S/L Gilchrist, P. A., Weyburn, Sask., D.F.C.
908152, Sgt. Gilpin. W. G., D.F.M.
F/L Grant, G. F., Ottawa, Ont., D.F.C.
41579, F/L Grassick, R. D., London, Ont., D.F.C.
F/O Green, J. H., Vancouver, B.C., D.F.C.
45202, S/L Greenslade. W. R.. D.F.C.
24037, W/C Griffiths, J. F., Niagara Falls, Ont.. D.F.C.
42221. F/L Harper, C. W., D.F.C. and Bar.
F/O Harper, R. H., Bassano, Alta., D.F.C.
107809, P/O Harris, St. John, C. D„ D.F.C. and Bar.
106193. P/O Henderson. J., D.F.C.
P/O Henderon, S. J.. Winnipeg, Man., D.F.C.'
10525. P/O Hooey, G., Trenton, Ont.. D.F.C.
F/L Illsely. D. M., Nictaux Falls, D.F.C.
110952. F/O Ince, C. H„ D.F.C. and Bar.
41293. F/L Jackson, A. S„ D.F.C.
103488, F/O Jacobs, C. R„ D.F.C.
S/L Jardine, A. M., Vancouver, B.C., D.F.C.
40542, F/L Jones, L. L., Saskatoon, Sask., D.F.C.
50584, Kaye, T. C„ D.F.C.
39535, S/L Keddy, W. B„ Cornwall, Ont., D.F.C.
37106, W/C Kent, J. A., Winnipeg, Man., D.F.C. and Bar.
G/C King, C. K„ Wallace, Man., D.F.C. F/O. King, S. L., Regina, Sask., D.F.C. 42008, F/O Latta, J. B., Victoria, B.C., D.F.C. 1027207 F/S Lavack, R. F., Vancouver, B.C., D.F.M.
42238. F/O Leavitt, R. F., Regina and Saskatoon, Sask., D.F.C.
41188, F/O Lewis, W. J., Port Hope, Ont.. D.F.C.
79S
Questions
[Stage Direction]
42465, F/O Lewis, W. ,M., Battleford, Sask., D.F.C.
Sgt. Little, F. B., Tisket, Yarmouth County, N.S., D.F.M.
42718, F/L MacIntyre, G. L„ D.F.C.
F/L Mackid, J. G„ Calgary, Alta., D.F.C.
1006443, Sgt. MacLean, A. D., D.F.M.
F/O MacRae, W. J.. Regina, Sask., D.F.C.
F/O McIntosh. D., Regina, Sask., D.F.C.
41937, P/O McKnight, W. L., Calgary, Alta., D.F.C. and Bar.
39019, F/O McLaren, A. H., Montreal, P.Q., D.F.C.
41443, F/L Manahan, J. R., Winnipeg, Man., D.F.C.
515903, F/Sgt. Marshall, J. R., Ottawa, Ont., D.F.M.
41447, F/O Mitchell, H. T., Port Hope, Ont., D.F.C.
102996, F/O Morgan. A. C. B., D.F.C.
41450, F/O Murray, G. B., Carberry, Man., D.F.C.
Sgt. Neale, E. F„ Regina. Sask., D.F.M.
39675, F/O Nelson, W. H., Montreal, P.Q., D.F.C.
F/O Nicholson, A. J., Windsor, Ont., G.M.
N/L Niven, R. H„ Calgary, Alta.,
*33329, S/L O'Brian, P. G., St. George, Toronto, Ont., D.F.C. and Bar.
42872, F/O Ogilvie, A. K., Ottawa, Ont., D.F.C.
41457, F/L Patrick, R. C., Richmond Hill, Ont., D.F.C.
612426, AC1 Patterson, G. N., Woodrow, Sask. D.F.M.
P/O Philpot, O. L. S., Vancouver, B.C., D.F.C
S/L Prior, G. W„ Indian Head, Sask., D.F.C.
P/O Purdy, P. H., St. Stephen. N.B.. D.F.C.
37508, S/L Raphael, G. L., Brantford, Ont., D.F.C., D.S.O. and Bar.
43042, S/L Reardon, J. D„ Charlottetown, P.E.I., D.F.C.
Sgt. Redfearn, G. B., Hudson Bay Junction, Sask., D.F.M.
P/O Rigler, T. G., Toronto, Ont., D.F.M.
39031, F/L Ring, S. L., Regina, Sask., D.F.C.
40141, F/L Robertson, D. S., Calgary, Alta., D.F.C.
39568, F/L Robertson, H. M„ D.F.C.
42265, F/O Romans, D. A. A., Halifax, N.S., D.F.C.
1375548, Sgt. Ross, M. H., Montabello, P.Q., D.F.M.
128492, F/O Rowley, W„ D.F.C.
106175, F/O Sanders, E. A., D.F.C.
37831, S/L Schwab, L. G., Niagara Falls, Ont., D.F.C.
49268, F/O Service, W., D.F.C.
41747, F/L Simpson, A. J., D.F.C.
F/O Sinclair, G. L., Bagot, Man., D.F.C.
F/L Skey, L. W„ Toronto, Ont., D.F.C.
102564, F/O Smith, D. T.. D.F.C.
41483, W/C Smith, D.W.M.. D.F.C.
40952, F/L Smith, R. R.. D.F.C.
42272, F/O Stansfield, N.K., Vancouver, B.C., D.F.C.
34252, S/L Stickley, L. J., Lethbridge, Alta., D.F.C.
42906, F/L Sturdy, W. R. N., Vancouver, B.C., D.F.C. and Bar.
119916, F/O Sutherland, H„ D.F.C. [DOT]
40862, F/L Tamblyn, H. N., North Battle-ford, Sask, D.F.C.
108048, F/O Teetenborn, A. R., D.F.C.
104415, P/O Thomas, R. P., D.F.C.
S/L Thompson, J. R., Atwood, D.F.C.
39046. W/C Timmerman, N. W., Kingston, Ont., D.S.O., D.F.C.	[DOT]
F/O Trickett, C., Port Albert, Ont., D.F.C.
P/O Tudhope, W. F., Montreal, Quebec, D.F.C.

40767,	F/O Tweddell, W. O. D., Toronto, Ont., D.F.C.
37775, S/L Turner, F. W. S„ D.F.C.
F/L Turner, P. S., Toronto, Ont., D.F.C. & Bar.
Sgt. Turner, R.S., Winnipeg, Man., D.F.M. 42281, F/O Urwin-Mann, J. R., Victoria, B.C., D.F.C. & Bar.
41225, F/O Valachos, P. J.. Brantford, Ont., D.F.C.
39803, F/L Walker, G. E., Gleichen, Alta., D.F.C.
40768,	F/O Walker, J. A., Gleichen, Alta., D.F.C.
43421, F/L Walsh, A. P„ London, Ont., D.F.C. 759223, P/O Webb, C„ D.F.C.
W/C Weir, T.C., Toronto, Ont., D.F.C.
40330,	F/L Whelan, J. R., Saskatoon, Sask., & Bathurst, N.B., D.F.C.
533230, LAC Whitehead, G. W., Toronto, Ont., D.F.M.
42549, S/L Whiting, S. G., Whonock, B.C., D.F.C.
S/L Widdowson, R. P., Winnipeg, Man., D.F.C.
42931, S/L Wigmore, W.S., D.F.C.
62281, F/O Wilkerson, D.S.S., D.F.C.
40276, F/L Williams, A. T., Toronto, Ont., D.F.C.
40331,	F/L Willis, D. A., St. Boniface, Man.. D.F.C.
39805,	S/L Wolfe, D. L„ D.F.C.
F/L Wood, C. P., D.F.C.
39806,	W/C Woodruff, P. H„ D.F.C.
41092, F/O Woodward, V. C., Victoria, B.C., D.F.C. & Bar.
Appendix "C"
R.C.A.F. Personnel Decorated by Allied Governments
United States Distinguished Flying Cross
J15246, F/L Buekham, R. A., Box 1036,
Vancouver, B.C.
C807, W/C Hodson, K. L. B., 2050 Barclay St., Vancouver, B.C.
J5998, F/O MacIntyre, D. P., East Saint John, New Brunswick.
C786, W/C St. Pierre, J. M. W., c/o Hon. A. Sauve, St. Eustache, Que.
United States Army Air Medal C1220, S/L Boomer, K. A., 524 Golden Ave., Ottawa, Ont.
R86558, Sgt. Galliver, W. T., 11914 95 A. St., Edmonton, Alta.
J8356, F/O Gohl, J. G., Boissevain, Man. J10608, P/O Gooding, H. O., 19 Morris St., Ottawa, Ont.
J8354, F/O Lynch, R., 18 Humboldt St., St. Vital, Man.
J8786. F/L McKenzie, D. M., Stellarton, N.S. J16477, P/O Myles, J. R., 13 Lewin Park, West Saint John, N.B.
J15101, F/L Prest, W. A., 235-22nd St. East, Prince Albert, Sask.
J10231, F/O McMillan, L, Miami, Man. J10224, F/O Scott, D. G., 79 Barnesdale St. N., Hamilton, Ont.
J4524, F/L Elliott, E. B., Sutherland, Sask.
Croix-de-Guerre Beige 1940 J18746, P/O. Higgins, J. H. P., 354 Fifth Ave., Verdun, P.Q.
R.A.F. Pensonnel (Canadians) Decorated by Allied Governments United States Silver Star 36918, F/O Charles, E. F. J., Lashburn, Sask,﻿FEBRUARY 24, 1944
Questions

Mr. KNOWLES:: How many persons, by provinces, were registered as unemployed on January 31, July 31, October 31, November 30, December 31, 1943, and January 31, 1944?


Mr. MARTIN:: As the local employment and selective service offices report weekly, the information asked for is given as at the nearest dates to the end of the month.
Total applicants registered at employment and selective service offices by provinces anc. specified dates were as follows:
January	July	October	December	December	January28, 1943	29,1943	28, 1943	2,1943	30,1943	27, 1944Prince Edward Island....	743	269	276	483	343	369Nova Scotia 	2.866	2,587	1,924	2,401	1.611	2,143New Brunswick	2,391	1,799	1.974	2,024	1.441	1,698Quebec 	28,457	20,719	17,560	20,877	16.S70	25,502Ontario	30,419	22,466	24.852	22,505	15.379	21,287Manitoba 	9,328	4,167	3.544	4.445	2,619	4,346Saskatchewan 	4,048	2.430	2.829	3,040	1,875	2,629Alberta 	3.489	4,894	3,230	3,229	2.071	3,163British Columbia	14,058	10,637	8,596	7,980	5,737	8,731Totals	95,799	69,968	64,785	66,984	47,946	69,868Total applicants referred to jobs J ami ary	were as follows: July October	December	December	January28,1943	29,1943	28, 1943	2, 1943	30, 1943	27,1944Prince Edward Island	140	117	257	220	219Nova Scotia 	1,210	1,202	1,387	652	784New Brunswick	Figures	955	1,239	1,271	844	886Quebec 	18,449	15,592	14,940	11,024	14,290Ontario	not	14,461	15,565	14,046	9,685	11,433Manitoba 	1,499	1,986	2,294	899	1,196Saskatchewan 	available	981	1,250	1,001	665	750Alberta 	2,263	1,517	1,437	1,003	1,049British Columbia	4,968	4,122	3,458	2,117	3,166Totals	44,926	42,590	40,091	27,109	33,773Net registrations in process of placement were as follows: January July October	December	December	January28, 1943	29, 1943	28, 1943	2, 1943	30, 1943	27, 1944Prince Edward Island	129	159	226	123	150Nova Scotia 	1,377	722	1.014	959	1,359New Brunswick	Figures	844	735	753	597	812Quebec 	2,270	1,968	5,937	5,846	11,212Ontario	not	8,005	9,287	8,459	5,694	9,854Manitoba 	2,668	1,558	2,151	1.720	3,150Saskatchewan 	available	1.449	1,579	2,039	1,210	1,879Alberta 	2,631	1,713	1,792	1,068	2,114British Columbia 	5,669	4,474	4,522	3,620	5,565Totals	25,042	22,195	26,893	20,837	36,095Requests for employees	in process of being January July	filled were as October	follows: December	December	J anuary28,1943	29,1943	28, 1943	2, 1943	30,1943	27,1944Prince Edward Island ... .	76	281	458	431	259	173Nova Scotia 	6,722	12,606	13,900	10,789	8,149	6,324New Brunswick	3,450	6,683	9.792	9,294	6,873	4,894Quebec 	78,294	84,533	77,932	73,932	57,005	56,174Ontario	57,142	85,011	95.948	74,625	61,172	59,312Manitoba 	3,514	8,469	7,196	5,508	4,509	4,173Saskatchewan 	1,912	4,272	4,288	3,616	3,016	2,815Alberta	3,697	8,290	10,873	8,906	6,199	4,276British Columbia 	8,021	24,044	16,566	13,208	10,394	10,576Totals	162,828	234,189	236,953	200,309	157,576	148,717It is inevitable that a	certain	number of	people should always be	registered	as unemployed with local selective service offices. There are those who are regularly seeking and accepting short term or casual employment. There is also the group of people who are
changing jobs.
Questions



CANADIAN FORCES-ALLOWANCES ON DISCHARGE- INCOME TAX

Mr. SINCLAIR:: 1.	Is the clothing allowance of $65 paid to other ranks on honourable discharge from the services regarded as taxable income for the year in which it is granted?
2.	Is the gratuity of one month's pay and allowances granted to officers on retirement and other ranks on honourable discharge regarded as taxable income for the year in which it is granted?


Mr. GIBSON:: 1.	Not taxable income to recipient.
2.	If the recipient, officer or other rank, is, as such, a taxable person, then the gratuity if paid in respect of services rendered is taxable.



LOANS BY BANK OF CANADA TO CHARTERED BANKS

Mr. McGEER:: 1.	What amounts of money have been loaned by the Bank of Canada to, (a) the Bank of Montreal; (b) the Royal Bank of Canada; (c) the Canadian Bank of Commerce; (d) the Bank of Nova Scotia; (e) the Bank of Toronto; (f) the Dominion Bank; (g) the Imperial Bank of Canada; (h) Barclays Bank; (i) Banque Canadienne Nationale; (j) Banque Provinciale du Canada, during each of the following years: 1934, 1935. 1936, 1937, 1938, 1939, 1940, 1941, 1942, 1943?
2.	What was the period of time of each loan?
3.	What was the rate of interest paid?
4.	What was the amount of interest paid by each of the said banks in each of the said years?


Mr. ABBOTT:: 
Mr. LOCKHART:: 1.	Is the training of officers for the Canadian army being carried on at the present time in officers' training centres in Canada?
2.	If so, how many men are now in training in the various officers' training centres in Canada?
3.	How many officers, graduates of officers' training centres in Canada, are now awaiting appointment to active duty?
4.	Have all the officers who have graduated from officers' training centres in Canada and who are still awaiting appointment to active duty volunteered for service overseas?
5.	Have all the men now in training for officers in officers' training centres in Canada volunteered for active service overseas?
6.	What portion of available officers whose training is completed will be required for service overseas?


Mr. MACDONALD (Halifax):: 1.	Yes.
2.	978, of which 97 are officers such as medical officers, dental officers, chaplains, etc., who are appointed to the active army in commissioned rank and are required to undergo special courses on appointment.
3.	All qualified officers on the strength of the Canadian active army, who are not disabled by injury or sickness or are not on leave, are on active duty.
4.	See answer 3. All officers on the strength of the Canadian active army have volunteered for overseas service.
5.	Yes.
6.	Portion of officers required for overseas is dependent upon future operations and the exigencies of the service. All who are qualified by age and physical fitness are at call for service overseas as required.



WARTIME HOUSING


Mr. LOCKHART:: 1.	What was the total or over-all cost per unit of houses erected under the wartime housing plan in the districts of Hull, Quebec; Oshawa, Hamilton, St. Catharines and Niagara Falls, Ontario?
2.	Has any portion of the over-all cost of such houses in any of these centres been paid for by authorities or persons other than the Wartime Housing Limited?
3.	If so, at what place or district, and what is the amount of such contribution in each case and in total; and by what authority were such contributions made?


Clarence Decatur Howe: I. No. of Units		Total C
Hull, Quebec		
HI and H2	25	$2,794Hll and H12	100	4,199H21 and H22	25	2,970Oshawa, Ontario	HI and H2	25	2,545Hll and H12	18	3,100H21 and H22	7	2,767Hamilton, Ontario	HI and H2	626	2,788Hll and H12	225	3,462H21 and H22	100	3,136St. Catharines and and Merritton, Ontario	HI and H2	506	2,620Hll and H12	177	3,242H21 and H22	92	2,778Niagara Falls, Ontario	HI and H2	140	2,670Hll and H12	39	3,242H21 and H22	71	2,742
Note-The above costs are all-inclusive figures which include land acquisition, services, grading, landscaping, etc.
2.	No.
3.	Answered by 2.

Questions



MUNITIONS AND SUPPLY


Mr. STOKES:: 1.	Has the Minister of Munitions and Supply exercised his power under subsection 4 of section 13 of the Department of Munitions and Supply Act, chapter 8 of the statutes of Canada, 1943?
2.	If so, what contract or contracts -were found by the minister to be yielding "an unreasonable profit", as set forth in the said act.
3.	What sums have been paid to the receiver general on the ditrection of the minister as authorized in the said act, and by whom were such sums paid?


Mr. HOWE:: 1.	In no case has it been necessary to exercise the powers given under subsection 4 of section 13 of the Department of Munitions and Supply Act. It has been found preferable to enter renegotiation proceedings on a less formal basis and in all cases in which the negotiations have been completed, a satisfactory price adjustment has been made on an amicable basis. Excellent cooperation has been received from the manufacturers and in a number of cases the initiative leading to important refunds has come from the contractor himself.
2.	In the above circumstances and as unreasonable profits frequently stem from cost reductions due to the discovery of new manufacturing techniques or to other causes creditable to the contractor, it is not deemed equitable to disclose the names of the contractors concerned. There are, however, approximately sixty-seven manufacturers whose contracts have been or are the subject of renegotiation of one type or another.
3.	It is not possible at this time to give an accurate statement of the amount recovered, and to be recovered under renegotiation arrangements, as the final figures will be subject to determination by the treasury cost accountants whose work in this matter is not complete. Moreover, renegotiation of certain ship contracts included an abandonment of the right to claims for extra and increased costs under the escalator clauses for amounts not easily calculable.


MONTREAL LAKE INDIAN RESERVE-TIMBER LIMITS
Mr. DIEFENBAKER:: 1.	What timber limits have been put up for tender in each year since 1939 in the Montreal lake Indian reserve?
2.	Were any tenders received? If so, by whom, and what was the amount of each?
3.	To whom were sales made, and at what price?
4.	Were any sold or disposed of without tender? If so, to whom, and at what price?

5.	Have any logging or lumbering operations been conducted on any of said timber limits during the said years? If so, (a) by whom; (b) how much has each of the operators removed?
6.	Have the Indians occupying said reserve been asked to surrender any of their rights in the said limits?
7.	Were any of said limits sold without public tender? If so, why?
8.	What check, if any, is being made by the departent on the timber being cut on each of the said limits?


Mr. CRERAR:: 1.	1939, Nil; 1940, Timber berth No. 4; 1941, Nil; 1942, Nil; 1943, Timber berths 1 and 2; part of timber berth No. 3.
2.	Yes.
For berth No. 4:
By Wm. A. Bear, Indian, for spruce timber, at $3 per M f.b.m.
By Lumber Manufacturers Limited, Saskatoon, as follows-Spruce, $3.02 per M f.b.m.; Pine and birch, $2.50 per M f.b.m.; Balsam pulpwood, 75 cents per cord; Ties, jack pine, 10 cents per tie; Tamarack or jack pine piling, 2 cents per lin. ft.; Posts, tamarack, 2 cents per post; Cordwood, 25 cents per cord.
For berths Nos. 1 and 2:
By Brooks Construction Company, Prince Albert, Saskatchewan, for white spruce timber, at $3.75 per M f.b.m.
For part of berth No. 3:
By Prince Albert Lumber Company, Limited, Prince Albert, Saskatchewan, for spruce saw timber, at $4.50 per M f.b.m.
By Hertzog Bros., Tweedsmuir, Saskatchewan, as follows-White spruce saw timber, $5.75 per M f.b.m.; White poplar saw timber, $1.75 per M f.b.m.; Birch saw timber, $2.75 per M f.b.m.
3.	Berth No. 4: To Wm. A. Bear, Indian, at $3 per M f.b.m. for spruce timber.
Berths Nos. 1 and 2: To Brooks Construction Company, Prince Albert, Saskatchewan, at $3.75 per M f.b.m. for white spruce timber.
Berth No. 3: This block of timber was not sold, and has been retained for the Indians at their own request.
4.	No.
5.	Yes (a) and (b): Wm. A. Bear on berth No. 4, 448,440 f.b.m. to date; Brooks Construction Company, on berths Nos. 1 and 2, 315,755 f.b.m. to date.
6.	Yes, and surrender accepted by governor in council by P.C. 298, dated February 9, 1939.
7.	Yes. In order to save time the firms operating in the district were asked by wire if they were interested in submitting a tender to purchase the spruce timber on berths Nos.

Questions
1	and 2, this timber being urgently required for war purposes. The only tender received was from the Brooks Construction Company. The price offered was $3.75 per M f.b.m. and was accepted after being certified to be fair and reasonable by the supervisor, prices division, timber control office.
8.	Returns are in the form of affidavits and are signed by qualified scalers. Cutting operations are under the supervision of the Indian agent.


WHEAT AND COARSE GRAINS-CARLOADINGS IN PRAIRIE PROVINCES
Mr. CASTLEDEN:: What was the number of carloadings for each of the prairie provinces for, (a) wheat; (b) coarse grains, for each month from July until December, 1943, inclusive?


Mr. MICHAUD:: Canadian National Railway Company:
Manitoba-	Wheat	Coarse grainsJuly 	. 1,152	1,686August	. 1,418	2,236September 	. 854	1,933October 	. 2,020	1,589November 	. 3,623	1,027December 	. 408	1,959Saskatchewan-	July 	. 3,369	2,008August 	. 2,380	2.761September	. 3,787	2,621October 	. 3,121	2,416November	. 6,120	1,679December 	. 2,333	3,054
Alberta

		
July 	. 912	762August	. 1,066	993September	. 1.629	980October	. 1,317	891November 	. 963	674December 	. 1,023	1,319'anadian Pacific Railway Company:	Other grainsManitoba district-	Wheat	July 	. 1,018	1,630August	. 1,819	2,161September	2.538October	2,128November 	935December 	2,138Saskatchewan district-	July	2,371August 	. 2.457	2,369September	2,378October 	. 4,204	2.820November	1,836December 	. 3,069	3,763Alberta district-	July	. 2,010	1,317August	. 2.408	1,363September	1,354October	. 2.032	1,095November	.. 2.018	772December	. 2,457	1,493
* This company's records are compiled on the basis of the three prairie districts of the corn-
100- 5 1J
pany's western lines. The principal terminals marking the limits of their districts are as follows :-
Alberta district-
West	Field, B.C.
"	Crows Nest, B.C.
South	Coutts, Alta.
North	Edmonton, Alta.
East	Lloydminster, Sask.
ft	Hardisty, Alta.
ft	Kerrobert, Sask.
ft	Swift Current, Sask.
"	Shaunavon, Sask.
"	Valmarie, Sask.
Saskatchewan district-	
West	Lloydminster, Sask.
it	Hardisty, Alta.
	Kerrobert, Sask.
"	Swift Current, Sask.
"	Shaunavon, Sask.
South	North Portal, Sask.
East	Bredenbury, Sask.
f(	Neudorf, Sask.
ft	Broadview, Sask.
ft	Areola, Sask.
ft	Estevan, Sask.
Manitoba	district- *
East	Port Arthur, Ont.
West	Bredenbury, Sask.
it	Neudorf, Sask.
it	Broadview, Sask.
It	Areola, Sask.
if	Estevan, Sask.
It	Lyleton, Man.
South	Gretna, Man.
((	Emerson, Man. MEAT AND BACON BOARDS


George Hugh Castleden: .
1.	Are any members of the meat board employed by or connected with the meat packing
industry?
2.	If so, in what capacity?
3.	What was the amount of, (a) pay; (b) allowance; (c) travelling expenses, paid to each member of the bacon board during its operation?
4.	Was any complete audited report of the operations of the bacon board published by the government?
5.	Is any arrangement made for the publishing of a report of the operations of the present meat board?


Mr. GARDINER:: 1.	S. E. Todd.
2.	Managing-director, industrial and development council of Canadian meat packers.
3.	(a) Nil, (b) (December, 1939 to June, 1943), allowance for living expenses incurred during board meetings and to and from such meetings: J. G. Taggart, $2,130; L. C. Mc-Ouat, $2,164; S. E. Todd, $1,674; A. Morin, $324; (c) (December, 1939 to June, 1943), transportation to and from board meetings: J. G. Taggart, $1,351.82; L. C. McOuat, $98.50;,
S.	E. Todd, $836.08; A. Morin, $171.75.
4.	No.
5.	No.
Questions


CONVERSION OP DREDGE &quot;FIELDING&quot; INTO OIL TANKER-COST OP FREIGHTERS
Mr. GILLIS:: 1.	What was the cost of converting the dredge Fielding into an oil tanker?
2.	What is the cost of one of the 4,000-ton freighters built in the Saint John, New Brunswick, dry dock?


Mr. HOWE:: 1.	The work of conversion on this dredge was not completed until November, 1943, and the final cost has not yet been determined.
2.	The final cost has not yet been determined.


DISTRIBUTION OF RAW SUGAR LANDED AT HALIFAX
Mr. ISNOR:: 1.	In connection with the raw sugar landed in Halifax in January, 1944, what are the names of firms and locations to whom sugar was distributed, and what amount to each?
2.	Was the sugar ordered by the sugar administrator or by individual firms? If the latter, give names of firms with quantities ordered.


Mr. ABBOTT:: 1.	It is not considered desirable to disclose current transactions relating to the business [DOT]of individual firms. To do so would give information of value to competitors. Revelation of the total amount of sugar landed at Halifax in this period might make it possible for the enemy to draw inferences regarding the movement of ships on the high seas.
2.	All importations of sugar into Canada are ordered by the sugar administrator.


COST OF QUEBEC CONFERENCE, 1943
George Hugh Castleden: What was the total cost to the Canadian government of the Quebec conference held during August and September, 1943?


Mr. McLARTY:: Including expenditure in connection with the visit of the President of the United States to Ottawa, $366,596.27.


BATAWA, ONT., POSTMASTERSHIP
Mr. McGREGOR:: 1.	Is there a post office at Batawa, Ontario?
2.	If so, when was it opened?
3.	What is the name of the postmaster?
4.	When was he appointed, and by whom?
5.	Is the postmaster a returned soldier?
6.	If not, were returned soldiers considered for the position?


Mr. MULOCK:: 1.	Yes.
2.	7 July, 1943.
3.	James Arnold Stickle.
4.	7 July, 1943; by the Postmaster General.
5.	No.
6.	No returned soldier applied.
fMr. Gardiner.]


LABOUR DEPARTMENT-GEORGE HODGE-P.C. 9384
Mr. ROSE:: 1.	Has George Hodge, a C.P.R. executive, been in the employ of the labour department at any time since the beginning of the war?
2.	If so, since -when, and in what position?
3.	How much salary and how much expense money has he received since his employment?
4.	What were his duties in different positions he has held?
5.	If he is not now in the employ of the labour department, to what government bodies is he attached?
6.	Was it within the scope of his responsibility to assist in the preparation of wage control order P.C. 9384?
7.	If so, on what points in the order was his advice taken?


Mr. MARTIN:: 1.	Yes.
2.	Mr. Hodge was a member of an industrial disputes inquiry commission which was appointed in June, 1941. Mr. Hodge has not functioned on this board since the national war labour board was established in November, 1941.
In November, 1941, at the request of the then Minister of Labour, Hon. N. A. McLarty, the Canadian Pacific Railway made Mr. Hodge available, without salary, to act as a member of the national war labour board. He subsequently became a member of the executive committee of three.
Since the national war labour board was reconstituted in February, 1943, Mr. Hodge has served as a technical adviser to the board, a full-time post; as a member of the national war labour committee, and as a member of the national selective service advisory board.
Mr. Hodge was a member of the former national labour supply council. As such Mr. Hodge was not technically in the employ of the Department of Labour.
3.	Mr. Hodge has at no time received any salary from the Department of Labour. He has been paid only actual expenses incurred by him as undemoted:
Number of days: fiscal year 1941-42, 142; fiscal year 1942-43, 362; fiscal year 1943-44 (to January 31, 1944), 304; total, 808.
Total expense: fiscal year 1941-42, $1,458.79; fiscal year 1942-43, $3,955.91; fiscal year 1943-44 (to January 31, 1944), $2,820.36; total $8,235.06.
Average per day: fiscal year 1941-42, $1027; fiscal year 1942-43, $10.93; fiscal year 1943-44 (to January 31, 1944), $9.28; total, $10.19.
It should be noted that fees paid to Mr. Hodge as a member of the industrial disputes inquiry commission under order in council P.C. 4020 are not included in the above figures. These amounted to: remuneration at $20 per day, 1941-42, $1,440; actual travelling expenses, 1941-42, $707.27.

Questions
4.	As a member of the industrial disputes inquiry commission, Mr. Hodge was required, together with other members of the commission, to make a preliminary inquiry into all disputes referred to the commission by the Minister of Labour.
In respect to the national war labour board, Mr. Hodge fulfilled the normal functions of an executive officer while a member of the executive committee. He now serves as a technical adviser to the board and is a member of the national war labour committee.
As a member of the national selective service advisory board, Mr. Hodge participates with other members in matters affecting national selective service.
5.	See answers to questions 1 and 2.
6 and 7. It was not within the scope of Mr. Hodge's responsibility to assist in the determination of the provisions of wage control order P.C. 9384. Departmental officers of finance, justice and labour, whose duty it was to prepare draft of order in accordance with instructions, consulted others, among them Mr. Hodge in view of his experience in the administration of previous wage control orders, in regard to the phraseology of operative provisions of the order for their application in practice in accordance with regulations to be made effective as already determined upon.


CANADIAN ARMY
Mr. BLACK (Yukon):: 1.	How many of the 11,000 deserters from the Canadian army who have been apprehended have been tried by court-martial?
2.	How many of them have been executed?


Mr. MACDONALD (Halifax):: 1.	3,215 men have been tried by court martial on charges of desertion in Canada from the outbreak of war up to February 15, 1944.
2.	No men have been executed for desertion from the Canadian army since the outbreak of war.


TOTAL ESTIMATES AND REVENUE
Mr. LACOMBE:: 1.	What were Canada's total estimates for the years 1937, 1938 and 1939?
2.	What was the total revenue of Canada in the said years?


Mr. ABBOTT:: 1. Fiscal year ended March 31:
1937		 $560,947,332
1938		 554,496,828
1939		 548,914,746
In addition to the amounts provided in the estimates, expenditures were incurred in these years under the provisions of other statutes. The total expenditures of the dominion of Canada in these years were as follows:
Fiscal year ended March 31:
1937 		$532,005,432
1938 		534,408,118
1939 		553,063,098
Fiscal year ended	March 31: *
1937 		$454,153,747
1938 		516,692,749
1939 		502,171,354


GRANTS FOR ROADS TO AND FROM COAL MINES
Mr. MARSHALL:: 1.	Were any grants made to provinces, municipalities or coal mining companies during 1943 for the purpose of constructing all-weather road* to and from coal mines?
2.	If so, what v'as the nature of such grants, and to whom w-ere they paid?


Mr. HOWE:: 1.	Yes.
2.	During 1943 the folowing moneys were granted by the emergency coal production Board:-
Amount
Approved Amount by Board Paid
(a)	The Bulkley Valley Collieries Ltd., Telkwa, B.C. (part cost surfacing and gravelling of subgrade-\ mile from highway
to property)	 $2,100	$2,000
(b)	Consolidated Mining & Smelting Co., Trail, B.C. (paid to
Department of Public Works, B.C.) (part cost of reconditioning of 14 miles of road from McGillivray to property)_____	2,000	2,000
(c)	Sturgeon municipality district (part cost of gravelling road
to several properties

2J miles west of Namao, Alberta)_______	1.500
Total	 $5,600	$4,000
Questions


VETERANS' LAND ACT-ALBERTA
Mr. SHAW:: 1.	How many parcels of land have been purchased in the province of Alberta under the Veterans' Land Act to date?
2.	What was the average price paid per acre for such land?
3.	How many veterans or discharged men have been settled in Alberta under the Veterans' Land Act?
4.	How many applications made by veterans or discharged men for settlement in Alberta under the Veterans' Land Act have been refused?


Mr. CRERAR:: 1.	56 comprising 46 full-time farms and 10 small holding parcels.
2.	$15.91 including existing buildings for full-time farms. S106.50 including existing buildings for small holding parcels.
3.	8.
4.	45 applications for qualification have been dealt with by regional advisory committees of which 23 have been certified as qualified, 11 declined certification and 11 are pending. Nine applications for loans have been received from veterans certified as qualified, 8 have been approved and one is pending.


GASOLINE RATIONING-SASKATCHEWAN
Mr. DOUGLAS (Weyburn):: What are the names, addresses and occupation of all persons in the province of Saskatchewan who, up until December 31, 1943, have been given a gasoline ration book in, (a) C category; (b) D category?


Clarence Decatur Howe: There were 89,742 motor car owners registered for gasoline ration books in the province of Saskatchewan as of December 31, 1943.
Number of registrations for C category-440 "	"	"	" D "	-156
It is not the policy of the department to give names, addresses and occupations of citizens possessing ration books.


UNEMPLOYMENT INSURANCE
Air. DOUGLAS (Weyburn):: 1.	What is the total number of persons registered for employment under the selective service,
(a)	in Canada; (b) by provinces?
2.	What is the total number of persons receiving unemployment benefits from the unemloyment insurance funds, (a) in Canada; (b) y provinces?
3.	What was the total amount paid out in unemployment insurance benefits during the calendar year ending December 31, 1943, (a) in Canada; (b) by provinces?


Mr. MARTIN:: 1.	Total number of applicants registered at employment and selective service offices in Canada, by provinces, as of January 27, 1944,
was as follows:
Total Canada	 69,868
P.E.1	 369
Nova Scotia	 2,143
New Brunswick	 1,698
Quebec	 25,502
Ontario	 21,287
Manitoba	 4,346
Saskatchewan	 2,629
Alberta	 3,163
British Columbia	 8,731
P.EJ	
Nova Scotia	
New Brunswick	
Quebec	
Ontario	
Manitoba	
Saskatchewan	
Alberta	
British Columbia	
Total	
These figures include only the first 27 days of
2.	(a) 2,226-as at December 31, 1943; (b) Prince Edward Island, 8; Nova Scotia, 245; New Brunswick, 30; Quebec, 664; Ontario, 479; Manitoba, 250; Saskatchewan, 114; Alberta, 171; British Columbia, 265.

Total applicants	Net	Requests forreferred to jobs	registrations in	employees in(luring month of	process of	process of beingJanuary *	placement *	filled *219	150	173784	1.359	6,324886	812	4,89414,290	11,212	56,17411,433	9,854	59,3121,196	3,150	4,173750	1.879	2,8151,049	2,114	4,2763,166	5,565	10,57633,773	36,095	148,717
the month.
3.(a) $9291219.33; (b) Prince Edward Island, $6,101.64; Nova Scotia, $44,787.01; New Brunswick, $37,727.18; Quebec, $403,282.19; Ontario, $143,167.94; Manitoba, $100,372.31; Saskatchewan, $48,037.62; Alberta, $69,165.31; British Columbia, $75,412.38; Yukon, $1,165.75.

Questions


SHIPMENTS OF WHEAT TO SPAIN
Mrs. NIELSEN:: 1.	What shipments of Canadian wheat or other grains have gone to Spain in the years 1936 to 1944 inclusive?
2.	Has the British government put an embargo upon shipments of Canadian wheat or other grains going to Spain in any of these years? If so, in what years?


Mr. MacKINNON (Edmonton West):: 1.	No shipments of Canadian wheat or other grains have gone to Spain in the years 1936 to 1943. Information for 1944 not yet available.
2.	No information.


CENSUS-PERSONS OF JAPANESE ORIGIN
Mr. MacINNIS:: 1.	As at the 1941 census, what was the total population of persons of Japanese origin in Canada?
2.	Of these, how many were, (a) Japanese nationals; (b) persons of Japanese origin naturalized; (c) persons of Japanese origin born in Canada; (d) persons of Japanese origin whose citizenship is other than Canadian or Japanese?


Mr. MacKINNON (Edmonton West):: 1.	See table below.
2.	See table below.
Persons of Japanese Origin in Canada, Census of 1941
Province
Born in	Citizenship
Racial born in other Japanese other than Japanese
Origin Canada	British Nationals Canada or	Natural-countries	Japan	izedCanada 	
Prince Edward Island 	23,149	Nova Scotia 	2	1	. . .	2	....New Brunswick 	3	2	1	Quebec 	48	....	. .	Ontario 	234	122	8	37	24	48Manitoba	42	12	1	13	5	11Saskatchewan 	105	53	1	21	1	29Alberta 	578	374	....	89 ..	115British Columbia 	22,096	13,509	2	5,751	18	2,932Yukon 	40	....	....Northwest Territories 	1	....	-	-Total 8 provinces 	23,060	14,073	12	5,911	51	3,135Note.-Details regarding the	89 Japanese	in Quebec, Yukon	and N.W.T.	are	not yetavailable.	WOOL BOARD-ADMINISTRATIVE EXPENSES	provided to the Canadian wool	board from


Mr. WRIGHT:: 1.	Are the administrative expenses of the Canadian wool board a charge against the products handled by this board?
2.	What profits have accrued to the board as a result of its handling of wool in each of the years 1940, 1941, 1942 and 1943?
3.	What disposal has been made of these profits?
4.	What have been the expenses of this board in each of the years 1940, 1941, 1942 and 1943 under, (a) salaries; (b) office expenses; (c) travelling and other expenses?


Mr. ABBOTT:: 1.	The administrative expenses of the Canadian Wool Board Limited are not charged against the products handled by the Canadian wool board, but are charged against the funds
the war appropriation.
2.	The Canadian Wool Board Limited was incorporated on March 18, 1942. No profits have accrued to the board in either of the years 1942 or 1943.
3.	Answered by 2.
4.		9 months
	Year ending	ending
	March 31,	Dec. 31,
	1943	1943
(a) Salaries	519,142 53	$24,761 71(b)	Office expenses (c)	Travelling and other administra-	9,123 79	12,735 08tive expenses ....	5,488 87	5,165 87$33,755 19	$42,662 66
Questions


WHEAT TAKEN OVER FROM UNSOLD STOCKS
Mr. WRIGHT:: What was the total number of bushels of wheat taken over by the government on September 27, 1943, from unsold stocks in each of the board years 1940-41, 1941-42 and 1942-43?


Mr. MacKINNON (Edmonton West):: The total number of bushels of wheat taken over by the dominion government as at September 27, 1943, from unsold stocks in each of the board years was as follows: 1940 crop, 57,464,763-25 bushels; 1941 crop, 20,152,146-05 bushels; 1942 crop, 63,906,141-30 bushels.
Note: The answer to this question gives advance information which is not usually released until the annual report is tabled.
(a)	Salaries	
(b)	Office expenses	
(c)	Travelling and other expenses


WHEAT BOARD-PARTICIPATION CERTIFICATES- ADMINISTRATIVE EXPENSES
Mr. WRIGHT:: 1.	Are the administrative expenses in connection with the operation of the wheat board deducted from the price received for the sale of wheat before payment on participation certificates is made?
2.	What are these expenses for each of the crop years 1939-40, 1940-41 and 1942-43 under, (a) salaries; (b) office expenses; (c) travelling and other expenses?


Mr. MacKINNON (Edmonton West):: 1.	The actual administrative expenses chargeable to the board years will be a deduction from the proceeds of grain before payment is made on the producer's certificates.
2.	Expenses as at July 31, 1943, as shown hereunder, were:
1939-40	1940-41	1941-42	1942-438467,281.00	8 663,412.89 8290,118.00 $398,958.10 161749.76	222,548.50	89,044.44	115,469.1885,543.77	115,763.41	46,073.66	53,803.61


S714,574.53 81,001,724.80 $425,236.10 $568,230.89 MEAT BOARD-ADMINISTRATIVE EXPENSES
Mr. WRIGHT:: 1.	Are the administrative expenses of the bacon and meat board a charge against the products marketed under this board?
2.	What has been the profit or loss in connection with the operation of the bacon or meat board on each of the contracts made with Great Britain on bacon since the outbreak of the war?
3.	If profits have accrued, what disposal has been made of same?
4.	What have been the expenses of the board in the years 1940, 1941, 1942 and 1943 under, (a) salaries; (b) office expenses; (c) travelling and other expenses?


Mr. GARDINER:: 1.	No.
2.	The net operating margin under the first three bacon agreements were as follows:
First agreement (1939-1940), surplus, $1,317,912; second agreement (1940-41), deficit, $509,671; third agreement (1941-1942), deficit, S807,536.
Final figures are not yet available with respect to operations under the fourth agreement (1942-43),
3.	Any moneys which have accumulated in the reserve fund of the board have been eventually disbursed through increases in the price paid for bacon for export to the United Kingdom. Hog producers benefited by this action through securing corresponding increases in hog prices.
4.	Bacon and Meat Board Expenses
Salaries	
Office expenses1	
Travelling and other expenses

$44,960.78	$41,115.10
1	Includes telephone, telegraph, printing, stationery.
2	Up to January 31, 1944.

Questions


CANADIAN FORCES-OVERSEAS UNITS BROKEN UP OR DISBANDED
Mr. HAZEN:: 1.	How many units of the Canadian army have been broken up or disbanded after their arrival overseas ?
2.	What are the names of these units, and at the time of being broken up or disbanded who commanded each of them, and what was the approximate strength of each of them?
3.	What was done with the non-commissioned officers and men of these units after they were broken up or disbanded?


Mr. MACDONALD (Halifax):: Mr. Speaker, for security reasons this question cannot be answered, and I ask that it be dropped.


Thomas Vien: Dropped.


COAL CONTROLLER-COST OF POSTERS
Mr. REID:: 1.	What amount of money has been expended by the coal controller during the present fiscal year, up to the end of January, 1944, for posters?
2.	In this connection, (a) what amount of paper was used; (b) what was the cost of such paper; (c) what was the cost of printing?


Mr. HOWE:: 1.	$5,623.25.
2.	(a) 15,990 pounds; (b) $1,430.97; (c) printing, freight and tax, $4,192.28.


CHARTERED BANKS-ENLISTED EMPLOYEES-LIFE INSURANCE
Mr. KNOWLES:: 1.	Are the following employers maintaining or discontinuing the life insurance policies of their individual employees insured under group insurance plans when such individuals secure leave of absence from their employment for the purpose of enlisting in the armed forces: Bank of Montreal; Royal Bank of Canada; Canadian Bank of Commerce; Bank of Toronto; Bank of Nova Scotia; Imperial Bank of Canada; Dominion Bank; Barclays Bank (Canada), and Banque Canadienne Netionale?
2.	In cases where the answer to question one is "yes", which of the above-noted employers pay the premiums?


Mr. ABBOTT:: 1.	This information is not of official government record. The Bank Act does not require'
Poultry Products:
Shell Eggs
Year	doz.
1941	 15,336,600
1942	 4,133,460
1943	 -
the chartered banks to furnish the Minister of Finance with details of their group insurance funds.
2.	Answered by No. 1.


SPECIAL PRODUCTS MARKETING BOARD- ADMINISTRATIVE EXPENSES
Mr. WRIGHT:: 1.	Are the administrative expenses of the special products marketing board a charge against products marketed under it?'
2.	What products have been exported to Great Britain under this board, and what are the amounts of each in the years 1941, 1942 and 1943?
3.	What have been the expenses of the special products marketing board in the years 1941, 1942 and 1943 under, (a) salaries; (b) office expenses; (c) travelling and other expenses?


Mr. GARDINER:: 1.	No.
2.	Fruit and Vegetable products:
Export in 1941 out of 1939 and 1940 crop: Canned apples, 702,511 cases (10's) Evaporated apples, 61,997 cases (50's) Apple pomace, dried, 931,106 lbs.
Fruits in SO-2 for jam, 6,428 bbls.
Exported in 1941-42 out of 1941 crop:
Fresh apples, 1,199,990 boxes (bushel) Fresh apples, 111,044 bbls. (3 bushel) Fresh onions, 880,000 lbs.
Evaporated apples, 116,147 cases (50's) Dried apple pomace, 2,104,334 lbs. Concentrated apple juice, 3,982 bbls. Canned tomatoes, 300,000 cases (24's) Assorted fruits in pulp for jam, 6,491,915 lbs.
Exported in 1942-43 out of 1942 crop: Dehydrated vegetables, 7,814,905 lbs. Strawberries in SO-2, 3,260 bbls.
Tomato puree, 28,798 4-gal. cans.
Tomato pulp, 51,779 cases (12's)
Exported in 1943-44 out of 1943 crop: (Shipments to January 31, 1944, only)
Fresh apples, 199,998 boxes (bushel)
Fresh apples, 155,9001 bbls. (3 bushel) Dehydrated vegetables, 2,231,530 lbs.
Dried	Dressed	DressedEggs	Chicken	Turkeylbs.	lbs.	lbs.11,567,149	.	12,000.000	190,565	67,064
Questions

Seeds:
Exported in 1941-Nil.
Exported in 1942-43 out of 1942 crop: Alfalfa, 180,120 lbs.; com (Comptons early), 400 bus.; flax, bison, 150 bus.; flax, royal, 200 bus.
Exported to date out of 1943 crop: Alsike, 411,900 lbs.; alsike and white, 139,050 lbs.; alfalfa, 224,250 lbs.; timothy, 325,800 lbs.; beans, 5,843 lbs.; lettuce, 1,673 lbs.; onion, 5,680 lbs.'; radish, 10,000 lbs.; tree seeds, 500 lbs.
Flax fibre:
Processing and	Amounts of flax fibres
Agreement year	(all grades) pounds
1940- 41	 nil
1941-	42		 1,721,536
(Aug.12-Sept.15,1942)
1942-	43		 7,571,990
(complete year)
, 1943-44		 2,737,464
(Sept, 15,1943 - Jan. 31,1944)
3.	Expenditures:
Salaries ____$ 1,312 02
Office
Expenses ..	6,213 98
Travelling and other exps... 6,182 89
1943-44 1942-43 to Jan. 31 10,118 60 20,173 11
7,641 16	9,780	418,495 49	9,539	87
Total ... $13,708 89 26,255 25 39,493 39 Telephone, telegraph, postage and printing and stationery.


DAIRY BOARD-ADMINISTRATIVE EXPENSES
Mr. WRIGHT:: 1.	Are the expenses of the dairy board a charge against the products marketing board under this board?
2.	What products have been exported to Great Britain under this board, and what are the amounts of same in each of the years 1940, 1941, 1942 and 1943?
3.	What has been the profit or loss in the handling of these products?
4.	What has been the amount of butter purchased by this board in each of the years of its operation?
5.	What profit or loss has accrued as a result of these purchases?


Mr. GARDINER:: 1.	No.
2.
Cheese
Agreement	Total No. Lbs.
1940-	41	
86,372,1441941-	42	
115,393,0901942-	43	
142,044.8551943-	44 (To Jan. 31, 1944).. 114,436,337
fMr. Qa-'dmer.l
Concentrated Milk
No. Cases
1940-	41	
106,6821941-	42	
607,3571942-	43	
668,4021943-	44 (To Jan. 31, 1944)	
253,476
Note: Practically all concentrated milk was shipped to different theatres of war under contract with the Ministry of Food.
Butter
1943-44 (To Jan. 31, 1944)..	7,088,506 lbs.
3.	There has been neither profit nor loss in handling cheese and concentrated milk and the price received for butter exported was calculated as closely to cost as possible. Any profit or loss would be negligible.
4.	1943-44 (To Jan. 31, 1944). 15,674,282 lbs.
5.	Profit or loss cannot be determined until all butter purchased by the board has been sold.


CONSCIENTIOUS OBJECTORS
Mr. WINKLER:: 1.	How many conscientious objectors to military service, by provinces, are performing alternative service in, (a) their own province; (b) in provinces other than origin?
2.	How many of the above are farmers or farmers' sons?


Mr. MARTIN:: 1. The number of conscientious objectors to
military service by provinces performing alternative service in-
(a)	Their own province:
Prince Edward	Island ....	2
Nova Scotia	 20
New Brunswick		-
Quebec	 6
Ontario	 1,800
Manitoba [DOT]	 2,453
Saskatchewan	 1,460
Alberta	 793
British Columbia	 556
Total	 7,090
(b)	In provinces other than where they were postponed:
Prince Edward Island ....	1
Nova Scotia	 6
New Brunswick	 -
Quebec	 15
Ontario	 148
Manitoba	 194
Saskatchewan	 141
Alberta	 127
British Columbia	 -
Total	 632
2.	Approximately 80 per cent of the above are either farmers or farmers' sons.

Questions


VETERANS' LAND ACT-ONTARIO
Mr. WHITE:: 1.	How many parcels of land have been purchased in the province of Ontario under the Veterans' Land Act to date?
2.	What was the average price paid per acre
for such land?	'
3.	How many veterans or discharged men have been settled in Ontario under the Veterans' Land Act?
4.	How many applications made by veterans or discharged men for settlement in Ontario under the Veterans' Land Act have been
refused?
5.	Have any applications from Ontario been refused because the veteran or discharged soldier was unable to make the cash down payment as provided under the act?


Mr. CRERAR:: 1.	157 parcels approved and under negotiation for purchase comprising 101 full time farming parcels and 56 small holding parcels. Sixteen full time farming parcels and 9 small holding parcels have been actually purchased.
2.	$40.23 including existing buildings for full time farms. $179.23 including existing buildings for small holding parcels.
3.	Three.
4.	41 applications for qualification have been dealt with by regional advisory committees of which 31 have been certified as qualified, 5 declined certification and 5 are pending. Nineteen applications for loans have been received from veterans certified as qualified, 3 have been approved, one declined and 15 are pending.
5.	Nil.


PENSIONS AND NATIONAL HEALTH-HOSPITALS
Mr. CRUICKSHANK:: 1.	How many hospitals are operated by the Department of Pensions and National Health for members and ex-members of the armed forces?
2.	Where are these hospitals?
3.	What is the bed capacity of each, (a) normal; (b) emergency?
4.	At the outbreak of war, what was the bed capacity of hospitals of the Department of Pensions and National Health for treatment of former members of the forces?
5.	Has provision been made for further enlargement of any of these hospitals?
6.	If so, what additional accommodation, expressed in numbers of beds, (a) is under construction; (b) is in an earlier stage of development?
7.	Has the Department of Pensions and National Health reserve stores of hospital beds and hospital equipment available?
8.	What number of hospital beds could be equipped out of such stores in an emergency?


Mr. MACKENZIE (Vancouver Centre) :: 1.	10. (In addition the government has paid the cost of construction on Veterans' pavilions at University Hospital, Edmonton, and at Ottawa Civic hospital, Ottawa, and the Department therefore has accommodation guaranteed at these institutions. Also, the Department, by providing equipment for a part of the Toronto East General and Orthopaedic hospital, secured guarantee of accommodation there.)
2	and 3.
Location
Halifax, N.S	
West Saint John, N.B	
Quebec, Que	
Ste. Anne de Bellevue, Que	
Toronto, Ont	
London, Ont	
Winnipeg, Man	
Calgary, Alta	
Vancouver, B.C	
William Head, B.C	
and
University Hospital, Edmonton	
Ottawa Civic Hospital, Ottawa	
Toronto East Gen. and Ortho. Hospital
Normal Bed	Emergency Bed	
Capacity	Capacity	Total783	213	996291	89	380260	73	3331,110	284	1,3941,409	128	1,5371,122	380	. 1,502542	191	733429	102	531880	361	1,24148	315	363100	100297	297250	2507,521	2,136	9,6574.	2,595.	7. Yes.5.	Yes.	8. 8,404 additional to number shown in6.	(a) 1,958; (b) 2,210.	answer to 3 (b).
100-52J
Questions



MUNITIONS AND SUPPLY-PETBECO PROCESSES

['I shall be glad to do that.']
Mr. WHITE:: What companies or persons have been authorized or permitted to use the petreco processes, equipment and information, in addition to those specifically designated and approved by the Hon. Minister of Munitions and Supply, viz., the Cannar Oil Limited, Vermilion Refinery Company Limited and the North Star Oil Limited?


Clarence Decatur Howe: The Lloydminster Refining Co. Ltd., Lloydminster, Alberta, and the Goodrich Refining Co. Ltd., Port Credit, Ontario.



Mr. CRUICKSHANK:: 1.	With respect to, (a) service in Canada only; (b) service outside of Canada during the present war, how many pensions for disability have been awarded respectively to ex-members of the Canadian navy, army, air force?
2.	In each classification, what is the estimated annual liability?
3.	With respect to, (a) service in Canada only; (b) service outside Canada during the present war, how many pensions to dependents of members of the Canadian navy, army, air force, have been awarded arising out of death?
4.	In each classification above, what is the annual estimated liability?
5.	With respect to how many Canadians serving in or attached to imperial forces in the present war, has the Canadian pension commission awarded augmentation of imperial pensions?
6.	With respect to augmented imperial pensions (as in No. 5) what has been the total outlay by, (a) the Canadian government; (b) the imperial government?
7.	How many pensions have been awarded arising from, (a) disability; (b) death, under section 11-3 of the Pension Act?
8.	What is the total annual liability with regard to pensions awarded under section 11-3?
9.	To what other classes and groups have pensions been awarded by the Canadian pension commission?
10.	What are the numbers and annual liability with respect of each such class under the headings of disability and death respectively?


Mr. MACKENZIE (Vancouver Centre):: Return as of December 31, 1943:
1 and 2. Disability pensions, including awards under section 11 (3) of the Pension
Act.	In Canada	Estimated Annual
	Number	Liability
Navy 	
48	$ 26,349Army 	
1.267	472,423Air Force .	
241	105,808Total ...	
1556	$ 604,580Navy 	Outside Canada 	
274	$ 119,585Army 	
4,222	1.524,727Air Force ..	
122	56,022Total ....	
4,618	$1,700,3343	and 4. Death pensions, including awards under section 11 (3) of the Pension Act.
In Canada
	Number	Estimated Annual Liability
Navy 			$ 23,012
Army 	
513	327,179Air Force .	
342	237,869Total 	
885	$ 588,060Navy 	Outside Canada 	
351	$ 259,228Army 	.'	
1,574	1,223,697Air Force ..	
173	134,024Total ...	
2,098	$1,616,9495.	1,192.6.	(a) $775,974.00. (b) $363,316.86.7.	(a) 583.
(b) 377.
8.	$489,731.00.
9 and 10.
Mariners	
Fishermen	
Auxiliary services	
Civilian employees	
R.C.M.P. special constable gds	
Civilian defence	
Corps of civilian fire fighters for service in the United Kingdom	
Total	
(Mr. Ian A. Mackenzie.]
	Disability		Death
	Estimated		Estimated
	Annual		Annual
No.	Liability	No.	Liability26	$12,335	337	$195,7371	370	21	19,392-	1	1,244-	-	6	5,2843	1,134	-	-3	1,224	-	-1,410	t	9003S	$16,473	366	$222,557
Questions


ELEMENTARY FLYING TRAINING SCHOOLS
Mr. CRUICKSHANK:: 1.	What are the names of each company operating elementary flying training schools?
2.	Is all equipment used in operating such schools supplied by the government? If not, what items are supplied by the companies?
3.	Who pays for the servicing and repairs of equipment?
4.	Does the government supply all food, clothing, medical and dental treatment, gasoline, oil, lubricant? If not, what items are supplied by the companies?
5.	Are all the salaries and wages paid by the government? If not, which ones are paid by the companies?
6.	What is the total cost paid the companies for training each student?
7.	What is the total amount paid to date to each company operating such a school?


Mr. MACMILLAN:: 1.	Elementary Flying Training Schools Under the B.C.A.T.P.
School	Name and Address	T.C.	Manager	Secretary-Treasurer	PresidentNo. 2 E.F.T.S.	Thunder Bay Air Training School	2	H. F. Dougall	E. M. Wilson, Asst..	H. F. Dougall"A Class	Limited,	(90)	Fort William, Ontario.	No. 4 E.F.T.S.	Windsor Mills Flying Training School	3	J. K. M. Green	C. S. Deakin	A. S. Dawes"A" Class	Limited,	(90)	Windsor Mills, P.Q.	No. 5 E.F.T.S.	High River Flying Training School	4	D. K. Yorath	H. G. Richardson,	D. K. Yorath"D" Class	Limited,	C.A.	(240)	Airport, High River, Alberta.	No. 6 E.F.T.S.	Northern Saskatchewan Flying	2	E. A. Rawlinson,	E. A. Rawlinson,	H. M. Sibbald"C" Class	Training School Ltd.,	C.A.	C.A.	(180) No. 7 E.F.T.S.	P.O. Box 810, Prince Albert, Saskatchewan. Windsor Flying Training School,	1	A. A. J. Pelzer	W. H. Cantilon
E. Holmes		
"A" Class	Limited,				
(90) No. 10 E.F.T.S.	Windsor Airport, Windsor, Ontario.				
	Hamilton Flying Training School,	3	G. Moes		G. V. Sanders		S. S. MacNaughton
D Class	Limited,				
(240)	Pendleton, Ontario.				
No. 12 E.F.T.S.	Huron County Flying Training School, Limited,	1		Harry B. Weir,	J. R. Beaton
"C" Class					
(180)	Sky Harbour Airport,			B. C. Straughan	
(Naval)	Goderich, Ontario.				
No. 13 E.F.T.S. "C" Class	Eastern Ontario Flying School, Limited.	3	W. Davidson		C. K. Swerdfager...	G. T. Byshe
(180) (Naval)	St. Eugene, Ontario.				
No. 15 E.F.T.S. "C" Class	Regina Elementary Flying School, Limited.	4	G. C. Rooke, C.A..	M. I. Chase, C.A...	G. C. Rooke, C.A.
(180) No. 19 E.F.T.S. "D" Class	P.O. Box 86, Regina, Saskatchewan.				
	Virden Flying Training School, Limited,	2	J. R. Morgan		D. P. Carmichael...	W. E. Sellers
(240)	Virden, Manitoba.				
No. 20 E.F.T.S.	Ontario County Flying Training	1	S. R. Bernardo		W. Turnbull, C.A...	Alex. G. Stone
"C Class	School, Limited,				
(180)	Oshawa, Ontario.				
No 24 E.F.T.S. "D" Class	Vancouver Air Training Company, Limited,	4	Stewart McKercher, K.C.	Fred Graham		Maj. Austin Taylor
(240)	Abbotsford, B.C.				
No. 25 E.F.T.S.	Central Manitoba Flying Training	4	C. W. Nicholl.	J. J. Pope	C. W. Nicholl,"D Class	School, Limited,	O.B.E., C.A.	O.B.E., C.A,.(240)	Assiniboia, Saskatchewan.	No. 26 E.F.T.S.	Miramichi Flying Training School,	2	J. W. Humphrey	R. Mills	Wm. V. Creoghan*'D' Class	Limited,	(240)	Neepawa, Manitoba.	R.A.F.	No. 31 E.F.T.S.	De Winton Flying Training School,	4	W. M. Alexander, D.F.C."D ' Class	Limited,	D.F.C.	(240)	De Winton, Alberta.	No. 32 E.F.T.S.	Edmonton Flying Training School,	4	Frank Burton	P. F. Heal	"D" Class	Limited,	(240)	Bowden, Alberta.	
3 "A" Class, 5 "C" Class. 8 *'D" Class.
Revised: 0th December, 1943.
Questions

2.	All equipment supplied by the government.
3.	The operating companies.
4.	(a) Food-Catering is the obligation of the operating company, the government supplying rations.
(b)	Clothing, etc.-Clothing, medical and dental treatment-for service personnel, these are the obligation of the government.
(c)	Oil, lubricant-Prior to 1st July, 1942, the operating companies were obligated to supply gasoline and oil, both aviation and motor transport. From that date the government is obligated to supply aviation gasoline and oil and the operating companies supply motor transport gasoline and oil.
5.	All salaries and wages of employees of the operating companies are paid by them.
6.	From the date of commencement of operation to the 2nd Jan. 1944, the average cost per pupil graduate is $911.55 while the cost per pupil intake $702.12.
7.	Total amount paid to date to each E.F.T.S.:
No. 2 E.F.T.S., Fort William, Ont., Thunder Bay Air Training School, Ltd., $1,354,986.66.
No. 3 E.F.T.S., London, Ont., London Elementary Flying Training School, Ltd. (to closing date of school, 3rd July, 1942), $764,777.34.
No. 4 E.F.TS., Windsor Mills, Que., Windsor Mills Flying Training School, Ltd., $1,377,684.48.
No. 5 E.F.T.S., High River, Alta., High River Flying Training School, Limited, $2,292,273.30.
No. 6 E.F.T.S., Prince Albert, Sask., Northern Saskatchewan Flying Training School, Ltd., $1,951,132.43.
No. 7 E.F.TS., Windsor, Ontario, Windsor Flying Training School, Limited, $1,343,084.73.
No. 8 E.F.T.S., Sea Island, B.C., Vancouver Air Training Company, Limited (to closing date of school, 4th January, 1942), $537,663.38.
No. 9 E.F.T.S., St. Catharines, Ont., St. Catharines Flying Training School, Limited (to closing date of school, 11th January, 1944), $1,672,510.63.
No. 10 E.F.T.S., Pendleton, Ontario, Hamilton Flying Training School, Limited, $1,946,376.36.
No. 11 E.F.T.S., Cap de la Madeleine, P.Q., Quebec Airways (Training) Limited (to closing date of school, 14th February, 1944), $1,763,147.30.

, No. 12 E.F.T.S., Goderich, Ontario, Huron County Flying Training School, Limited, $1,691,476.85.
No. 13 E.F.T.S., St. Eugene, Ont., Eastern Ontario Flying Training School, Limited, $1,753,766.91.
No. 15 E.F.T.S., Regina, Sask., Regina Elementary Flying School, Ltd., $1,703,488.63.
No. 17 E.F.T.S., Stanley, N.S., Nova Scotia Flying Training School, Ltd., (to closing date of school, 11th January, 1944), $1,154,801.45.
No. 19 E.F.T.S., Virden, Man., Virden Flying Training School, Limited, $2,048,662.32.
No. 20 E.F.T.S., Oshawa, Ont., Ontario County Flying Training School, Limited, $1,873,983.08.
No. 24 E.F.T.S., Abbotsford, B.C., Vancouver Air Training Company, Ltd., $298,053.03
No. 22 E.F.T.S., Ancienne Lorette, P.Q., City of Quebec Elementary Flying Training School, Ltd. (to closing date of school, 3rd July, 1942), $355,714.49.
No. 31, E.F.T.S., De Winton, Alta., Malton Flying Training School, Ltd., $1,958,801.19.
No. 32 E.F.T.S., Bowden, Alta., Edmonton Flying Training School, Ltd., $1,835,700.42.
No. 33 E.F.T.S., Caron, Sask., Boundary Bay Flying Training School, Ltd. (to closing date of school, 11th January, 1944), $2,149,586.84.
No. 34 E.F.T.S., Assiniboia, Sask. (Now No.
25	E.F.T.S.), Central Manitoba Flying Training School, Ltd., $1,867,415.47.
No. 35 E.F.T.S., Neepawa, Man. (Now No.
26	E.F.TS.), Miramichi Flying Training School, Limited, $1,650,364.47.


NAVAL SERVICES-ADMIRAL NELLES
Mr. GILLIS:: 1.	Why has Admiral Nelles been transferred outside of Canada to a post in the United Kingdom?
2.	To what extent is the policy of the Royal Canadian Navy directed from the said post in the United Kingdom?


Mr. MACDONALD (Kingston City):: 1.	In view of the larger number of R.C.N. ships and men serving in the European theatre and in view of impending events there, it was considered desirable that an officer of flag rank be sent to the United Kingdom, and ViceAdmiral Nelles was accordingly selected to fill this post.
2.	The policy of the Royal Canadian' Navy is directed entirely by the government of Canada, the war committee of the cabinet of Canada, and naval service headquarters at Ottawa.
FEBRUARY 24, i944
Questions


INCOME TAX-INDIVIDUAL AND CORPORATION EXPENSES FOR ADVERTISING, ETC.
Mr. COLD WELL:: 1.	To what extent are expenses for the maintenance of public relations counsel deductible from the income of persons or corporations, (a) in respect to public relations counsel employed by such persons or corporations; (b) in respect to contributions to independent public relations counsel?	.2.	To what extent are expenses for advertising of a political nature deductible from the income of persons or corporations before taxation thereof ?	,3.	To what extent are expenses or contributions in respect to political parties deductible from income before taxation thereof?


Mr. GIBSON:: 1.	(a) and (b) To the extent necessarily incurred to maintain and earn the income of the payor, along with other necessary expenses, but not to the extent that they are deemed to be in excess of what is reasonable or normal for the business carried on by the taxpayer.
2.	Not at all.
3.	Not at all.


POST-WAR AVIATION CONFERENCE
Mr. KNOWLES:: 1.	Has the government been advised of a proposal to hold a conference on post-war international aviation matters in the United States in the near future? If so, where will the conference be held, and on what date?
2.	Will Canada be represented at this conference? If so, by whom?


Mr. MACKENZIE KING:: 1.	The government knows of no proposal to hold a conference on post-war international aviation matters in the United States in the near future. The Canadian government is now taking part in discussions with the United Kingdom and the United States regarding the holding of exploratory conversations on international air transport. The date, place and other details of these conversations have not yet been settled.
2.	Canada is taking part in the present discussions and expects to take part in the subsequent exploratory conversations. No decision has been taken as to who the Canadian representatives in those conversations will be.


PENSIONS AND NATIONAL HEALTH-TORONTO HOSPITAL ACCOMMODATION
Mr. MAYHEW:: 1.	Is the Department of Pensions and
National Health establishing a new hospital in Toronto?	'
2.	If so, how many beds?
3.	Are plans of such institution in course of preparation? If so, by whom?
4.	Where is the hospital to be situated?
5.	What is the area of the site?
6.	What is the cost to the department of such site?
7.	Are utility services and transportation facilities available at the proposed site?
8.	If not, how are such services to be provided?
9.	Is a health and occupational centre contemplated for construction on the same site?
10.	If so, for what type of patients is such health and occupational centre intended?
11.	What is the estimated cost of, (a) the proposed hospital; (b) the proposed health and occupational centre?


Mr. MACKENZIE (Vancouver Centre):: 1.	A new hospital is planned just outside Toronto City limits.
2.	1,400 patient beds, plus nurses' residence.
3.	Yes. Messrs. Allward and Gouinlock, Toronto.
4.	On a part of Sunnybrook Park plus additional land to be acquired.
5.	The area of Sunnybrook Park is approximately 1774 acres.
6.	No cost expected as to Sunnybrook Park. The City of Toronto has offered and is preparing to deed the property to the dominion government as a gift.
7.	Officials of the city of Toronto have offered to arrange the necesssary extensions to the site.
8.	Answered by No. 7.
9.	Yes, on a part of Sunnybrook Park plus additional land to be acquired.
10.	For persons who, at completion of usual medical treatment, are found to have suffered a loss or lessening of their ability to earn a livelihood and in whose cases there is a reasonable probability that, under appropriate supervision, such ability can be restored.
11.	(a) $5,000,000; (b) $1,000,000.


MEAT BOARD-SHIPMENTS OF BEEF TO BRITAIN
Mr. SENN:: 1.	Has the meat board purchased and stored beef for shipment to Britain?
2.	If so, in what quantities?
3.	What quantities li ave been exported to the United Kingdom?
4.	Has any beef been exported to other countries? If so, in what quantity?
5.	How much beef purchased by the meat board still remains in storage?


Mr. GARDINER:: 1.	Yes.
2.	11,490,741 pounds.
3.	2,852,741 pounds.
4.	None by the meat board.
5.	300,000 pounds in storage. Balance purchased is in transit to seaboard.
Questions


LEAGUE OP NATIONS-CANADA'S CONTRIBUTIONS
Stanley Howard Knowles: What is the total amount of Canada's contributions to the expenses of the league of nations in each year since the organization of the league?


Mr. MACKENZIE KING:: The annual
contributions by Canada since the organization of the league have been as follows: League	Total
Year	Contributions
1919-	20
1920-	21
1921-	22
1922-	23
1923-	24
1924-	25
1925-	26
1926-	27
1927-	28
1928-	29
1929-	30
1930-	31
1931-	32
1932-	33
1933-	34
1934-	35
1935-	36
1936-	37
1937-	38
1938-	39
1939-	40
1940-	41
1941-	42
1942-	43
1943-	44


$ 87,728 58 223,730 09 209,427 07 223,177 66 200,356 66 195,620 30 195,345 83 190.268 08 204,213 77 216,507 14 234,808 96 251,694 46 311,600 67 277,936 52 389,891 97 404,732 02 423,572 29 397,251 37 328,638 08 311.318 61 292,417 23 258,610 63 189,920 76 184,255 74 235,094 61   PUBLIC SERVICE-EMPLOYMENT OP OTHER THAN CANADIANS
Mr. BLACKMORE:: 1.	Is Edouardo A. Astorga Barriga, a native of Chile, in the employ of the Canadian government at the Ottawa experimental farm? If so, at what salary, and since when?
2.	What number of persons, other than Canadians, have been appointed to the civil service of Canada or taken on the federal government payroll in any capacity at a salary higher than $1,200 per annum from September, 1939, to February 20, 1944?
3.	From what countries are such persons, to what positions were they appointed, and at what salary?


Norman Alexander McLarty: There will be no difficulty in answering the first question, but to answer the other two questions would involve a tremendous amount of work, because the files since 1939 would have to be gone over. I wonder if the hon. member would be willing to consider redrafting the question so that he could get the information he desires more promptly but in a more limited form.


Mr. BLACKMORE:: I shall be glad to do that.



QUESTIONS PASSED AS ORDERS FOR RETURNS


Mr. ERASER (Peterborough West):: 1.	What are the names of all officers who have been appointed to the acting or substantive rank of lieutenant-general, major-general and brigadier in the Canadian forces since September 1, 1939?
2.	What was the date of each such appointment?
3.	Where are each of the above officers now stationed?
4.	What duties are each of the above officers
performing?	*
5.	What pay, separation and other per diem allowances are being paid to each officer?


William Chisholm Macdonald: Return
tabled.


MOBILIZATION ACT-REQUISITIONS, POSTPONEMENTS, ETC.
Mr. DIEFENBAKER:: 1.	How many men in each military district, (a) have been requisitioned by the army under the National Resources Mobilization Act since March 20, 1941; (b) have reported for medical examination; (c) have been granted postponements?
2.	How many military training notices have been sent out in each military district?
3.	How many have reported?
4.	How many men have been enrolled in each military district?


FLOUR-MILLING BY-PRODUCTS-WHOLESALE PRICES
Mr. LACOMBE:: 1.	What are the present wholesale prices, by carload and per ton, of flour-milling byproducts, delivered to Montreal and Quebec?
2.	What are the prices of the same byproducts delivered to Sherbrooke, Three Rivers, Riviere du Loup, and Toronto?


Douglas Charles Abbott: Return tabled.


BEET SUGAR-EXCISE TAX
Mr. BLACKMORE:: 1.	How many pounds of sugar were produced in Canada during each of the years 1941, 1942 and 1943?
2.	What amount of excise tax was collected on beet sugar by the federal government during each of these years?
3.	How much of such tax was returned to the beet growers as a rebate in each of the above years?


PRAIRIE FARM ASSISTANCE-FIELD MEN AND SUPERVISORS, 1943
Mr. DOUGLAS (Weyburn):: 1. What are the names and addresses of the fieldmen and supervisors hired under the Prairie Farm Assistance Act during 1943?

Questions as Orders for Returns
2.	What is the total amount received by each for, (a) salary; (b) expenses?
3.	What was the total amount of time each of the above named was employed by the government during the calendar year 1943?


WHEAT ACREAGE REDUCTION-FIELD MEN AND SUPERVISORS
Mr. DOUGLAS (Weyburn):: 1.	What are the names and addresses of fieldmen and supervisors hired in the province of Saskatchewan under the wheat acreage [DOT] reduction administration?
2.	What is the total amount paid to each for, (a) salary; (b) expenses?
3.	What length of time was each of the above named hired by the government?


HON. SIR EUGENE FISET
Mr. DORION:: 1.	At what date was the Hon. Sir Eugene Fiset appointed Lieutenant-Governor of the province of Quebec?
2.	What amounts have been paid to him by the dominion government each year since his appointment either by way of remuneration or for other expenses in connection with the office of Lieutenant-Governor of the province of Quebec?
3.	What amounts have been paid to him by the provincial government of Quebec each year since his appointment either by way of remuneration or for other expenses in connection with the office of Lieutenant-Governor of the province of Quebec?
4.	At what date did the Hon. Sir Eugfene Fiset become entitled to an annual pension of $6,300 pursuant to the Militia Pension Act?
5.	During what years has this amount of $6,300 been paid to the Hon. Sir Eugene Fiset?
6.	What is the case which is to be brought before the Exchequer Court of Canada referred to in paragraph 3 of order in council P.C. 9380, dated the 7th December, 1943?
7.	Has this case been actually brought before the Exchequer Court of Canada? If so, has a judgment been rendered, and what is the said judgment?
8.	What are the additional expenses incurred by the Hon. Sir Eugene Fiset in the exercise of his office as referred to in paragraph 5 of order in council P.C. 9380, dated the 7th December, 1943?
9.	Was the amount of $4,000 per year provided by order in council P.C. 9380 of the 7th December, 1943, actually paid to the Hon. Sir Eugfene Fiset? If so, when, and for what fiscal years?
10.	(a) What are the extraordinary expenses incurred by the Hon. Sir Eugene Fiset and caused by the war; (b) what provision of the War Measures Act, referred to in order in council P.C. 9380 of the 7th December, 1943, provides for payment of the said extraordinary expenses to the Hon. Sir Eugene Fiset?


LABOUR CONDITIONS-TEXTILE WORKERS
Mr. RAYMOND:: 1. Has the Department of Labour made inquiries to ascertain whether textile workers had received the salary rates fixed by the various orders in council or other orders relating to the minimum salary rates to be paid to wartime workers?
2.	If so, what did the Department of Labour find as to the payment of salaries fixed by the said orders in council or other orders? '
3.	What companies have been required to pay back to the workers the salary to which they were entitled, and what was the total amount in each case that the companies had to pay in this maimer to the workers?


MOBILIZATION ACT-POSTPONEMENTS
Mr. DOUGLAS (Weyburn):: 1. How many men in each military district, up to December 31, 1943, have, (a) been called for military service; (b) applied for postponement; (c) been granted postponement for six months or longer?


PRAIRIE FARM REHABILITATION-FIELD MEN- ADMINISTRATION COSTS
Mr. DOUGLAS (Weyburn):: 1.	What are the names and addresses of fieldmen in Saskatchewan hired during 1943 under the Prairie Farm Rehabilitation Act?
2.	What amount was paid to each for, (a) salary; (b) expenses?
3.	What is the total amount of time for which each was hired by the government?
4.	What is the total cost of administration during the calendar year ending December 31, 1943?


ATHABASKA TAR BANDS
Mr. JOHNSTON (Bow River):: 1.	What amount of money was spent on the development of the Athabaska tar sands last year, 1943?
2.	What amount was authorized and/or spent for the year 1944?
3.	What office buildings have been built up to date, and what is the cost?
4.	What residential buildings have been built up to date, and what is the cost?
5.	How many of these residences are occupied?
6.	How many persons are employed in these offices?
7.	How many persons are employed in other occupations at this plant?
8.	Has the pilot-plant been started yet? If so, how long before it will be completed?
9.	When is it expected that this pilot-plant will be in operation, and what will be its capacity?
10.	What plans are there for further development this year?
11.	Is it expected that gasoline will be produced in quantity this year?



FUEL WOOD


Mr. REID:: 1.	What amount of money has been paid by way of subsidy or assistance for the production of wood for fuel?
2.	By provinces, how has this money been distributed?
3.	How many cords of wood for fuel have been produced or obtained under assistance during the calendar year 1943?
4.	What has been the total expenditures for the production of firewood by persons of
Questions as Orders jor Returns

Japanese origin in the province of British Columbia, (a) in wages; (b) by way of other assistance?
5.	How many cords of such firewood have been produced from August 1 to December 1, 1943?
6.	To what points has the firewood produced in British Columbia been shipped, and in what quantities?
7.	Per cord of wood, how much has the production cost, up to December 31, 1943?
8.	How many cords of firewood have been shipped to Vancouver under the Japanese woodcutting operations?
9.	What has been the cost of all firewood shipped to Vancouver?
10.	Under whose jurisdiction or ownership is such firewood?
11.	If not owned by the government, has the
overnment received payments for any of the
rewood shipped to Vancouver, and what
amounts have been received?
12.	Has any agreement been entered into with the Vancouver city council regarding sale or disposal of firewood shipped to that city?
13.	If so, what are its terms?



SUBSIDY ON MINE PROPS AND MINING TIES

Mr. SHAW:: .
1.	Was an order in council passed at any time since the outbreak of war authorizing the payment of a subsidy on mine props or mining ties? If so, what was the number of the said order, upon what date was it passed, and what was the rate of subsidy established?
2.	What was the purpose of passing an order in council authorizing the payment of a subsidy on mine props or ties?
3.	What was the total amount paid to producers of mine props and ties in Alberta by way of subsidy between the date of the passing of the said order authorizing the payment of such subsidy and January 19, 1944?
4.	Was a ceiling price placed on mine props and ties at any time between January 1, 1942, and January 19, 1944? If so, what was the ceiling price in Alberta?
5.	Have prisoners of war been engaged in cutting mine props and ties in Alberta at anytime between January 1, 1942, and January 19, 1944? If so, where were they engaged in such work, and what was the total number of thousand lineal feet cut by such prisoners?
6. Were the mine props and ties cut by prisoners of war in Alberta sold? If so, by whom, to whom, and at what price per thousand lineal feet?
7.	Was the subsidy paid on mine props and ties which were cut by prisoners of war in Alberta?
8. Were the mine props and ties cut by prisoners of war in Alberta sold at the prevailing rate for such materials?
9.	Upon what date were the producers of mine props and ties in Alberta who were receiving subsidy payments notified that the subsidy was cancelled, and upon what date did the cancellation order become effective?
10.	Did the cancellation prevent the collection of the subsidy for mine props and ties which were cut prior to the cancellation date of the subsidy but not sold?

11.	Were the producers of mine props and ties notified at any time since January 1, 1944, that they might increase the sale price of same? If so, by what amount could the price be increased?
12.	Has the government or any government board. increased the sale price of mine props and mine ties produced by prisoners of war since January 1, 1944? If not, why not?



PAYMENTS TO CANADIAN PACIFIC AND CANADIAN NATIONAL RAILWAYS

Thomas Langton Church: What has been paid by the government to,
(a)	the Canadian Pacific Railway Company;
(b)	the Canadian National Railways, during this war for each of the years 1939, 1940, 1941, 1942, 1943?



CANADIAN FORCES-MEDICAL SERVICES

Mr. GILLIS:: 1.	Would there be any saving of personnel or increase of efficiency if the consultant, hospital and medical organizations of the three armed services were united?
2.	When will the Archer report on medical services be made available to the public?
3.	What number of medical officers in each of the three armed services who are qualified to practice medicine are engaged in clerical work only?



CANADIAN FORCES-CLOTHING

Mr. PURDY:: 1.	Does each one of the three armed services supply the same units of clothing' to noncommissioned officers and men? If not, what are the exceptions?
2.	Does each service have the same regulations with respect to replacements? If not, what are the major differences?



RADIO LICENCES-REVENUE AND EXPENSES OF C.B.C.

Mr. REID:: .
1.	What number of radio licences have been issued during the present fiscal year, up to January 1, 1944?
2.	What amount of money has been collected by the Canadian Radio Broadcasting Corporation during the present fiscal year, up to January 31, 1944, by way of, (a) radio licences; (b) all other sources, giving details?
3.	What have been the total expenditures on behalf of and for the Canadian Radio Broadcasting Corporation during the present fiscal year, up to January 31, 1944?



PRODUCTION OF FLAX

Mr. HATFIELD:: 1.	Was there a bonus paid by the government to the growers of flax during the 1942 season? If so, how much a bushel, and what was the total of the bonus paid?
2.	How many bushels of flax were produced in Canada during the 1942 season?
3.	How many bushels of flax were processed in Canada during the 1942 season?
4.	How many bushels of flax were exported to the United States due to lack of machinery to process same in Canada?
/

Mobilization Act-Call-up Notices



OIL-BEARING SEED PLANTS

Mr. WINKLER:: 1.	What was the estimated, (a) acreage; (b) yield, in Manitoba, Saskatchewan and Alberta in 1943 of the following crops of oilbearing seed plants: flaxseed, sunflowers and Argentine rape-seed?
2.	What is the target acreage in these seeds for 1944?
3.	To date, how much has been processed in these provinces, and at what points?
4.	To date, how much from these has been processed in Ontario and other provinces?



RENTAL OF SPACE IN SAINT JOHN, N.B.

Mr. HANSON (York-Sunbury):: 1.	What space, if any, has been rented by the Department of National Defence from J. Clark & Son, Limited, in the city of Fredericton or elsewhere in the province of New Brunswick?
2.	What	rent is being	paid	for	eacht suchspace, and	what are the	terms	of	the rental
arrangement with respect to time, termination of the rental contract, renewal arrangements, and other like conditions?
3.	What space, if any, has been rented by the wartime prices and trade board from J. Clark & Son, Limited, in the city of Saint John or elsewhere in the province of New Brunswick?
4.	What	rent is being	paid	for	each suchspace, and	what are the	terms	of	the rental
arrangement with respect to time, termination of the contract, renewal arrangements and other like conditions?


Norman Alexander McLarty: Order for return.


Richard Burpee Hanson: No; I
want the information on Hansard. There are just four short questions requiring four short answers.


Norman Alexander McLarty: But two departments are involved, the Department of National Defence and the Department of Public Works. That is the only reason for making it an order for return.


Richard Burpee Hanson: To cover
it up.


Norman Alexander McLarty: That is not the purpose
at all. It is purely by reason of the fact that two departments are involved, and no one department could answer the whole question. If the hon. member wishes to separate the questions, they could be answered1, but it is impossible for one department to answer the whole question as it now stands.


Richard Burpee Hanson: Questions
1	and 2 refer to one transaction, and questions 3 and 4 to another. They could easily be answered. But if you do not want to do it that way, I will get it to the public in some other way.



MOBILIZATION ACT


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Hon. HUMPHREY MITCHELL (Minister of Labour):: Mr. Speaker, on February 7, as will be noted on page 205 of Hansard, the leader of the opposition (Mr. Graydon) brought up the case of a soldier who had been in the army since 1942 but recently received a call-up notice under the National Resources Mobilization Act.
I have made inquiries about this case and I find that the master registration card of the man in question shows that on registering he gave the date of his birth as July IS, 1925. It has been ascertained that he enlisted on March 30, 1942, at Petawawa, stating at that time that he was bom on November 22, 1923. Consequently, at the time of enlistment he was under seventeen years of age.
Registration cards in the divisional registrars' offices are kept in order of the year of birth and the registrar would not be in a position to prevent the issuance of a call-up notice to a man reaching the age of eighteen and a half years against a notice of enlistment from the armed forces giving a birth date that would make the callee twenty years of age. It will be realized that this difference in ages would cause considerable confusion as to identification. The recent call-up of this man went out because he had reached the age of eighteen and a half years based on his registration record.
I might add that in November, 1942, a change was made in the method by which the armed forces advise this department of enlistments, and under the present system the registrar receives copy of a pro-forma for each man enlisted through very definite channels.
While there is always the possibility of clerical error there would be relatively few cases under the present system whereby a man already enlisted would receive a call-up under mobilization regulations, unless, of course, the information provided by the man at the time of enlistment was contrary to information given at the time of registration.
I return to the hon. gentleman the documents he gave me, with the exception of the railway ticket and warrants for meals, which will not be required.



CANNING FACTORY CROPS


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
George James Tustin: Mr. Speaker, I should like to direct a question
Labour Conditions

to the Minister of Agriculture, based on the policy of the government for the last two years of paying a subsidy on the canning factory crops, The question is urgent, because this is the season at which the growers and processors are entering into contracts for crop production. I might add that rumours are going around that the announcement of subsidies will not be made until late in March. Is the minister in a position to make a statement as to whether or not a subsidy will be paid, and if so, in what amounts? If he is not in a position to do so now, can he tell us when he will make such a statement?


James Garfield Gardiner: I cannot make a statement to-day, but we shall be in a position to do so very shortly.



POTATOES


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. G. A. CRUICKSHANK (Fraser Valley):: I should like to ask a question of the government arising out of a headline in yesterday's Ottawa Citizen.


Some hon. MEMBERS:: Order.


George Alexander Cruickshank: I am not quoting the article, Mr. Speaker. Hon. members over here are always calling somebody else to order. They are generally out of order themselves. I should like to ask the government the following question:	Which government officials
arranged to allow the dumping of surplus American potatoes in Canada when Fraser Valley potatoes have to pay a duty of $7.50 per ton on certified seed potatoes and $12.50 per ton on commercial potatoes entering the United States? Has any effort been made to alter the situation?


Thomas Vien: That is a question which should be placed on the order paper.


George Alexander Cruickshank: If I do that it will never be answered.



LABOUR CONDITIONS


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. ANGUS MacINNIS (Vancouver East):: Is the Minister of Labour aware that some employers, particularly in the province of Ontario, in industries where a vote has already been taken to determine the bargaining agency, and where negotiations with the bargaining agency so determined were entered 
into, are refusing, since the tabling of the wartime labour relations regulations order, P.C. 1003, to continue negotiations on the pretext that they are not clear what the status of the bargaining agency previously determined will be under the new order? Is the minister in a position to make a statement that would clarify the order as it relates to the situation I have described?


Humphrey Mitchell: Mr. Speaker, in answer to the question of the hon. member for Vancouver East, I should like to make a statement regarding the application of the wartime labour relations regulations, P.C. 1003, particularly in those provinces where legislation is at present in force providing for certification of bargaining representatives before collective bargaining is commenced. The provinces of Ontario and British Columbia have such legislation. So has Quebec, although I am under the impression that machinery has not yet been completed to administer the labour relations act recently passed by the Quebec legislature.
Hon. members will be aware that the wartime labour relations regulations, approved by the governor in council on February 17, are not yet in force. Section 48 provides for their coming into force on a day to be fixed by the governor in council. We first must set up the wartime labour relations board and the machinery to carry out the regulations. However, I can assure the house there will not be unnecessary delay in doing so.
In those provinces where machinery exists for the certification of bargaining representatives, and pending the coming into force of the new federal regulations, I would say that employees and employers should observe the terms of the existing provincial legislation and bargain in good faith after the bargaining representatives have been certified. If as a result of this bargaining a collective agreement is consummated before our regulations come into force, the collective agreement should be regarded as a valid one. If on the other hand the negotiations following the certification of bargaining representatives under provincial laws fail to produce a satisfactoiy agreement, either party may make application to the Minister of Labour for the establishment of a board of conciliation and investigation under the provisions of the Industrial Disputes Investigation Act, provided the industry is one coming within the scope of that act as extended by order in council P.C. 3495.
It should be noted that the suspension of the Industrial Disputes Investigation Act occurs only when the wartime labour relations regulations come into force. In other cases provincial legislation may provide for

War Appropriation-Army
further reference to the competent authority when agreement on the terms of a collective agreement cannot be reached.
Where certified bargaining representatives are in negotiation with employers when our federal wartime labour relations regulations come into force, there might be some apprehension that certification of such bargaining representatives will again have to be sought.
Section 36 (2) of our regulations empowers the Minister of Labour, with the approval of the governor in council, to enter into agreements with the governments of the provinces to provide for the administration, within those provinces, of the regulations. I would say that when the terms of these agreements are under consideration by the provinces and ourselves all questions which may arise, such as that of the recognition by the board of the decision of the labour court of Ontario or other provincial authorities with regard to certification of bargaining agencies or representatives, will be fully considered and adequately covered.
I make this statement at this time because I realize that some uncertainty is bound to exist in the minds of trade union officers and officials of employing companies, engaged in proceedings initiated under provincial regulations, as to their status under the national regulations; uncertainty which might tend to delay the current negotiations until our regulations are effective.
The interests of industrial peace and of the war effort will best be served if parties to negotiations now in progress continue their negotiations with a genuine desire to reach a satisfactory outcome.


Mr. ADAMSON:: The Industrial Disputes Investigation Act is still in force?


Humphrey Mitchell: Absolutely; it is in force until the new labour code is proclaimed by the governor general in council.


Mr. GILLIS:: Will the new labour relations regulations be printed for general distribution? There is a widespread demand for them.


Humphrey Mitchell: We have arranged for the printing of many thousands. I understand the first copies came to my office this morning. My hon. friend can rest assured that there will be a widespread circulation of the order, and it will also be printed in the Labour Gazette of this month.


Angus MacInnis: Will the report of the war labour board be printed?


Humphrey Mitchell: I have made arrangements for the printing of both reports as an appendix to the Labour Gazette of this month.



CANADIAN FORCES


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Thomas Langton Church: Will the Minister of Transport or the government give some consideration to the large number of resolutions of municipalities and other public bodies regarding soldiers' fares? Could not the question and the bill I introduced be turned over to the railway committee or some other committee? This is a very important matter.


Joseph Enoil Michaud: I shall give consideration to that.



WAR APPROPRIATION BILL


[Stage Direction]
The house resumed from Thursday, February 17, 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.
DEPARTMENT OF NATIONAL DEFENCE *-ARMY SERVICES
2. Pay and allowances, $547,256,061.
Stanley Howard Knowles: Mr. Chairman, despite the statement of the minister concerning the matter of the amount of allowances payable to mothers of men in the armed services, I should like to press him to give the matter further consideration. It seemed to me that there was an inconsistency between the statement which the Minister of National Defence (Mr. Ralston) made on page 613 of Hansard and that which he made on page 619. On page 613, when he was discussing the reasons for cutting off the allowances of dependents to any soldier who is absent without leave, he made this statement:
Dependents' allowance is not granted as compensation to a wife because she has lost the comfort of or association with her husband. It is paid to the wife in order to promote the well-being of the service, and to relieve the anxiety which husbands overseas would have, if such payment were not being made.
In passing, I do not agree altogether with the spirit of that statement. It seems to me that dependents deserve some consideration in their own own right rather than simply on behalf of the men in the forces. But even taking the statement at its face value, I emphasize these words of the minister:
It is paid to the wife in order to promote the well-being of the service, and to relieve the anxiety which husbands overseas would have, if such payment were not being made.
War Appropriation-Army

On pages 619 and 620, when we were discussing the difference between amounts allowed to wives and to mothers of soldiers, the minister pointed out that in the case of a wife, the $35 is given to her as of right, whether she has nothing or is a millionaire; and then he went on to say that the mother received the $25, not necessarily the whole of that amount, only if dependency could be established. There is also the further regulation that her total income outside assigned pay must not exceed $65. As all hon. members know, there are many men in the forces who have a deep anxiety because of the economic position of the mother at home, and if the minister is going to take the position which is set out on page 613 in regard to the morale of men in the services, I submit it ought to apply to mothers of men in the forces. If it is desirable for the morale of the forces to pay $35 to wives, it is at least equally desirable that the maximum payable to mothers should be raised to that figure, $35.
I hope that the minister and the government will give this matter further consideration, because it affects a great many men in the forces. Many a young man is just as much concerned about the economic circumstances of his mother, particularly where there is invalidity on the part of the father, as married men are for their wives and families. At the same time I should like to press further this point with regard to the regulation that sets $65 as the ceiling on income for mothers in this class. It has the effect of discouraging mothers who might otherwise get some kind of work as a means of stepping up their income, because when they do they are cut down in the amount of the allowance they receive. It should be remembered that in hundreds, perhaps thousands, of cases the mother is called upon to put up with conditions inferior to those under which she lived when the son was at home working and contributing to the upkeep of the home.
I bring to the attention of the minister and of the government these two points-the desirability of increasing to $35 the maximum allowance paid to mothers, and of raising the $65 ceiling to, I would say, $75, or better still, $100.


Thomas Clement (Tommy) Douglas: I support the very reasonable plea made by the member for Winnipeg North Centre (Mr. Knowles). If a soldier can establish the fact that he was contributing to the support of his parents prior to his enlistment, I submit that automatically one of the parents ought to be entitled to dependents' allowance^ Let me give an instance I came across the other day of a

w'idow on a farm who had her youngest son helping her to operate it. The boy joined the army. The mother cannot possibly continue working the farm without men to help her, and at the present time she cannot hire reliable farm help. She therefore leaves the farm and goes to teach school, though she is not by any means a young woman. This boy had been contributing toward her support during all the years he was working on the farm. Now, because his mother is teaching school, she is not allowed the dependent's allowance. He can assign part of his pay as a contribution, but she cannot get dependent's allowance. If she stayed in town and sat around, she would get it, but because she teaches in a small country school, where teachers are hard to get, and receives $75 a month, she cannot get the dependent's allowance, since her income is in excess of $65 even without the dependent's allowance.
As the regulation stands at the present time, this woman could not get the full dependent's allowance if her income were more than $40. Her total income' could not be more than $65. The government have set a very low figure if they think that the mother of a man in the services can live on $65 a month. It is far too low. This boy has been contributing for years to his mother's support; now he dons the king's uniform, and I suggest the government should underwite that boy's responsibility and shoulder the provision for the dependency of his mother, which the boy has been doing throughout the years. I ask the minister to consider the matter further.


Mr. RALSTON:: The hon. member for Winnipeg North Centre was referring to two different passages of mine. What I was dealing with on page 619 was not the matter of the ceiling for dependent's allowance, but the necessity of showing need. There are two different principles with w'hich the committee has been dealing and in which there is a difference between payment to mothers and to wives. In the case of the wife of a private the maximum dependents' allowance payable is $35, and in the case of the mother, $25; moreover, in the case of the wife the $35 is, in practice, paid automatically, whereas in the case of the mother, dependency has to be shown-that is, that the mother was receiving support from the son before he enlisted or that, owing to circumstances beyond his control, it was impossible for him to contribute.


Richard Burpee Hanson: It is an entirely different principle.


James Layton Ralston: Yes. These are the two different matters with which I was dealing in

War Appropriation-Army
the two replies. I take it that my hon. friend and the hon. member for Weyburn were both really dealing with the question of dependency, though the hon. member for Weyburn did deal with the matter of the ceiling as well. I do not think I can add anything on this question of dependency. The principle is that the country takes the place of the son who has supported his mother, up to $25 a month, exclusive of the assigned pay-


Richard Burpee Hanson: That is a condition precedent?


James Layton Ralston: That is right; and the assigned pay may amount to as much as $23, which means that the mother may get up to $48 from the son and the country together in order to take the place of whatever contribution the son was making before he enlisted. In addition the mother is entitled to earn up to $40 before any reduction is made in the allowance. This means she could receive $88 in all, of which the country would continue to contribute the full $25.


Mr. LOCKHART:: How long has that been in effect?


James Layton Ralston: The allowance was increased from $20 to $25 as of the first of January, 1943.


Mr. GREEN:: Is any cost-of-living bonus paid to the mother?


James Layton Ralston: No.	.


Richard Burpee Hanson: Following that up I should like to ask one other question, based upon a case that came to my attention. This was the case of the dependent mother of a soldier who, subsequent to his enlistment, married. What happens to the mother?


James Layton Ralston: If the soldier assigns an additional five days' pay, then the mother may be granted the dependents' allowance.


Richard Burpee Hanson: And the wife also?


James Layton Ralston: The wife also.


Richard Burpee Hanson: That is the condition precedent in both cases?


James Layton Ralston: Yes.


Richard Burpee Hanson: I am glad I asked that question, because the minister has clarified the situation. The position, then, is that if the soldier has a dependent wife to whom he must assign some money, I have forgotten how many days' pay-


James Layton Ralston: Fifteen days.


Richard Burpee Hanson: -she automatically gets the dependents' allowance of $35?


James Layton Ralston: Yes.


Richard Burpee Hanson: And if he further assigns five days' pay to his mother, then his mother will get the $25?


James Layton Ralston: That is so.


Richard Burpee Hanson: I am glad to have that information; it clarifies a position which has given me a good deal of trouble. I thought the position was that once the soldier married the mother was out, and I believe the hon. member for Comox-Albemi had the same impression. The minister now states definitely that if, in addition to the pay assigned to the wife, five days' pay is assigned to the mother, she still gets her dependents' allowance?


James Layton Ralston: Yes, but not automatically, of course.


Thomas Reid: I have a case I should like to bring to the attention of the minister, and I would say at once that there will always be exceptional cases no matter how well the act is framed. I think there is a principle involved in this case and, since a change must be brought about in the regulations, I believe this is the proper place to bring the matter to the attention of the minister. A man with a wife and one child assigned fifteen days' pay to his wife who was in receipt of dependents' allowance for herself and the child. Then the wife died and the child was placed in care of a home. Immediately the allowance for the child was cut off, and the reason given by the dependents' allowance board was that the pay assigned by the soldier more than covered the cost of keeping the child in the home. The soldier contended that he was as much entitled to dependents' allowance for his child as any other soldier was entitled to it, and that there was no reason for the dependents' allowance being reduced merely because he was continuing to assign pay to the home which was looking after the child. There may be many similar cases throughout the country, and I believe the point is well worth looking into.


James Layton Ralston: If I understood my hon.
friend correctly the situation was that there was a wife and child, the wife died and the child was then placed in a home?


Thomas Reid: Yes.
War Appropriation-Army


James Layton Ralston: The child would be in the same position as the soldier's mother, in that the fact and extent of dependency would have to be shown. In the particular case cited the assigned pay was sufficient to care for the child and provide for its support.
Mr. HANSON >(York-Sunbury):	And
nothing more was allowed.


James Layton Ralston: No.
Mr. HANSON (York-Sunbury)1: In the case of a soldier who is not married but who has a dependent mother, is it a condition precedent that he shall assign the full fifteen days' pay, or would five days' pay do in that case?


James Layton Ralston: It would be fifteen days.


Stanley Howard Knowles: Apparently the minister
did not quite understand my reason for making reference to his two statements in Hansard. In the statement at page 613 I felt that the minister had laid down as the government's reason for the dependents' allowance the desire to relieve the anxiety of the soldier in the forces. I felt there was some inconsistency between that statement and the one appearing at page 619, because in the second case the minister tried to draw a line between the needs of wives and mothers.


James Layton Ralston: No, not the needs.


Stanley Howard Knowles: At least the minister
pointed out that in practice the wife gets the allowance as of right, whatever may be her economic position, while the mother gets it only if dependency can be established and then to an amount not exceeding $25 per month, which can be reduced if she is making any other money, though this condition does not apply in the case of the wife.


Richard Burpee Hanson: She is
allowed to make $40.


Stanley Howard Knowles: My point is that if the
statement on page 613 is correct and it is the desire of the government to relieve the anxiety of the man in the forces, it should be realized that in thousands of these cases there is as much anxiety over the condition of the mother as there is over the condition of the wife, and I cannot see any reason for making the difference ironclad. I might agree to one difference being allowed, namely that the wife should get the maximum amount as of right while the mother's allowance should be up to a maximum, but at least it seems to me that the maximum should be the same in both cases. Again, I do not see why the mother should1 not have the privilege of earning other income,

even beyond the $40 to which the hon. member for York-Sunbury refers, the same as the wife may.


James Layton Ralston: I believe my hon. friend
is mixing up two things. The relief from anxiety, or some similar term, was the principle laid down in the passage I read from article 98 of the dependents' allowance regulations, but relief from anxiety does not depend on whether the amount is $25 or $35. Relief from anxiety depends on whether the need is relieved; and if the need is relieved by $25 there is relief from anxiety. If the need is not relieved, then the dependents' board of trustees comes in, in any special case of emergency and hardship, and makes a supplementary grant The theory of the assistance to the wife is, I grant, on a little more generous scale; but in each case the board has sought to establish, and they believe have established, a reasonable ceiling for the purpose of seeing to it that anxiety is relieved.
The hon. member for Weyburn (Mr. Douglas) has left the chamber; I wanted to have a word with him about the case he mentioned. But let us say a mother is earning $40. This, with the $25 of dependents' allowance makes $65. In addition, there is an assignment of pay of possibly as much as another $23, giving a total of $88. My hon. friend can see that that is a fairly respectable situation. On the other hand if the mother had no outside income and was not able to do anything it is possible that the anxiety would not be relieved, and in such circumstances the dependents' board of trustees might have to consider any emergency needs specially. The anxiety is not relieved simply by fixing a dollar sign. Each case must be considered on its merits.


Richard Burpee Hanson: In respect of the wife there is the question of marital relationship, which cannot be ignored.


James Layton Ralston: That is so, and that is different from the relationship of the mother.


Mr. MacNICOL:: I should like to present certain facts respecting the treatment of soldiers who have returned from the old country, and particularly those who participated at Dieppe. Am I in order?


The CHAIRMAN:: Does the hon. member's question deal with pay and allowances?


John Ritchie MacNicol: I am asking if I have the right to ask my question. I shall be only a moment or two. I shall not give the names of the men or of the detention barracks they are in.
I fear a certain condition surrounds soldiers who have returned from Dieppe, which may

War Appropriation-Army
not have been handled in the best possible way-and I am not blaming anyone. These men who were on the Dieppe beaches, as was the one I have in mind, and were wounded- the one in point was wounded in three places -may not be as easy to get along with as would be the trainee troops.


James Layton Ralston: And the hon. member would not blame them.


John Ritchie MacNicol: Well, I have been thinking that when they return to Canada they should be put with other men who have served in active warfare. The case I have in mind is that of a young man who, upon returning from overseas was sent to a barracks. Having been there only a few days he found he could not stick it any longer. Apparently his nerves were wrought up, with the result that he went away AW.L. That young man came to see me, and I said to him, "Why are you here in uniform?" He said, "I am away without leave." Then I said to him, "My dear boy, I think you ought to go right back to barracks and report." He replied, "I am now away four days." I pointed out to him that that did not make any difference, that he could not take the law into his own hands, and urged that he report back to his superior officer. The young man did go back, and he was put into the clink for four days. When he got out his nerves again got the better of him, and he went away for a period of sixty-five days, returning to his home in Toronto. Apparently no effort was made to find him. After he had been away those sixty-five days he went back to barracks, and told me that when he returned to barracks his name was written off the rolls. I had suggested to him that he go back and tell his full story. This time he was put into the clink for twenty-eight days.
After that detention-and I shall not say whether it was inflicted rightly or wrongly; I do not know, and I have no fault to findr- he went away again, and stayed away without leave for a further number of days. Upon his return he was put into the . clink for another twenty-eight days. Upon his release he went away again. When I was home I went to see him in barracks, because he had written me a letter. I said to him, "You should not do this. When you get out you ought to act fairly with the officials." "Well," he said, "I cannot stick it; my nerves are so shot that I cannot do otherwise." Then he showed me wounds on his hands, another on the side of his head, and he told me that he had suffered a third, and pointed out that
he could not stand it. I told him I was going to report his case to the officials, and that has been done.
I have mentioned the matter because I have felt that there might be other cases of a similar kind. I do not wish to give this man's name or barracks, but I should like tile minister to look into the matter as presented in my letter and see what can be done when he comes out again on or about March 4 after a total of 128 days' detention. I am only a layman, but I was convinced that his nerves were in bad condition. I have no fault to find with the treatment he has received from the officials. But if this is a condition which applies to other soldiers returning from actual warfare, they should be placed in separate camps and ought not to be in close association with the young men who are coming in, particularly in view of the fact that they do not seem to get along well when they are placed together.


James Layton Ralston: I am advised by the official .sitting in front of me that the hon. member's letter has been received. I believe as a matter of fact this case has already been referred to the medical authorities. My hon. friend is quite right when he points out that this does not seem like the actions of a normal man. I must add that I am greatly surprised that steps were not taken earlier to have an examination made. I can only assume that steps were taken, and that it was felt that this boy was incorrigible- although my hon. friend's description would not lead me to that conclusion. I shall certainly have the case investigated, from a point of view altogether removed from that of disciplinary treatment.


John Ritchie MacNicol: It does not look normal to me.


Mr. NOSEWORTHY:: May I return to the matter of mothers' allowances, and ask two questions of the minister? First, do I understand if the $25 allowance is not sufficient to cover a mother's needs, in the event of her having smaller children dependent upon her, there is a provision under which more than S25 can be paid? My second question is this: Will the minister undertake to reconsider the ceiling price placed upon earnings? This is working an unfairness. The effect is that no mother can take a full-time job, paying $10 a week or more, without losing part of the $25 allowance. There are no full-time jobs for women to-day for which less than $10 a week is offered, although in depression days one might have found that
War Appropriation-Army

condition. The result is that if a mother works at all she must forfeit a part of her $25 allowance. She will see others who work only two or three days a week but who receive the full $25. On the other hand if she works five days a week she must forfeit a part of the allowance. Surely that is unfair. Will the minister consider raising the ceiling on earnings to the point where a mother can work five or six days, if she chooses, and still receive the S25?


James Layton Ralston: I believe it is the other principle with which my hon. friend is quarrelling, the principle of need.


Mr. NOSE WORTHY:: That will take care of it.


James Layton Ralston: If the mother is earning
money and wants to work five days a week- God bless her if she does-and if the principle is based upon need, then the basic condition for dependents' allowance in respect of mothers does not arise-or, at least, it is reduced to the extent that she is earning from other sources. The anxiety of the son is not there, because he knows his mother is being provided for. He knows, in other words, that she is looking after herself, and that the country is making up the difference, to the total of $65, plus assigned pay.
My hon. friend asks me to reconsider this matter. He makes his request of one who is most sympathetic to the mothers of these men. All I can say to him, however, as I have said to the committee before-and it does not mean anything more than I am saying-is that the position of these mothers is always under consideration. When I say it does not mean more than what I am saying, I mean just that; if there are cases or situations which really justify intervention, then we endeavour to intervene.
I should like the committee, if it will, to remember that what we are endeavouring to do is to take the place of the sons with regard to mothers' earnings. The hon. member for Wey-burn referred to a mother, a daughter and a son on the farm, and pointed out that the son had been contributing to his mother's support for many years. I was going to ask him, not to give me the name in question, but to tell me how much a month the son had contributed through the years, and how much the mother was getting for teaching in the school instead of doing the work she did on the farm. It looked to me as if she must have been getting $25 a month dependents' allowance and at least $40 a month additional from the school. In fact I take it she was getting more than that,

because my hon. friend said that she could not get any dependent's allowance at all, having taken a position at the school. She must have been getting at least $65 at the school, and then she was getting her son's assigned pay, whatever that was. I wondered if she was not better off financially under the circumstances than she had been, having regard to the amounts which the boy had been contributing when they were on the farm. We must remember that the country is taking the place of the boy so far as supporting the mother is concerned, but only up to limits which are considered reasonable. However, the dependents' board of trustees is able in meritorious cases to step in and to provide a supplementary grant to that given by the dependents' allowance board.


Mr. BENCE:: I believe I have a still more to the point case than any suggested so far. A man is receiving an old age pension of $25 a month, and his son assigns so much pay to the mother. Both the father and mother are totally incapacitated and are unable to earn any money. Their only income is their old age pension and the assigned pay. The mother is entitled to have an income up to $40 a month, but because her husband is receiving an old age pension he cannot receive a dependent's allowance. There is conflict between the old age pension authorities and the dependents' allowance board. The old age pension regulations provide that if a man has an income, or if there is an income in the family, the old age pension is reduced proportionately. I ask the minister to take up this matter and see if some agreement cannot be reached between the dependents' allowance board and the old age pension authorities in the respective provinces in order that hardships such as this may be obviated. It is obvious that a case of the kind is outside the principles which govern the dependents' allowance regulations.
I should like to say a word or two about dependents' allowances generally, and to draw to the attention of the minister what I think are anomalies in connection with their application. The principles which govern the granting of dependents' allowances are set out in regulation 98, and it is stated that a dependent's allowance may not be claimed as a right. As the minister has put it, the reason for the granting of dependents' allowances is to relieve the anxiety of soldiers who have enlisted. There is another principle involved in connection with the relationship of a man and a woman to which I think the dependents' allowance board should pay more attention.

War Appropriation-Army
I refer to possible legal rights as between the two parties. It seems to me that more attention should be paid to the actual legal rights of a woman. Let me give one case as an example. A man deserted his wife, ran away with another woman and set up a separate establishment. They were living in northern Saskatchewan under circumstances where he did not have any property. It was impossible for his wife to obtain a court order under the provincial jurisdiction. This man had lived with the other woman for three or four years. His legal wife was guiltless, but when her husband enlisted she was unable to get a dependent's allowance. The other woman, of the type commonly described as a common-law wife-I do not recognize the term-was able to get a dependent's allowance. It is true that some adjustment was made under which the soldier assigned a certain amount of his pay to his legal wife, but she could not get a dependent's allowance or anything like what she would have been entitled to if the soldier had not gone away with the other woman.
There are other similar cases. A wife may have a husband who is continually badgering her, and things reach the stage where he no longer contributes to her support. She finally loses her temper and puts him out of the house. He goes away and joins the army. Despite the fact that she has legal rights and could obtain a court order for maintenance, the dependents' allowance board still will not recognize her claim. It seems to me that in considering these cases the dependents' allowance board should depend more upon what are the legal rights of the wife. Like all other hon. members I have had considerable experience with individual cases. I believe the practice is to send an investigator, generally a member of a federal government department, into the community. He makes an investigation and presents a report upon which the dependents' allowance board makes its decision. This practice seems to me to be unfair. Because of an investigation carried on by one man, a woman may be deprived of her legal rights. If a woman is able to obtain a court order against a man, then she should be entitled to a dependent's allowance, and the report of a man appointed by the board to look into her case should be disregarded. The judge sitting on the case is in a position to hear the evidence and determine the rights as between parties.


James Layton Ralston: My hon. friend has given me three cases?


Alfred Henry Bence: Yes. Here is another one along the same line. A wife divorces her husband because he has committed some statutory offence which entitles her to a divorce. She is guiltless but just as soon as the decree nisi is granted the dependents' allowance board arbitrarily reduces her allowance, so that she is receiving less than she would be entitled to receive if she continued in her married state. This condition is brought about through no fault of her own. Her husband has been unfaithful, and the result is that she is left in a worse position than she was before. I suggest that that is an unfair position to put her in. A woman may not feel like going to court to obtain a divorce, because she knows that if she does, the amount she receives will be drastically reduced. The woman may be elderly and not able to earn anything; she may be depending entirely upon her legal rights in the civil courts, and yet the dependents' allowance board rules that she is entitled to considerably less than she would receive if she continued in her married state.
Could the minister give us some information as to the number of cases in which duplicate dependents' allowances have been paid?- that is, where a wife has been receiving more than one allowance because she is married to more than one man. There are one or two other points I should like to draw to the attention of the minister. I understand that this is a general item under which we can discuss matters which do not come specifically under other items.


Joseph-Arthur Bradette: No.


Alfred Henry Bence: Where in the agenda can I discuss general matters?


Joseph-Arthur Bradette: It could only be with the consent of the committee, because we had a general discussion under item No. 1.


Alfred Henry Bence: It was restricted to the particular item. I do not think there is a specific item covering prisoners of war but I wish to ask a question on that. It has come to my attention directly from men who are prisoners of war that they are concerned because, being prisoners of war, they are not entitled to obtain promotion as the years go by, while men who serve in Canada, by sticking to their job, are entitled practically automatically to promotion in the ordinary course of events. I have seen communications from prisoners of war with respect to this matter. I would not say that they feel bitter, but they are concerned because they are kept in statu quo as to rank, while the men who joined up at the same time with them and are back in
82S
War Appropriation-Army

Canada are receiving promotions by being made sqnadron leaders and wing commanders while the prisoner of war stays in his present rank. I realize that no such promotions are recognized by the German authorities, but so far as the Canadian authorities are concerned I think the minister should take into serious consideration whether prisoners of war should not automatically be raised in rank as the years go by, in the same manner as the men in all branches of the services who serve in this country.
I also have a question to ask with respect to the men, and particularly officers, who are ' returning from overseas. I would ask the minister to give serious consideration to the possibility of placing in positions here in Ottawa these men who have been overseas for three, four or five years, and have been retired or returned on account of age or for other reasons. I do not think they should be necessarily discharged, but advantage should be taken of positions available in Ottawa to place some of these men who have served overseas for three, four or five years in posts which have been occupied by men serving in comparative comfort as compared with the men overseas.


James Layton Ralston: Dealing first with the old age pension case raised by my hon. friend, I will look into that. I think he has stated the situation correctly, that the old age pension is taken into consideration as income.


Alfred Henry Bence: It is the other way round. If they took it into consideration as income, that would be only $240 a year, and the mother would be entitled to the dependents' allowance. But the position is this. If the mother is given a dependents' allowance, the provincial and dominion authorities in charge of old age pensions would reduce the old age pension. If it were the other way round, as the minister says, the matter would be simple. It would be only $240 or $300 a year, as the case might be. But the situation is just the reverse, and the mother cannot get anything extra at all.


James Layton Ralston: Even at that I would not throw up my hands. It is the action of the provincial authorities administering the old age pensions which results in the situation whereby both the dependents' allowance and the old age pension are not receivable. But I will look into the matter and see if there is anything from the federal point of view that can properly be done and that ought to be done.


Alfred Henry Bence: In view of the fact that the federal government pays seventy-five per cent of the pension.


James Layton Ralston: But the provincial authorities administer it.
My hon. friend's next case was that in which a man had left his wife to live with another woman, and the wife could not get a separation. I presume she had not the money, or something of that sort. The common-law wife, so called, was receiving a dependents' allowance. I am told that the board have power in such cases to make a grant to the legal wife. But I would point out to the committee that it is pretty hard to blow both hot and cold in this matter. I do not suggest that my hon. friend is doing so. But we have one member saying that we should reply on the principle in the regulations to the effect that this soldier shall be relieved from anxiety while serving, which is really the reason why the country is paying the allowance. Apparently, however, this man was completely relieved from anxiety by leaving his wife and going and living with the other woman. His legal wife's situation is not worrying him in the slightest and his service is not affected at all by the fact that she happens to be in want. I do not know whether the country is called on to provide for the legal wife in this case, but the dependents' allowance board have power to do this in individual cases, under the proper circumstances. Has my hon. friend a particular case in mind?


Alfred Henry Bence: I have a case in mind, but I wish to deal with the principle, rather than with any particular case. The common-law wife has no rights at law to proceed against a soldier for support. She takes that risk when she goes to live with him. I suggest that we should pay more attention to the rights of the legal wife than we are doing.


James Layton Ralston: That is contrary to the principle which was argued for the other night. It seems to me that to-day the discussion is getting into the right groove. The other night I listened to pleas on behalf of those who were absent without leave, on behalf of those who were in detention, and on behalf of common-law wives and illegitimate children. Now we are talking about mothers of soldiers and my hon. friend has put the case of the legal wife. While the fact that the woman is his legal wife does not disturb the soldier's sleep at all or interfere with his service, and while it is true that he has escaped a moral and legal responsibility, the country is being asked to help him-


Alfred Henry Bence: It is a position which hag been determined all through the centuries.


James Layton Ralston: But remember this, that the wife is not in any way worse off because

War Appropriation,-Army
her husband is a soldier. The man my hon. friend speaks of had run away with the other woman before he enlisted. If he were not a soldier she would be in exactly the same position.


Alfred Henry Bence: No. Because the man is a soldier she cannot proceed against him and get an order in the courts and collect, whereas if he were in a civil job she would be able to get an order against him. No money was available at the time the desertion took place. Now the man is a soldier, and the soldier is given protection by the law of the land against the wife's proceeding against him and having an order made against him which will procure some of the money the soldier is earning.


James Layton Ralston: I think my hon. friend is stating the principle rather too broadly. There are actions being brought all the time against soldiers for divorce.


Alfred Henry Bence: An order against a soldier's property cannot be enforced.


James Layton Ralston: Certainly.


Alfred Henry Bence: Can you garnishee his wages?


James Layton Ralston: It is not a matter of gamisheeing. It is a matter of getting a separation order. That brings me to the next case, where the wife left because conditions were such that she could not live with the man any longer, and she got a separation order of some kind. I am instructed that the board will pay attention to that separation order and will pay the amount the man is obligated to pay under that order, first, out of the assigned pay and the remainder out of dependents' allowance up to the maximum amount payable under the regulations.


Alfred Henry Bence: I may not have put the
position as clearly as I intended to. In that particular case there was no court order. The wife was in a position where she would have to apply to the court for judicial separation which, as the minister knows, is a rather expensive piece of litigation. She was not in a position to do that. My suggestion is that the dependents' allowance board should take the position that until the husband has paid the minimum of the court's order the payment should be made notwithstanding.


James Layton Ralston: I think my hon. friend is putting a pretty heavy burden on the dependents' allowance board. That is really trying a case of marital relations between a husband and his wife.


Alfred Henry Bence: They do that, anyway.


James Layton Ralston: They do on the question of whether husband and wife are living together, but apparently not on the question of
whether the husband has deserted the wife or the wife has deserted the husband. On the question of paying the wife's dependents' allowance when the husband has deserted the wife, the situation as I understand it is, if a separation order is made the dependents' allowance board pays the amount which the man is obligated to pay. I am instructed further that there are, shall I say, escalator clauses which permit payment to be made in what are considered to be meritorious cases. I come back to this. I am assuming my hon. friend1 is right; that conditions are perfect in every way. The wife's position is no different from what it would be if the man were not a soldier. My hon. friend asked another question which had to do with duplication of the wife's allowance.


Alfred Henry Bence: There was another question before that, the question of a wife divorcing her husband.


James Layton Ralston: I thought that was a case in which a separation order was obtained, or at least where an order for alimony was obtained-[DOT]


Alfred Henry Bence: The point I made was that the dependents' allowance board put a ceiling on it which is considerably lower than what she would be entitled to if she were living with her husband.


James Layton Ralston: The dependents' allowance board does not necessarily carry out the order to the full extent.


Alfred Henry Bence: They will not pay the full
order of the court.


James Layton Ralston: As I understand it, they do not pay the amount which the husband1 is obligated to pay under the alimony order up to the amount of the dependents' allowance and assigned pay.


Alfred Henry Bence: I can produce correspondence with the dependents' allowance board which says that is not so.


James Layton Ralston: I shall appreciate seeing
that. These are the instructions. I shall be very glad to get the details of the case, if that is not so.
My hon. friend spoke of cases in which the wife's allowance has been duplicated. He asked for the number. I cannot tell him the number. I can tell him, however, that the total amount of overpayments, on all counts, is less than one-twelfth of one per cent of the amount of money paid.
My hon. friend raised the question of prisoners of war. I am very sympathetic to that, as a matter of fact. What is done in so far as prisoners of war is concerned is that acting
War Appropriation-Army

ranks are confirmed. Up to date there has been no provision for promotion. I shall look into that matter further.
My hon. friend referred also to officers returning from overseas and retired on account of age. He asked that they be not discharged but be put in places of men here who could be sent overseas.


Alfred Henry Bence: That consideration be given to some of those officers, at any rate.


James Layton Ralston: I say to my hon. friend that we act on that basis constantly. If my hon. friend has any cases in mind I invite him to bring them to my attention. I do not want him to go too far in my department, but I shall be very happy indeed to receive any suggestions in regard to any cases of that kind, where he thinks a man returned from overseas can handle a job that somebody else is doing. That is exactly what we are looking for all the time. I know some people are sceptical about it, but I believe the committee will believe me when I say that men doing national defence jobs are just as anxious to get overseas as the cases that have come to the attention of my hon. friend. We are not keeping them from going overseas. Every man who comes up for appointment has a limit on the time during which he can hold the appointment. I am talking, of course, of men of the age and category for going overseas. He goes overseas whenever the opportunity offers itself. We do give them a certain amount of training here, and we do keep them here for administrative work. That applies particularly to ordnance work.


Alfred Henry Bence: I was thinking of positions held by men who are in a category which would entitle them to go overseas. They are allowed to continue in their positions, and I think those positions should be held by men who come from overseas. They should be given the opportunity to fill some of those jobs.


James Layton Ralston: I say to my hon. friend that every time I initial an appointment-I do not initial in all cases, particularly junior positions-both the military secretary and the adjutant-general who look at it first know that I look first to see whether or not the man is fit for overseas service. If he has not had overseas service I make inquiry as to why and raise immediate question as to why recommendation is made.


Mr. MAYBANK:: I wish to express agreement to a certain extent with what I understand to be the principle enunciated by the last speaker. I believe it would be better for the dependents' allowance board to be given authority to pay attention to and be guided by

the rights of the wife, as between her and the husband. I realize the overriding principle in connection with these cases is that of freeing the soldier's mind from worry; but in the great majority of cases there is no violence done to that by recognizing also the rights of the wife with respect to the soldier. I am not suggesting that the dependents' allowance board give no attention to that, but I should like to bring to the attention of the committee the fact, as I believe it to be, that there is a tendency on the part of the dependents' allowance board to get away from recognizing the wife's rights as much as possible. I do not mean that it is done all the time. It has seemed to me in the last year and a half that in dealing with questions where there was something in the way of a dispute between husband and wife the dependents' allowance board was moving with much greater reluctance than seemed to be the case before. Of course I speak only from my own experience. It may not be in accord with the experience of other hon. members. I have seen a sense of tightening up on the part of the dependents' allowance board. I wish to draw to the attention of the committee two or three cases which have passed in front of me. I do so only for the purpose of citing them as typical of several. I am not interested in taking up the time of the committee with any particular case; I refer to it only as a type in order to illustrate the more or less mild complaint that I am making at the moment.
Before I mention the cases I wish to protect myself against you, Mr. Chairman, and the committee thinking that I am very critical of the dependents' allowance board and that I have had a bad experience with them. That is an impression I would not wish to convey because the contrary is the fact. I find in general that the dependents' allowance board are excellent people to get along with. They are doing an extremely fine job, but I think it would be a good thing if some directive could be given to them by the minister in connection with one or two matters.
May I illustrate the difficulty by giving the following case? A man and his wife got into trouble, the one with the other. They separated and had a case in court. The man was not working. There was no possibility of making an order against him for maintenance for the wife. The only thing the court could do in the circumstances was to give an order of separation and to give the custody of the child of the marriage to the wife. That having been accomplished, the husband departed from the neighbourhood for some little time at any rate. Later on he was found to be in the army. Of course, the wife always had the

War Appropriation-Army
right to apply for maintenance from this man, if, as and when she could catch up with him and he was in a position to maintain her. No order was given, for the simple reason that there was no use giving an order to get blood out of a stone. But when he is found in the army application is made for two things, the wife's maintenance and the child's maintenance. The dependents' allowance board follow the procedure whereby a soldier in such a case can be required to make an assignment. I think it is called D.A.B. form 14. This woman demonstrated the soundness of her position and the forms were filled in. This is many months ago. It was made perfectly clear by a certified order of the court that this was a proceeding between husband and wife, where they were both present and both represented by counsel. It was not a case where a wife sues her husband after he has enlisted and gets an order ex parte. They fought it out in court and she established her position. The custody of the child was granted her. She has the child and is supporting it.
The procedure that was adopted was to endeavour to get the man to make an assignment, but he said he would not make an assignment. Apparently no further pressure was put on him, on behalf of the wife or the child, to make an assignment, except this. He said, "I will make an assignment in favour of the child if you put that child in such-and-such an institution". There the dependents' allowance board stood still. They said, "He will make an assignment if the child is put in such-and-such an institution", and that is as far as the woman can get. No dependent's allowance is paid either for her or for the child.
The case with respect to the child is unarguable. They fought out the question where the child ought to be; they were both present in court, and the court decided where the child should be. But this lad takes the position that he will pay the allowance for the child, which he has admitted he ought to pay, only if they will do something different from what the court ordered on behalf of the woman. I am giving this as typical of some others, and I suggest that such a case requires some direction either from the minister in charge or from some other person on the government benches. I am quite sure of the facts. I am not stating anything hearsay; what I have said is absolutely correct. There is not the slightest variation from what is factual.


James Layton Ralston: As I understand the situation, an application was made for allowance for the wife and child. The board said, "You must have an assignment of pay in order to found that application". The man said, "I
am not going to make any assignment of pay". Finally he said, "I will make an assignment conditional on one thing, namely, that the child shall be put in a certain institution or school". The board did not treat that as an assignment. The wife does not accept that condition, I suppose, while the board on the other hand refuses to order a compulsory assignment. Is that the condition?


Ralph Maybank: Yes, but there is one important step left out in the minister's repetition of what I stated or intended to state; I may have left something out myself unintentionally, though I do not think I did. The board made it clear that the power resided either in them or in some other arm of the service, through which they would work, to force an assignment from the man, and it was that action of the government agency upon which the woman relied. She relied upon the assistance which the board could give her, and indeed it was the board that pointed out that it would be done. I was told that. But they did not follow it through. That is one very important point that the minister did not state.


James Layton Ralston: I stated it the other way, that, the woman having refused to consent to the conditional assignment which he had agreed to give, the board refused to make an order for an unconditional assignment.


Ralph Maybank: I am not quite sure that we are at one yet. The steps are these. There is an application to the board, showing the board that she is resting under the benefit of a certain court order; the board make it quite clear that they have power to force an assignment and will undertake to do so, and they get in touch with the officer commanding with a view to doing that. But when the soldier makes answer to the king's officers that he will make an assignment on such-and-such a condition, the board say in effect- they do not put it down this way in black and white, but they say it by inference: "If you will place that child in the institution we will see that you get the allowance for it". I have not pressed the case with regard to the wife's own allowance because there is a little more argument there, and I do not want to press anything that is not open and shut; but with respect to the child, there can be no argument that a man is required to support his own child. Probably we are completely at one now.


James Layton Ralston: Did the husband give any reason for imposing the condition?
War Appropriation-Army


Ralph Maybank: No reason whatever, though I may say that the dependents' allowance board did for its own purposes effect a very careful investigation into the life of the young woman. There was a real examination of that sort, something which I am sure every person will agree was quite the proper thing to do, and the result of that examination was entirely to the credit of that young woman. I think that is what the minister had in mind. No problem of that sort arises at all.
Another sort of difficulty I have come across from time to time involves also a domestic problem. A soldier marries a woman who already has one or two children by a former husband, or at any rate she has them whether by a former husband or not. It is perfectly clear that under provincial law that man marrying that woman with those children is responsible for the children of his wife just as he is responsible for the childen of himself and his wife. I find this curious development now, that although the soldier is admittedly liable for the upkeep of these children and is perfectly agreeable to maintaining them-whether he is agreeable or not he is liable at any rate -the board are now saying, "We won't give you dependents' allowance for the children of your wife unless you go through the procedure of adoption". Very often, and I think probably in the great majority of cases, the husband is quite agreeable to adopting the children, though I can conceive many instances in which the mother might not desire to have that done. But it does not make any difference whether or not one is agreeable; there is no reason why the dependents' allowance board should say, "We know you are liable for the maintenance of these children, but we will not grant any allowance for them unless you go through the courts in your province and become the foster father". That was not the situation formerly. I know of instances where it was suggested that the man should become the foster father-this was some three or four years ago-but he was told that he did not have to go through that procedure in order to have this allowance paid. I have come across two or three cases of that kind. Knowing what the practice was in the past, therefore I was greatly surprised recently to find that the board would not give these allowances unless the procedure I have mentioned was gone through, and I submit there is no reason why that should be the situation. I believe a directive should be given to the dependents' allowance board that in cases such as I have mentioned the allowance should be paid, so that the matter may be settled on proper legal grounds. There is no use in having one law with respect to liability while we follow a completely different course.

There are other typical cases which I wanted to bring to the attention of the committee. I cannot do so at present because in a very short time I must get away to attend a committee meeting, but I should like the opportunity of presenting further cases a little later on.


James Layton Ralston: If my hon. friend has to leave I should like, before he goes, to say a word or two with respect to each of the cases he has mentioned, and I understand what he has said, namely, that he regards them as type cases. I am not so sure that the first would be a type case; I should not think that type of case would occur very often. I think my hon. friend is right in connection with the second case; there is a principle involved in connection with the requirement that the child should be adopted.
With regard to the first case, I should like to examine into it. I am sure my hon. friend knows far more about the circumstances than I do, and I am sure he has stated all the salient facts that he thinks are necessary; but as I see it from the statement he has made there must be some reason why the dependents' allowance board did not exercise what is, after all, a discretion; that is to say, why they did not decide what allowance should be granted and the number of days' pay per month which should be deemed to be compulsorily assigned for the benefit of the dependent. That can be done under article 100 of the regulations, and I shall have to find out from the board why they did what they did, and ascertain whether or not there is need for any change in the regulations. I wish to say that I have never yet given a directive to the dependents' allowance board. I think it is a wrong thing to do, because it seems to me that if the board has a discretion it should be allowed to exercise that discretion, while on the other hand if you intend to make a provision mandatory you should do so.


Ralph Maybank: Will the minister permit me to say that I am not suggesting at all that there should be a directive in a particular case; I should like to make that perfectly clear. Sometimes, however, we get type cases, which may indicate the need for some change in the law or the regulations, and that was what I had in mind. I was not advocating any interference with the board.


James Layton Ralston: I realize that. It seems to me, since we all have to read these regulations, that it would produce a serious situation if hon. members or others interested in dependents' allowance came to read the regulations and were not aware that some directive had been issued which was really interpretive of

War Appropriation-Army
the regulations and which to some extent at least substituted the minister's discretion for the discretion conferred upon the board. I would rather see a regulation made mandatory if it is a case where mandatory action is required. I think the same thing applies to the second case referred to by my hon. friend. In that connection I should like to read, for the benefit of the committee, article 97 (e) of the dependents' allowance regulations. It will be remembered that my hon. friend said this soldier married a woman who had two children and the soldier thereby became legally responsible for the maintenance of those children.


Richard Burpee Hanson: Is that the law in all the provinces?


James Layton Ralston: That would depend entirely upon provincial law; in some provinces it might be so and in others it might not. In section 97 (e) the regulations provide that the definition of the word "dependent"-
-shall, at the discretion of the board, include a child, even though not legally adopted, providing a married applicant has assumed in his own home the care and maintenance of said child for a reasonable period prior to his appointment or enlistment, during -which period he has continuously wholly maintained such child and was so maintaining such child at the date of his appointment or enlistment, and continues to do so after his appointment or enlistment.
The important words in that provision are "at the discretion of the board". Apparently the board exercised its discretion and decided not to grant the dependents' allowance in this particular case unless the man legally adopted the children. I do not know why that was done. That was why I said I agreed with my hon. friend that this was a type case. It may be that in this case there should not be discretionary but mandatory provisions; I shall have to inquire into the matter before I can give any opinion that would be worth anything.


Norman James Macdonald Lockhart: I do not wish to bring particular cases to the attention of the minister, but I think it will be helpful if the minister can clarify matters of policy in one or two instances. At the outset I want to say that I could bring many cases before this committee; I have had many cases before the dependents' allowance board, and it has been my experience that if all the details are laid before the board they try to interpret the regulations as fairly as possible. I know they have been very lenient in many matters I have brought to their attention, and have done their best to straighten them out satisfactorily.
I have in mind a matter of policy in connection with the power of the regional board of trustees with respect to mothers of 100-53
soldiers overseas. As I understand it, these regional boards have power to deal with such cases, and I should like to inquire whether there is any limit or ceiling upon what may be done for a mother. The second point I wanted to bring up is in connection with soldiers' wives. In the beginning of the war soldiers' wives who were receiving dependents' allowances for themselves and their children were restricted in the amount they might earn. Later on I believe the regulations were changed, but in the beginning a soldier's wife could not earn more than a certain amount of money.


James Layton Ralston: I am advised that this limitation applied only where the money was received from some public authority, but that the wife could earn any amount while employed in a private capacity.


Norman James Macdonald Lockhart: There was some conflict of opinion in the case I have in mind, but I think the point is pretty well established now.


James Layton Ralston: I was sure my hon. friend would want me to correct him on that point, because what I have said constitutes a serious limitation on the statement he made.


Norman James Macdonald Lockhart: I assume that at present, if a soldier's wife has special training, and some service to which she may apply herself, particularly in connection with the war effort, there would be no limit to her earnings, and she would still receive the whole of her dependents' allowance. Would the minister explain why the policy of his department is not to allow the same latitude to the mother? I should like to have that cleared up definitely.


James Layton Ralston: I understand there is a limitation on the wife's earnings to the extent that if she is earning more than 83,000 in the civil service her separation allowance is affected.


Norman James Macdonald Lockhart: I understand that.


James Layton Ralston: An amendment was made last year which permitted that extra earning. Outside of that, however, there is no limit at all. I have explained a number of times, and I can only repeat to my hon. friend that in the case of a mother, as distinguished from a wife, both in these regulations and under the Pension Act of 1917 the mother has been placed in a position different from that of the wife. The principle has been, as I tried to enunciate a short while ago, that in respect of the mother we are simply trying to take the place of the son, with regard to support, whereas in respect of the wife the country pays the amount for which provision is made, regardless of whether or not the wife needs it.

War Appropriation-Army


Norman James Macdonald Lockhart: I understood that before. My understanding is that under no circumstance is that latitude given to the mother. I could cite certain extenuating circumstances, but there would be no necessity to detain the committee by such procedure. The fact is that the mother is definitely restricted, despite any circumstance which might obtain in any given case. It is a definite restriction.


James Layton Ralston: That cannot be so. The circumstance to which my hon. friend has referred is the very circumstance which the dependents' board of trustees would take into consideration in deciding whether or not a mother is in need. To answer my hon. friend's question directly, one could say that if there was a case where a mother had no need, then there are no circumstances which would give her any amount.


Norman James Macdonald Lockhart: That is clear.


James Layton Ralston: And by "need" I mean a need, having regard to the necessary comforts.


Norman James Macdonald Lockhart: There is another question which has not been answered, in connection with the regional board of trustees, dealing with mothers. I understand the board is allowed a certain latitude in those cases.


James Layton Ralston: The regional committees, as I understand it, are given a limit for direct immediate grants which may be necessary in any emergent situation. They do not even have to refer it to the board itself.


Mr. HOMUTH:: But there is a ceiling on it?


James Layton Ralston: Yes, there is a ceiling for the regional committees, but in the case of grants by the dependents' board of trustees there is no ceiling.


Norman James Macdonald Lockhart: What is the ceiling in
the other instance?


James Layton Ralston: It is $35, without reference to the board.


Clarence Gillis: I wish to discuss this matter respecting the position in which the mothe; who seeks employment is placed. I do not think it is possible to lay down any hard and fast regulations with regard to these allowances. There are many different cases which can crop up, each of which may have different angles. To my mind, before there can be complete satisfaction the dependents' allowance board will have to be given administrative latitude where extenuating circumstances are shown. If the discussion has shown anything surely it has thus far shown that.
I believe the mother who has some earnings is definitely discriminated against. The minister makes the statement that the allowance is established on the basis of replacing what-

ever earnings a son may have had, or what he may, prior to enlistment, have contributed toward the support of his mother. That is not a fair premises from which to work, because prior to enlistment employment conditions were such in this country that the great majority of these young men, on account of lack of employment, were not contributing anything.
In my opinion the proper light in which to view the situation would be that of present employment possibilities. We would decide what a boy would be contributing, where the mother now seeks to augment her income. Many of these mothers are placed in the position where they must maintain homes. I have in mind a case where the father is incapacitated and has no earnings. There are two or three small children, and the only income the mother has is the $25, and the allowance granted' by the board by virtue of assigned pay. At the outside it does not exceed $50 a month. In order to support the home the mother is obliged to -take work.
One case I have in mind is that of a mother who works as a waitress at one of the local airports, and receives approximately $S0 a month. Prior to enlistment the son was employed, and was maintaining the home. Her allowance is cut off on the ground that she is earning more than the ceiling permits.


James Layton Ralston: No, not what the ceiling
permits; with respect, I suggest my hon. friend is putting that incorrectly.


Clarence Gillis: If she earns more than a
certain amount a month-$40, I believe it is- no allowance is indicated.


James Layton Ralston: No. If she is earning over $40, the amount by which her earnings exceed the $40 is deducted from the dependents' allowance. But that does not affect the assigned pay.


Clarence Gillis: She is permitted to have an income of $65 a month.


James Layton Ralston: Plus assigned pay.


Clarence Gillis: That is the decision which
was made in the case I have in mind.


James Layton Ralston: I am instructed that if
the facts are just as the hon. member has set them out, the decision was not correct. This is what we find in section 102 (c):
102. No allowance shall he granted . . .
(c) To a person, other than those entitled to receive allowances under paragraphs (a) and (b) of article 101, who has income (from any source other than pay assigned by sons who are serving in the naval, military or air forces of Canada) greater than $65, but if the person has income less than $65, any allowance awarded together with such income shall not exceed $65.
That is apart from the assigned pay.

. War Appropriation-Army


Clarence Gillis: The case I have in mind was on the ground that she was exceeding the amount permissible under the regulation.


James Layton Ralston: Was the dependents' allowance cut off entirely?


Clarence Gillis: Yes. I do not think, in view of the many ramifications connected with allowances, that we should have hard and fast regulations. Every case cited in the house has had merit, and in order to have any kind of satisfaction it is my view that the board will have to have more administrative latitude. It is not possible to draft hard and fast regulations. In this particular case where a home is being maintained I do not think the earnings of the mother should be restricted by the regulations. I realize that a blanket order cannot be made that the government will pay sufficient to maintain a home regardless of the income of the family, but where circumstances exist such as those I have described I think the board should be given some latitude.
Another matter to which I should like to. refer has to do with those cases where soldiers get into difficulties overseas. Under the regulations the allowance is paid for six months, and if a man gets into trouble with the military authorities he may be restored to his former status later on. I am referring particularly to the soldier in England who may have some difficulty with the civil authorities and receive a prison sentence of from eighteen months to two years.
In the case I have in mind the sentence was eighteen months. In this case the wife was notified that her allowance would be cut off at the end of six months, which would leave her without any allowance for a period of twelve months. I understand that a man such as this is automatically discharged from the service. That is not a nice prospect for a wife to face who has a family to take care of in Canada. She is to be put on her own resources after a certain period. If that man were in Canada there are ways and means of taking care of the woman and helping her out with her family obligations, but because the soldier is in England she is cut adrift without any assistance after the six months period. I do not think the wife and family in Canada should be forced to pay for any trouble the husband may get into in England. We have some responsibility for that family. I am not going to suggest what it should be-I have my own opinion-but I leave this with the minister, so that he may take it up with his officials and see if some relief cannot be given to families who find themselves in circumstances such as I have described.
The next matter I should like to deal with has to do with trades pay. I understand that 100-534
the regulations are not working as satisfactorily as we would like to have them work. Some of us who went through the last turmoil will remember that for twenty years we carried on a fight for tunnelers in particular in connection with trades pay. I have received several letters from men who were overseas and who claim that they have worked at occupations which entitled them to trades pay. They have returned to this country and have been discharged from the service, but up to date they have not received the trades pay which was promised them at the time. The same complaint is made by men serving in Canada. They say they have taken the necessary trades tests but that trades pay has not been paid as yet. I realize that this matter is pretty much in the hands of the commanding officer and that certain recommendations must be made by him, but there would appear to be considerable laxity.
I should like to cite another case of a soldier with foster parents. I have taken this case up with the department. This boy was taken by foster parents when he was six months old and raised to the age of twenty-two or twenty-three years. Apparently no legal adoption papers were taken out. The boy has made a good record in the service and has been promoted to a fairly high position. He made application for a dependents' allowance for the parents who gave him the opportunity to grow up and serve -his country, but the claim has been disallowed because no adoption papers were taken out. There should be no doubt about a case of this kind. The parents who have raised such a boy should be entitled to the same consideration that is given to a mother under similar circumstances.


James Layton Ralston: Was the boy supporting the foster parents?


Clarence Gillis: Yes. The department rendered a decision against this case.
Another matter to which I should like to refer concerns the notification sent to the next-of-kin when a soldier is killed overseas. In many cases insurance has been carried by the soldier, and his widow or mother make application to the insurance company. I know of cases where the next-of-kin have had to wrangle for months with the insurance company before the insurance was paid. It was claimed that there was no official notification of death from the Department of National Defence. The insurance companies do not accept a telegram as official notification; they say they must have an official death certificate from the department. I took up one or
War Appropriation-Army

two cases of this kind and they were attended to, but the department should send out some form which would be acceptable to the insurance companies.


James Layton Ralston: The hon. member began his remarks by saying that there were so many different kinds of cases and such diverse sets of circumstances that it was impossible- I think he rather indicated that-to have hard and fast regulations to govern such cases. We do have to have regulations. We do have to have some principles laid down and some rules to guide the dependents' allowance board. The hon. member said that there should be some administrative latitude where there were extenuating circumstances. I have read some sections to-day which I think indicate pretty clearly that there is administrative latitude and in great degree. In extenuating circumstances the board has the discretion to give special consideration. In order further to extend those principles of equity we have established the dependents' board of trustees. This is another body which also has wide discretion in connection with cases considered to be meritorious. I should like to refer the committee to two sections in the dependents' allowance regulations which indicate the extent to which the board has discretion to exercise the administrative latitude to which my hon. friend refers. I refer first to proviso (vii) of article 101 on page 15 of the pamphlet, "Assigned Pay and Dependents' Allowance Regulations," which states:
In dealing with applications for allowances for "other dependents relatives", described in clauses (i), (ii), (iii) and (vi) of subparagraph
(c)	of this article . . .
Those clauses provide that "other dependent relatives" shall mean: (i) widowed mother or widowed foster mother; (ii) mother or foster mother whose husband has deserted her; (iii) mother or foster mother whose husband is alive but totally incapacitated; clauses (iv) and (v) refer to mother or foster mother having two, or three or more sons in the forces, and (vi) applies to father or foster father whose wife is dead. Proviso (vii) then continues:
. . . an allowance may be granted to such dependent relative provided that, in the opinion of the board, such relative is in a dependent condition and that the applicant has contributed wholly or to a substantial extent to the maintenance of such relative during a reasonable period of time immediately preceding enlistment; provided further that, even where the applicant has not actually so contributed, the board may in its discretion make a special allowance (not in any case, exceeding the maximum amount specified in subparagraph (e) of this article) in a ease where, in the opinion of
[Mr. Gillis.l
the board, the applicant would have so contributed but was prevented from doing so by circumstances beyond his control.
That is a fairly wide section to allow the board to take in dependents who are not included in the regular provisions of the act.
Let me refer now to article 119 of the regulations, which is even wider in scope and can be regarded as a superstructure built on all the regulations. It says:
Notwithstanding any provision of these regulations, whenever the board is of the opinion that a state of dependency exists-
A "state of dependency" does not mean only full dependency but also includes partial dependency:
-and that the granting of an allowance is in the public interest, but the board lacks authority to make an award, it may make a recommendation to the treasury board, and if that body concurs, the matter shall be decided by the governor in council, but no such grant by the overnor in council shall be construed as roadening the terms of these regulations. [DOT]
That is another article in the regulations, and in addition there is the dependents' board of trustees. So that I find it difficult to see how we can widen the terms of the regulations themselves and at the same time keep any principles on which all of us can work, least of all the board, if we go farther than the regulations which already confer so much discretionary power.
My hon. friend referred to one other matter, the question of mothers. I wish to make myself clear on this because my hon. friend took something that I said as indicating that the country would provide only the amount which the son had been contributing at the time he was supporting the parent. He said that I had said it was only a replacement of the son's contribution that the country was paying. I did not intend to convey that impression. It is not any replacement of the son's contribution so far as the amount goes. But the country does say, even if the son was not contributing at all to the parent's support, the question of an allowance may be given consideration. I want to point out that all that is required in order to qualify a widowed mother to receive a contribution from the board is to show that the officer or soldier was her sole or partial support. Even if he contributed only partially-I do not mean one dollar a month or something like that-the board may pay an allowance and need not limit its contribution, as I understand it, to the actual number of dollars which the mother lost by reason of the soldier going into the army. The board can say: We will pay in case of need up to $25 a month to the mother notwithstanding the fact that the son may

War Appropriation-Army
have contributed only five or ten dollars a month. 1 mention the point so that the committee will not get the idea that the allowance is just a meticulous replacement of the son's contribution and that nothing more can be provided. Whatever is granted must be within the limit set out in the regulations.
My hon. friend came back to the detention cases to which he referred the other night. I have every sympathy with the wife and with the children. I say to my hon. friend that he made a case the other night for this particular set of circumstances, but I do feel that he is not on very strong ground when we come to the matter of dependents' allowance. If the dependents' allowance is being paid in order that the man may be a good soldier, and the man is in detention and is not earning, then if the country pays the dependents' allowance for six months altogether, it seems to me that the country has contributed substantially toward the maintenance of the dependents and toward making whatever provision should be made for the wife and the children. My hon. friend was very careful in his suggestions. He did not say: I am suggesting a particular amount or a particular rule; but he did hope that the minister and his officials would take the matter into consideration to see if better provision could not be made than the provision which is here. I do want my hon. friend and the committee to bear in mind that we have to think of the good soldier too, as well as the soldier who is in detention for eighteen months and is going to be discharged afterwards. The good soldier stays on the job day in and day out; he does his training; he is ready to go overseas and get into the show; he makes his assigned pay, and he knows his wife receives dependents' allowance. It is not much of an inducement to keep him at his job to know that the other fellow who has deserved detention, who is absent without leave, or who has gone to gaol for eighteen months, is having dependents' allowance paid to his wife and children. One hon. member suggested the other night that in addition the country ought to pay the soldier's assigned pay which he would have assigned himself if he had stayed on the job, and that it should not be charged against him when he comes back to his regular duties. I suggest that is not quite a fair deal to the soldier who is trying to do his duty. I know it is tough on the wife and tough on the children, but at the same time a reasonable amount of consideration was shown them when six months provision was made. Nevertheless, as I said the other night, and I repeat, these matters are always open for consideration. This class of case, and the absent without leave case which
was brought up by my hon. friend and by some other hon. member, I am looking into and will keep before me.
My hon. friend also mentioned trades pay. I will look into cases of that kind at any time and keep on examining them. If a man has not received trades pay to which he is entitled, I am the last to say that that should be denied to him. Quite the reverse. I will try to see that payment is made if entitlement is shown.
Lastly, with regard to the sombre case of the casualty and parents having to make proof of death, if there is anything in that respect that can be done to speed things up, I assure my hon. friend that it will be done. I am cosntantly impressing that on my officers, not only with respect to the formal proof of death for purposes of insurance claims but also that all information with regard to casualties should be given just as speedily and as carefully and as sympathetically as it can possibly be given.


Mr. QUELCII:: On February 15, at page 533 of Hansard I drew the minister's attention to the practice of the old age pensions branch in refusing a man old age pension because the wife was receiving dependents' allowance and assigned pay, in spite of the fact that the wife was investing the full amount of the assigned pay in victory bonds in the name of the soldier. I thought that where the total amount of the assigned pay is being held in trust for the soldier upon his return it should not be taken into consideration in figuring out the wife's income. If the assigned pay were not taken into consideration then the amount of the dependents' allowance itself would not in any way affect the full payment of the old age pension. I should like to draw the attention of the minister to a letter that was written by the deputy minister of pensions to Mr. MacFarlane, director of old age pensions. The letter is dated January 20, and in part reads as follows:
During the time the writer was chairman of the war veterans' allowance board we established the policy of exempting assigned pay where such was placed in trust for the return of the soldier or used to keep insurance in good standing or to meet taxes or payment on property owned by him. Where it is a veterans' allowance case and it was established to the satisfaction of the board that the moneys from the assigned pay were not being used for the maintenance of the parents of the soldier but kept in trust for the soldier himself, such sum would not be taken into consideration.
It does seem to me that the ruling of the war veterans' allowance board with regard to assigned pay invested in the name of the soldier is a good one. There is no 'reason why
War Appropriation-Army

a similar attitude could not be adopted by the old age pensions branch. I would suggest to the minister that perhaps he, in collaboration with the Minister of Pensions and National Health, get in touch with the Minister of Finance to see whether or not this matter could be reconsidered. When I brought this matter to the attention of the minister on February 15, he stated that he would reply on the following day. It no doubt skipped his memory on the following day and I did not have a chance to bring it to his attention.
There is another matter to which I should like to refer. Would the minister clarify the situation with regard to the rights of men receiving their discharge at their own request? As I understand the situation, a soldier receiving discharge at his own request does not receive the rehabilitation grants, namely, one month's pay and clothing allowance. This matter was discussed the other day, but I am still not clear with regard to it. I have three different classes in mind: first, the soldier who is brought back to Canada because his health has deteriorated and who has received a discharge at his own request. I understand that in that case he is eligible for the rehabilitation grant. Second, there is the case of a soldier overseas who receives his discharge on compassionate grounds. As an example let us assume that the father dies and the mother asks that the soldier be brought back in order to run the farm. I understand that in that case the rehabilitation grant is not paid. I have had two or three cases along that line referred to me. The third class refers to the soldier who has not gone overseas but who has had two or three years' service in Canada, and who applies for his discharge on compassionate grounds for reasons similar to the one I just mentioned. Would the minister clarify these three cases?	.
I should like to mention again the question of reductions from the dependents' allowance of dependents in T.B. sanatoria. The minister said the other night that he would be taking up that matter. I am wondering if he has had an opportunity to get any information in that connection. I received three more letters this morning regarding these cases. I hope I can get a reply that consideration has been given to them.
Before I sit down I should like again to mention the question of dependents' allowances, particularly the question of the assigned pay of soldiers serving sentence. I believe in a case where a man is serving a sentence and where the government have the man's body they should be able to get enough work out of him to continue dependents' allowance. If the minister feels that that cannot be done,
fMr. Quelch.]
at least the dependents' allowance ought to be continued and deducted from the man's pay after he has completed his sentence. I think the government should be able to do that in view of the fact that they have full control of the man, rather than to see the wife and the children penalized and put in a position where they have no money. In any event, the government could very well continue the allowance and take it out of the pay of the man when he has completed his sentence.


James Layton Ralston: I think my hon. friend referred to the first point the other night. I confess to him and the committee that I have not had a chance to look into it. If I understand my hon. friend correctly-I did not understand him correctly the other night-he is asking that I take up with the war veterans' allowance board, the Department of Pensions and National Health and the Minister of Finance the question of old age pensions to endeavour to see if possible that the assigned pay can be set aside and used for the purpose of investing it in bonds instead of for the purpose of maintenance.


Victor Quelch: I realize this comes under the old age pensions branch, but I thought, if the minister could get in touch with the Minister of Pensions and they to get in touch with the Minister of Finance, they might be able to get the old age pensions branch to change their attitude.


James Layton Ralston: I shall talk this case over with my colleagues; that is all I can say to my hon. friend. My hon. friend knows that so far as the dependents' allowance board is concerned it is required that the assigned pay shall be used for the maintenance of the dependents; otherwise, what the soldier does is to evade-I am not saying he does it culpably- the provisions which we have for deferred pay overseas. Overseas a man's pay is deferred if he does not assign pay; it is not deferred if he assigns pay. The effect is the same really. He gets the benefit of the money, but instead of deferring his pay he is having it come over here and it is invested in bonds, thereby building up a fund.


Victor Quelch: Under the Veterans' Land Act he is eligible, provided that he has saved enough money to pay down an amount equal to one-tenth. If he has to assign pay to his mother he will not be in a position to save any money and is thereby debarred from that privilege.


James Layton Ralston: The point in assigning pay to his mother is that it is for the purpose of supplementing the dependents' allowance which also goes to her. I say to my hon. friend that

War Appropriation-Army
I shall discuss the matter with my colleagues, the Minister of Pensions and National Health and the Minister of Finance. That is as far as I can go in connection with that case.
As one of my colleagues points out, if the soldier does not send his pay over here it is deferred over there. He has built up a fund and it could be used under the Land Settlement Act.


Victor Quelch: If he did not make an assignment no dependents' allowance would be paid.


James Layton Ralston: That is the point.
The next case had to do with the rights of a soldier receiving rehabilitation grants under three categories. As I understand the rule, he does not get a rehabilitation grant when he is discharged at his own request. If the discharge is at his own request in any one of the three cases mentioned, then it seems to me that the rehabilitation grant under the present regulations would not be payable.


Victor Quelch: I have a letter here which cites the case of Jossul. This man had been overseas for three years. He was returned to Canada on account of his health. He asked for his discharge because he said he had nothing to do. He has now been paid one months' pay and the clothing allowance. That is the only case I know of in which it has been paid.


James Layton Ralston: If it is a case of health, although there may have been a request, he may have been found ineligible anyway and therefore dischargeable and not properly in the service; that is to say, they do not regard that discharge as being at his own request. He would have to go out anyway. The other two cases refer to compassionate grounds, in which the request is, of course, an element. In these cases the rule I have spoken of would, under present regulations, preclude payment of a rehabilitation grant, but would not, as my hon. friend knows, preclude payment of the clothing allowance.
With regard to the sanatorium matter, I find I have given the dependents' allowance board a good deal to think about. The board had what they thought was a very easy way out of the situation, but I am not sure that it is really quite so easy, notwithstanding the fact that both they and I are anxious to meet the same objective. I wrote to the Hon. Mr. Cross, minister of health of Alberta, and told him I had taken the matter up with the board and was seeing it through as quickly as possible. My hon. friend cannot write any more than that to his correspondents. It may be only a little to be able to write; but, if I may
say so with respect, he can send them Hansard to-night so that they will know that he has not been neglecting their interest and that I have taken account of the matter.
With regard to the detention case, I cannot add to what I have said to the hon. member for Cape Breton South.


Victor Quelch: Will the minister give further consideration to the payment of the rehabilitation grant to the man who is discharged at his own request? The man will not be discharged at his own request unless there is good reason for it. Any man who has served for three years is entitled to as much consideration as the man who enlisted one year before the end of the war and has seen only nine months' overseas service. Surely the man with three or four years' service is entitled to the grant. He would not ask for discharge unless there was good reason for his doing so.


James Layton Ralston: I will certainly give the matter further consideration along with my colleagues. My hon. friend realizes, as has already' been announced, that certain matters are now under discussion with regard to rehabilitation and it is impossible to make an announcement at the present time. However, the representations which have been made in this respect will be taken into consideration in formulating measures.


Howard Charles Green: There are two matters about which I should like to ask the minister some questions. The first has to do with the enactment of some measure similar to the Sparkman act in the United States, which is in effect an act to protect the civil rights of men in the forces. As the minister will remember, this subject was thoroughly discussed during the last session. It came up on May 26, 1943, and members from all parties in the house advocated that some such measure should be passed quickly. I understood the minister to say then that the question had been given consideration by a committee, that recommendations had been made and that he hoped to be in a position to take action shortly'. For example, at one stage in his remarks he said:
I can only assure the committee that every study will be made of the matter and that active consideration will be given to it.
That is almost a year ago and, so far as I know, no action has been taken. It does seem to me that the matter is of vital importance to the men and women in the forces. As hon. members know, the Sparkman act contains different provisions which protect the fighting men. For example, it protects life insurance contracts up to the sum of $10,000
War Appropriation-Army

against cancellation for non-payment of premium. It protects the man against foreclosure of mortgages and against cancellation of instalment contracts and also sets a ceiling on interest that may be charged on any loans made to the soldier. It also provides for suspension of action against him in respect of debts and gives certain protection in respect of leases. I think it may be summed up as providing that where a man's ability to perform a civil contract has been impaired by his enlistment the state shall step in and protect him, provided, of course, that there is no bad faith. In other words, if he is able to pay he does not receive protection. It was pointed out during the discussion last year that there is protection of a type given men in some of the provinces.


James Layton Ralston: All now, I think.


Howard Charles Green: Do I understand the minister to say that there is provision of some sort in all the provinces?


James Layton Ralston: I think so.


Howard Charles Green: But there is no standard
protection, and I suggest that the dominion government should provide for at least standard protection. The Americans took this step in 1940 before they were in the war at all at a time when they were raising their forces, and yet, though we have been at war for over four years, we have not enacted any such measure. I would ask the minister to explain to the committee why it is that protection has not been forthcoming during the last year.
The other matter on which I should like to have an explanation has to do with the clothing allowance given men on discharge, and the rehabilitation grant. I propose to say something about these after the dinner recess. My question really mounts to this: Why are these two allowances not adequate?
At six o'clock the committee took recess.
After Recess
The committee resumed at eight o'clock.


Howard Charles Green: Just before the committee rose for the dinner recess I had asked the minister why the government has not yet enacted a measure for Canada similar to the Sparkman act of the United States, under which men and women in the forces are protected in respect of their civil obligations. Then I went on to ask my second question, which was why Canada is not giving an adequate clothing allowance and rehabilitation grant to the men and women of the forces upon their discharge.

As I understand it, the clothing allowance was $35 until about December 1 last, when it was increased to $65. Surely the allowance should be large enough to accomplish its purpose, which I understand is to enable a man who has been discharged to outfit himself with civilian clothes. I do not suppose any hon. member will contend that $65 is sufficient for that purpose. It is not sufficient even in the balmy part of the country from which I come, out on the Pacific coast, let alone being sufficient back here in these arctic wastes. I find it very hard to understand why these young men and women are not given a proper clothing allowance.
The rehabilitation grant consists of one month's pay, together with whatever allowances the man was receiving at the time of his discharge. That, too, is insufficient. We must remember that many of these men have been in the forces for more than four years, and they should be given a grant large enough to afford them a reasonable chance to become reestablished. I know it may be said that provision is made for the training of these young men and women, that they may take certain courses and, while taking those courses, receive certain allowances. I do not wish to quarrel at all with the training provisions; I think they will be very beneficial, but the allowances paid during the training period are also ridiculously small. It may be contended also that these men can get unemployment insurance for a certain time if they are unemployed, "but I suggest to the minister that in the majority of cases our young men and women who are being and will be discharged from the forces merely want to get jobs, to get back to work. That will be the wish of the great majority, and I think they would ask for only a fair amount of help from the government. Probably they would believe that if they could get six months' pay, say, that would be fair. Perhaps not; they might want a greater amount. I see it was suggested by the national council of veterans' associations last December that the rehabilitation grant should be one month's pay and allowances for every six months of service, irrespective of the length of service.
The point I wish to make is that the grant should be such that these young men and women will feel that it is fair. Then their outlook will be friendly and cooperative. They are all good sports. If they received a fair grant, spent it as they saw fit and then, through any chance, failed to become reestablished, I do not think they would blame anyone but themselves. It is so important that these young men and women should believe and be

TFar Appropriation-Army
convinced that they are being treated fairly, and I do not think that is the situation at the present time. Certainly many of them believe that these allowances are not fair; that the government is chiselling, and so on. Not only do many of the men who are being discharged believe that; their friends believe it also, and I must admit that I do.
The outlook of these young men and women is vital to the future welfare of this nation. They are the most important portion 6f the Canadian population at the present time and will continue to be such after the war is over. I say that because of the sacrifices they are making, because they are young and fit and keen and disciplined and trained, and because leaving the forces they do so feeling proud of Canada, feeling proud that they have worn the name "Canada" on their shoulders. I believe the great majority of them have that idealism about their country which comes from serving it and being willing to make sacrifices for it. I believe further that they are prepared to take their full part in the life of the nation, asking and needing first of all only a little understanding on the part of the remainder of the Canadian people, and second, a fair chance to become reestablished. In many cases the effect of the smallness of these allowances, and also the inadequacy of our present pension law-which unfortunately I cannot discuss under this item-is to shatter their vision of a new Canada
That is a most unfortunate situation, and I suggest that the government and parliament must take the lead in remedying it. There is a great need right across Canada for an awakened and determined public opinion with regard to these young men and women. I am afraid that across the nation there is a great deal of indifference about what may happen to them, which reminds me of the indifference with which we all treated the young men who were picked up and sent to gaol during the depression days because they went around shaking tin cans, trying to get enough money to keep themselves alive. We did not like that; we felt that it offended our dignity a bit; but as a people, by and large, we did not rise in our wrath and say, "This thing has to stop. We are prepared to give up anything in order to see that these young men get enough to live on." We did not feel like that as a Canadian people, and I am afraid that as a Canadian people we are not feeling deeply enough now about seeing that these young men and women are properly resettled when they leave the forces. Everyone is busy; everyone is working; there is the excitement of war events every day; men who are being 100-54
discharged now are able to get temporary war jobs, and therefore the people do not see why they should bother.
I am afraid that is the general tendency, and I think it is a tragedy; I think it is something about which parliament should1 take some steps, for in my opinion parliament should give the lead. We need in Canada now-right now, not after the war, though we shall need it then as well-a determination to see to it that these young men and women are resettled no matter what the cost, and that they are given an opportunity to take a prominent part in the life of the nation. We have many problems in Canada to-day, and we shall have far more after the war. They will become increasingly serious, and ive need the help of these young men and women if we are to solve those problems. I believe our hopes for a better Canada are based almost entirely upon those young men and women who are now in our fighting forces.
And so I say, in summing up, that I do not consider these allowances or the present Canadian pension law fair to these young men and women. I believe that this committee, regardless of party lines, should insist upon fair treatment-in fact, upon generous treatment for these young folk, something that is more worthy of our country. If we will insist upon fair treatment I am convinced the people of Canada as a whole have only to be shown the need, and they will follow." They will make every necessary sacrifice in order to see that these young people get a proper start.


James Layton Ralston: I shall not trouble the
committee by going into details in respect of the matters to which the hon. member has referred. He has really used, as the basis of his remarks, two measures, one of which he has said is the Sparkman act which, if I may put it this way, is not a major measure of rehabilitation or relief for ex-service men.
The remaining feature to which he has referred has been the matter of the clothing allowance given to the men on discharge. I share with my hon. friend-and he knows it, and I think the committee knows it, too-a full appreciation of the seriousness and the importance of looking after the men and women of our fighting forces. I can assure him that I am determined-and this is more than words-that every effort which can be put forward by the department over which I have the honour to preside shall be put forward.
First, of course, comes the winning of the war, as has been pointed out time and again. Second, and along with that, is the endeavour to ensure that we bring down and put into effect such measures as will make, not only

War Appropriation-Army

for the peace but for the happiness and security of the men and women who will have made victory possible. I say to my hon. friend when he asks for a lead in this regard- and I do not say it in any petty, party way, at all, nor do I suggest that he has done so- I agree that all of us have to be united in taking the lead in order to awaken this nation to the necessity for receiving these men and women some day, and helping to make Canada a country fit for heroes, both men and women, to live in.
I say to my hon. friend this, that we must put first things first. The first thing is to ensure that there is a post-war; that is to say, to ensure that there may be an end to the war, and to ensure that it is a successful conclusion. We are making every effort to make that just as sure as possible. When I made my short statement to the house I indicated the activities of the army in that respect, and I know my colleagues, the Minister of National Defence for Air, the Minister of National Defence for Naval Services, and other ministers who have to do with activities connected with the war will indicate what has been done in their departments to help to make victory certain.
But I wish to remind the committee anti my hon. friend that the government has not stopped there. I have said, and I repeat that sometimes I am concerned with the thought that perhaps there is too much talk and thinking about post-war, about rehabilitation, and about all the things which will come after the war when peace has been secured. We hear that talk when we have not yet reached our goal. At the same time I realize that, as is their right, people are thinking about these matters, and are looking forward to a future which will be brighter than the conditions we find to-night. I realize, too, that the men and women in our forces have similar thoughts. They are not professional soldiers; they are clerks: they are men from the farms; they are men from the factories and men from every other civilian occupation. They are Canadians who have turned aside from their real jobs, that of making Canada a great and prosperous country, to the job of making Canada free and secure. Those young people have a right to expect us to think of their welfare, and to endeavour to make plans for their future.
The government is trying to do that, and it has tried to give the lead to which my hon. friend has referred. That is mentioned in the speech from the throne, although it is not discussed in detail. There are a number of things to be done post-war, in the larger sphere, to which I shall not take the time to

refer this evening. It will be sufficient to mention them: the matter of export markets, the matter of world security and general prosperity.
After his excellency announced that "the winning of the war clearly remains the first of all objectives", we find these paragraphs in the speech from the throne:
Post-war planning falls naturally into three broad fields: preparation for the demobilization, rehabilitation and reestablishment in civil life of the men and women in the armed forces-
I say to my hon. friend that the government is trying to give a lead in that respect. I thank him for his support, and I believe the people of Canada generally will support that objective in every possible way. Then the paragraph continues:
-the reconversion of the economic life of the nation from a war-time to a peace-time basis, and its reconstruction in a manner which will, provide opportunities for useful employment for all who are willing and able to work-
Let me say to my hon. friend here that I believe I am speaking the mind of the men and women of our forces when I say that they are not as much concerned with the actual amount of a rehabilitation grant as they are with the question as to whether they will be able to find useful employment in this Canada of ours, and where they will get it. The paragraph continues:
-and the provision of insurance against major economic and social hazards.
Then, speaking particularly of the subject to which my hon. friend has referred, we find this paragraph:
A broad programme has already been developed for the reestablishment of veterans of the present war, and for the care of disabled veterans and the dependents of our fighting men and merchant seamen. You will be asked to approve a measure to provide w-ar service ratuities for all who have served in the armed orees, and also measures to supplement the existing rehabilitation programmes.
I refer to these matters because they cover the things to which the hon. member has referred. The matter of the Sparkman act, of which he has spoken, is one for the welfare of dependents. The matter of the clothing allowance given to men at the time of discharge is another matter of rehabilitation. The matter of one month's grant is still another rehabilitation matter. The objective is indicated by the programme I have read. It is indicated there that during this session the house "will be asked to approve a measure to provide war service gratuities for all who have served in the armed forces, and also measures to supplement the existing rehabilitation programme."

War Appropriation-Army


Mr. GRAYDON:: Would that be in one bill?


James Layton Ralston: I cannot tell my hon. friend at the moment. I would say this, that all these matters are being considered and taken into account in connection with these rehabilitation measures. The hon. member will understand that the rehabilitation measures which have already been taken are those which have seemed necessary, as time [DOT]has gone on. If I may say so, there has been [DOT] a remarkable programme. of various items under which men are given assistance in a vocational way in the matter of treatment, in the matter of out-of-work benefits, and in the matter of employment in some particular vocations, but not in all. It is felt that the time has come when that programme should be broadened and when there should be some further announcement and development toward the objective we are all seeking, namely, the assurance of assistance to get back to civil life when the time comes and that employment is provided for all those who are willing and able to work.
I say to my hon. friend that the matters to which he has referred will be studied. They have had and are having attention. I am not saying that they will be what he considers sufficient, but I think he will find, when the house is asked to approve the measures which will be brought down, that they will meet the objective which we all have in mind, not only to recognize but to give assurance to the men and women who are fighting the battles of Canada to-day.
With respect to the Sparkman act, may I say that its principal feature is a provision of moratoria or of some sort of arrangement by which men who have insurance premiums to pay may not lose altogether the benefits of their policies in case they are not able to meet the premiums at the time they come due. A complete study has been made of this whole matter. There is one rather remarkable fact about the lapses in policies which have occurred during the years of war. According to the information we have, these lapses have been less proportionately for the men in the service than they have for the civilian population.


Howard Charles Green: There should not be any lapses.


James Layton Ralston: I think my hon. friend will find that there has been very little request for this particular form of legislation. The situation when premiums are not paid is different in Canada from what it is in the United States. I understand that when a 100-54i
policy lapses in the United States they issue term insurance for the years or months which the cash surrender value of the policy would cover and that there is no provision for reinstatement. As my hon. friend knows, under our system the cash surrender value of a policy that lapses is devoted to the payment of premiums. So long as the cash surrender value lasts the policy is kept in good standing. Whether we should have had a Sparkman act or moratoria before is another matter. I have some opinion on that, but I think my hon. friend will find that the principle of the Sparkman act would be almost impossible of administration now. If policies have lapsed, they have lapsed, and there would seem to be almost insurmountable administrative difficulties in handling the situation in order to secure equitable treatment for holders of these lapsed policies, as well as equitable treatment for dependents.
I mention this to indicate to my hon. friend and the committee the serious doubt as to whether the principle of the Sparkman act would be workable in this country. As my hon. friend knows, the matter of moratoria is, strictly speaking, within provincial jurisdiction. He belongs to a party which claims to be fairly strong on provincial autonomy.


Howard Charles Green: I advocated a standard protection which the dominion would enact so that if the protection in any province did not come up to that standard, then the dominion provision would apply.


James Layton Ralston: A provincial legislature having undertaken to enact a law along certain lines, the dominion walks into the province and enacts a law along different lines on the same subject. That is only one feature of it, but that is one feature which is different in this country from that in the United States. As everybody knows, their division of legislative jurisdiction is different from ours.
When the amount of the clothing allowance was fixed at S65, there were a number of items of clothing which would be retained by the soldier. I think one item is boots, and another is also underclothing.


Howard Charles Green: You could not go very far in civilian life in army boots.


James Layton Ralston: I will undertake to say that when the boys come home they will wear army boots just as long as they can get them. I say that with some assurance. I know a good many civilians would like to have them. The returned soldiers are allowed to retain one pair of boots, their underclothing, their necessaries such as shaving kit, tooth-brush and other items in the hold-all, shirts, canvas
War Appropriation-Army

shoes, socks and gloves. Whether the amount is enough will be considered in connection with the matter of rehabilitation.
The rehabilitation grant itself will be considered in connection with the measures to which I have referred and which are now under consideration by the government. I cannot announce the policy to-night, nor can I announce the details. I say to my hon. friend that a note will be taken of what he has suggested and the whole matter studied. The programme will be brought before the house in due time.


Howard Charles Green: Are we to take it that the government has decided that there is no need of a Sparkman act in Canada?


James Layton Ralston: No; distinctly no. I was indicating some of the difficulties there would be with regard to adopting the principle of the Sparkman act in Canada, and I questioned whether or not it would be as effectual as my hon, friend and I would like it to be.


Howard Charles Green: Would there be any objection to furnishing us with a summary showing the advantages and disadvantages of the Sparkman act as applied to Canada, showdng why it might not be effective in Canada?


James Layton Ralston: That will be discussed when the measure is before the house. At that time my hon. friend will have an opportunity to present any objection or argument he has to offer. I do not think any advantage would be gained at the moment by launching on an argument as to the value of the Sparkman act, having regard to the fact that it w'ould be only one of literally many factors in a rehabilitation programme.


Howard Charles Green: Is some legislation along that line to be brought down?


James Layton Ralston: I can only say that when the legislation is brought down. I am unable to make any announcement as to policy.


Mr. FACTOR:: There is one small problem I should like to submit for the consideration of the minister. A non-commissioned or commissioned officer holding an acting rank is discharged on medical or other valid grounds. The gratuity which he receives is based on his former rank. I submit that when a man is discharged under those circumstances, either he should be confirmed in his rank before discharge or the gratuity should be based on his acting rank. I know of an actual case where a man overseas was killed while holding an acting rank and the allowance paid to his dependents was based on his former rank. This may be a small problem, but it is proving irritating to both the service men and their dependents.


James Layton Ralston: I understand that at least in the case of other ranks, the acting rank is confirmed before the man is discharged.
Mr. CRU1CKSHANK: I should like to take exception to what the minister said about the clothing allowance. A pair of boots might be quite valuable to a farmer in the Fraser valley, but I should like to see a lawyer on St. James street wearing a pair of army boots after the war. I do not think the argument is consistent at all. I do not think anyone in Canada can buy a pair of shoes for less than $7.50 or a shirt for less than $2, and I think I am conservative in those figures. Surely a man coming out of the army who is going to compete in professional life as a doctor or a lawyer will need three shirts; that would be at least $6. Arou cannot get a suit under S35, and where can you buy a hat for less than $3.50 or an overcoat for less than $25? That makes $77. I have every deference for the minister and for the legislation in contemplation, but the only possible place where the rank and file coming out of the army have for their claims to be presented publicly before the department is here through private members. It is all very well to say that a man coming out of the army is to have a carry-all, a suit of underwear and so on. His wife, I suppose, will look after putting the buttons on if he has a carry-all. But a man coming out of the army has to be properly dressed to compete with his fellow citizens, and I do not think that can possibly be done on $65. It is all very well to say that legislation is in contemplation; it was under contemplation when the government allowed S35 per man. This is the only place, I repeat, where the rank and file, the soldiers of my riding who will be coming out of the army, have to bring this up. So much for clothes.
I think that both this house and the Dominion of Canada owe a debt of gratitude to a member of this house who brought to my attention and, I think, to the attention of ninety-five per cent of the members, that a soldier coming out of the army-and this applies to all three branches of the service- was not allowed to keep his uniform. It is very important to me that the soldier-and again I have reference to all three services- should be allowed to keep his uniform, and so far as I have any say in the matter these estimates are not going to be carried until the government, gives a clear-cut decision in the matter. We have been at war for a few years now and I can see no earthly excuse for the Department of National Defence, in all three of its branches, still having under consideration whether the soldier is to be allowed

War Appropriation-Army
to keep his uniform. Surely the government can give a decision in a matter of that kind. They do not need to bring in all their experts to advise them on details. It is a simple question requiring an answer yes or no. Is the soldier to be allowed to keep his uniform, and I mean all three services? I say through you, Mr. Chairman, to the minister that I intend to keep these estimates going until we have a decision in the matter. I do not think it involves any detailed information. Is it the treasury board that is to say whether a man can keep his uniform or not? I ask the minister, before he asks us to pass these estimates, to tell us whether a decision has been arrived at.


James Layton Ralston: I can say to my hon. friend that he need not hold the committee up for one minute, for as a matter of fact the decision has been made that a man in the army, navy, or air force may keep one uniform. Let me tell my hon. friend, who is rather scornful of the difficulties and wants a simple yes or no, that I do not think he quite realizes all the difficulties that are involved. Does he realize that it means that a man who is out of the service and wears the uniform and gets into difficulties is likely to run foul of the provost? There may be a great deal of trouble regarding that very matter. But I am not disposed to cavil at all. We shall do the best we can. I like the idea of giving the man his uniform, not for the purpose of ordinary everyday wear, but because of the sentiment attached to it and for wearing on special occasions. As far as I am concerned, I think there should be some idea of having that rule observed, because otherwise you. are going to have men going to work and doing some job which sometimes may not be a very pleasant one, may be even more or less menial, and then people will say, "See that soldier in uniform working at that mean job." My idea is that the uniform ought to be kept for special occasions, and I think most of the men will feel the same way about it. But I do say that during this time of war when you have the number of men in uniform that we have in Canada, and the number coming back from overseas and being discharged, it will not be an easy matter by any means for those who have to do with discipline in the three services to handle the situation, because you will have men on the street in uniform, some of whom will be soldiers and some not. If my hon. friend thinks a simple yes or no answer can be given, I am afraid he does not realize the implications. However, we are prepared to undertake that every man shall receive his uniform. We shall do what
we can to see to it that the restrictions upon its use are as limited as possible, having regard to the necessity of ensuring that the distinction is properly preserved between men in uniform who are soldiers and men who are not. We shall endeavour to give those who have to do with discipline instructions in regard to the matter. I say to my hon. friend that perhaps we can continue with the discussion in committee now that I have answered his question.


George Alexander Cruickshank: I thank the minister for his explanation. I believe the minister knows what I think about the soldiers. I am glad that the men in all three services, are to be allowed to keep their uniforms, and that out of the discussion arising in this corner this decision has been made.


Mrs. CASSELMAN:: I have had cases of
pay and allowances brought to my attention and I have taken them up chiefly with the officials of the department rather than bring them up on the floor of the house, and I must say that I have had consideration and fair treatment in every case, with the reasons assigned when requests were refused. Of course not everything asked was granted. But I do think conditions with respect to pay and allowances in this war are much better than they were in the last war. Then there were no mothers' allowances and no grants for the children, but we have gradually broadened the basis since the beginning of this war.
I should like to say to this audience composed chiefly of men-I have not worked it out mathematically, but the composition of the chamber must be 99-9 per cent men-that the disabilities that hon. members are now bringing to the attention of the committee are disabilities under which, women have suffered from the dawn of time. It has always been the case that when a man has been sent to prison, or has been A.W.O.L., or has deserted his family it has been his wife and children who have suffered, and when the war is over we shall have to consider giving a little fairer treatment right across Canada to the women and children involved in these cases.
I think the soldier's wife has had a larger percentage of the family's income to spend than the civilian's wife has had down through the years. I do not want to make the share of the family income which the soldier's wife receives any less. I want to see the fairest and most generous possible treatment of the soldier's dependents. I think the new provision for family allowances that is to be discussed this session is something along the line of what I am thinking, where the woman will have more of the family income to handle.
War Appropriation-Army

I should like to say also that since the dependents' board of trustees has been set up I have had far fewer cases brought to my attention. The dependents' board of trustees has been one of the best things the department has set up. This board has been able to handle cases according to need, after investigation. It has been able to give not only financial help but advice, which has been very helpful to those who want it at this time. With the elasticity that the minister spoke of this afternoon to deal with other cases that are brought up, I think we shall have even better results from the dependents' board of trustees.


Mr. SINCLAIR:: The minister announced
this afternoon that other ranks will be permitted to keep their uniforms on discharge. I should like to ask him one or two questions along that line, since I was the first member to bring it before the committee. First of all. how long service must the man have before he is permitted to keep his uniform?


James Layton Ralston: No regulations have been -made with regard to that. I indicated a few moments ago that we must have regulations with regard to it.


John Ewen Sinclair: The decision has been
made that the men can keep their uniforms? 1


James Layton Ralston: Yes.


Agar Rodney Adamson: I should like to bring one or two matters to the attention of the minister. because I think the debate has shown the need for them. I understand that the Whitelaw committee has recommended the doing away with, or has actually done away, with the office of the district welfare officers in the military districts. I think that was a very unwise move, because the district welfare officer is an officer given authority by the district officer commanding. His judgment carries a great deal more weight with the civilian authorities than does the opinion of the auxiliary services themselves. In view of the increasing number of cases that are brought to the attention of hon. members by sold'ers' dependents and by soldiers themselves. I think the district welfare officers should be reestablished. I anticipate that the difficulties will become worse as time goes on. I wish to make that point quite definite. This officer, who is responsible to the district officer commanding, has a very important function to perform.
The second point I wish to make is that a number of soldiers are at present classed as dese:1ers because they have been absent without leave, struck off strength, or lost to their unit

 sometimes for many, many months or even '-cars A case was brought to my atten-'
tion while my own unit was outside Liverpool during the bad blitz. Our headquarters was a transit depot. A number of troops were passing through, and when the blitz was on, these troops, who were not part of the unit, and not known personally to our officers except by name and number, went out and helped the civilian authorities and A.R.P. workers in putting out the fires and removing bomb damage. In Liverpool, and in a number of other cities, there are still air raid shelters and cellars where, because of the lack of workers, there are unidentified bodies which have been sealed in. I wish to ask the minister if anything has been done in that regard. We may have a soldier whom we now class as a deserter who may actually have been killed while engaged in the heroic duty of A.R.P. work during the bad blitzes. That situation was brought to my attention while I was in Liverpool. I do not know how many cases there are. I do not think there would be many, but I believe that there may be some soldiers who are now classed as deserters who may have died an heroic death.
I come back to the case of the soldier undergoing detention and having his dependents' allowance stopped. I do this because I have had some first-hand experience in the matter. While passing through the district depot at Aldershot I spent a day in the Aldershot military prison. I was in good company; I had a member of the cloth with me. This prison is used only for soldiers serving sentences of two years and upwards. I understand it is the supreme military prison in England. In a discussion of the matter with the commandant, the intelligence officer and the psychiatrist it was stated that our regulation was acting as a deterrent to making soldiers out of the Canadians in their custody. They pointed out that the families of the British, the Australians, the New Zealanders and the men of the Royal Marines received dependents' allowance, while our men were discriminated against, and our men were very bitter about it. Instead of accepting training willingly-and I may say that the prison was magnificently run and an excellent institution; it contained some of the most modern equipment and some of the most excellent training instructors I have ever seen were there-the Canadian soldiers in the prison were disgruntled and had a grievance. They were likely to try to escape. When they came out, instead of adopting the attitude, "I will never go back there again but try to become a good soldier," they had a grievance against the army generally and frequently were found to be repeaters. I believe that simply for the sake of the soldier himself and the psychologi-

War Appropriation-Army
cal reaction that he undergoes while serving a prison sentence, some thought should be given to this particular matter of dependents' allowance being paid on behalf of men undergoing detention. That is all I have to say about that particular question, but I think it is an angle that has not been emphasized sufficiently in this house.
When the United Kingdom soldier comes out he is smart and he is very likely to be noncommissioned officer material because the training is good, the rules in the prison are excellent and he receives intensive instruction; whereas when our man comes out he has a. grievance because of the discrepancy or differential in his treatment as compared with that of his brother in arms.
There is just one other point that I wish to bring to the attention of the minister, and that concerns him jointly with the Minister of Pensions and National Health. It concerns the question of hospital allowances. When a soldier or an officer-and it is particularly hard on the officers-is discharged and is sent to hospital, when he is struck off strength he is put on hospital allowance, and the rates which I shall give to the committee constitute a great handicap to the officer undergoing hospital treatment. I should like to quote from the report of the Toronto rehabilitation committee with respect to hospital allowances under P.C. 91.


Ian Alistair Mackenzie: What is the date?


Agar Rodney Adamson: The date of the letter I have here is February 3, but I do not know the date of the report. However, it is some time in January or February. It is the most recent one. I will give it to the minister afterwards. I wish to put the figures on the record to show the serious discrepancy to which officers are subject when undergoing treatment in hospital:
Immediately upon his transfer to the Department of Pensions and National Health, his service pay and allowances, including assigned pay and dependents' allowance, is stopped and he is placed under clause 20 of the regulations of the departmental order in council P.C. 91, whereby he becomes entitled only to the special hospital allowance, which is the same for all ranks, and in the case of a single man, is $44.20 per month less $30 per month maintenance, and in the case of a married man $62.40, with any deduction for maintenance, of which he gets $10 and his wife $52.40 plus $12 for the first child, $10 for the next two children and $8 each for the next three children; provided that if the man and his wife have a private income this is up to $50 a month and if the wife is working and earning $40 per month there is a further deduction up to $18.20 per month.


James Layton Ralston: What is the date?


Agar Rodney Adamson: This was sent to me just the other day from the Canadian legion.


James Layton Ralston: Order in council P.C. 1/602 of January 31, 1944, changed all that.


Agar Rodney Adamson: What are the rates now?


James Layton Ralston: member of the force and his dependents at the following monthly scale, subject to such conditions and regulations as are determined

Former member of the forces		$44 20
Additional allowance for:
Wife	
18	20Person in lieu of wife	
18	20Parent or parents	
15	00First and second child, each..	12	00Third child	
10	00Fourth, fifth and sixth child, each 8	00
Provided that the above rate for a former member of the forces who is in hospital and who has no dependents or other obligations may be further reduced by $30 per month or by such lesser amount as to the department seems right; provided further that in no case shall the special hospital allowance, reduced if necessary as herein provided, be paid at a rate in excess of the rate of pay plus dependents' allowance of which he was in receipt at the date of his discharge.
(ii)	The foregoing allowances may be payable for a period not exceeding the period of service or one year, whichever is the lesser, reduced by any period during which treatment has been furnished under any other class, and in no case shall treatment be furnished beyond a date more than eighteen months subsequent to date of discharge.
(iii)	Treatment shall be granted in Canada only.
Then it provides for men who go to the Department of Pensions. The Minister of Pensions and National Health called my attention to the fact that he tabled that order in council on February 1 as shown in Hansard of this session, on page 63.


Agar Rodney Adamson: I had a letter to-day and that is why I brought the matter up. I understand that the maximum is the pay of lieutenant.


James Layton Ralston: Yes, plus dependents'
allowance.


Agar Rodney Adamson: That is, $195 a month is the maximum irrespective of rank?


James Layton Ralston: It depends on the number of children.


Agar Rodney Adamson: Is this retroactive?


Ian Alistair Mackenzie: 
James Layton Ralston: I can tell my hon. friend that this matter has been examined by the department more than once, and particularly by the Department of Pensions and National Health. It is not a closed matter, and I shall have it looked into again.


Ralph Maybank: What about the officers?


James Layton Ralston: I do not wish to be put in the position of constantly resisting demands with regard to allowances for men in the armed forces, but I do feel constrained to put to the committee the other side of the picture. The position is not that officers are entitled to an issue of clothing. Officers get a clothing allowance at the beginning. It was never intended, I think, that this allowance should cover the full cost of their clothing, but it has been increased so that it does cover the cost of the initial outfit. Now my hon. friend is suggesting that when an officer comes out of the army he should be put in the same position as an other rank, to whom there is a free issue of clothing all the way through, and that the officer should be given a clothing allowance. I say to my hon. friend that he is dealing with two altogether different classes of people as far as pay and allowances are concerned, and at the moment I am not prepared to say that anything can be done along the line he suggests. There also has been quite a bit of talk about the maintenance of clothing by officers, as though an annual allowance should be made for this purpose. An officer is paid at a higher rate than the enlisted man and, at least in my time, the officer maintains his own uniform. As I say, he does get the clothing allowance originally. But, so far as pay and allowances are concerned, there has been no suggestion that he should be reimbursed for the cost of upkeep of his clothing, in addition to his pay and his regular allowances.


Clarence Gillis: I am going to discuss an entirely different matter. This is about the only item under which an opportunity would be afforded to speak about this matter. I shall

War Appropriation-Army
be brief and explicit. I have not had an opportunity of taking it up with the minister's department, although I like to have a decision from that source before discussing any matter in the house.
The question I have in mind is one of discipline, and its application. I intend at some time in the future to go into this matter thoroughly with either the minister or his deputy. The fact is, however, that I happened to be in Camp Borden area yesterday morning and part of yesterday afternoon, and I had the privilege of sitting in on a magistrate's court. I was amazed to find that the Ontario provincial police had brought in a corporal from Camp Borden who was alleged to have committed an infraction of the regulations within the camp area. This corporal was in charge of one of the camp stores, and it was said that a revolver was missing. The provincial police were called in to make an investigation.
The point which arouses me is that that was an offence which took place within the precincts of the camp area. The boy was a clean-cut young fellow of about nineteen years of age and, in my opinion, instead of being taken to a civilian court by the civilian police, and instead of being placed in the hands of a rather tough crown prosecutor, without any representations being made from his unit, he should have been placed in a more favourable position. In this instance he had to hire the services of a civilian lawyer to defend him, and the amazing fact was that at least seven or eight members of his unit, headed by his company commander, and followed by his sergeant-major, his quartermaster-sergeant, and down to one of the troopers, took the stand and gave evidence against the boy. He was alone, with the exception of the civilian defence counsel he was obliged to hire.
The point is that if that young corporal is convicted in a civilian court and is sentenced to a term in a civilian gaol, he is a criminal and is automatically discharged from the army. He leaves the service with the record ol a convict. Having had some little experience in the service, and with an understanding of the experience the minister has had, I think he wall agree that if that is the esprit de corps being developed in that camp area-because I do not think it happens anywhere else in Canada-it does not speak very well for those who are in charge of that camp.
My question is this: Are the people responsible for discipline in that camp administering the policy of the minister's department with respect to an important matter of that kind? There is a lot more to this than what I have said. This is not the only case, but I have no
'Mr. Gillis.]
intention of delaying the committee, or of arguing the matter further. What I have said is based on what I saw myself, yesterday. In my opinion it is a most unfortunate mess. If it is not the policy of the department, then those who have placed the boy in that position should be called to account immediately. And if it is the policy of the department-and I do not believe it is-then I am sorry for the mothers and fathers of Canada who are placing boys of seventeen, eighteen and nineteen years of age under the control of people of that kind. Would the minister say if that is the policy of his department?


James Layton Ralston: I do not think I propose to answer yes or no to the recital of facts regarding what the hon. member has said he saw, but with regard to which I have no information whatever. I cannot say what policy was being administered in connection with that matter until I have the full facts. From what my hon. friend has said, it would seem that the provincial police were seized of the case, for some reason which I do not know, but which may have been as a result of policy in that particular case.
I thoroughly agree with my hon. friend that a young man who is in the army should be defended in connection with a serious offence. But I do say that in connection with civilian offences, offences which are strictly civilian-and I say this straight from the shoulder-I have felt it was much better that civilian authorities should deal with such civilian offences, and that the army should deal with army offences. I have felt very often that discipline in the army to some extent has been rather flouted by the idea that we have had to have sometimes as many as seven men try a court martial, for weeks on end, on account of procedure which is laid down, and which has been in force so long that it is almost like the laws of the Medes and Persians. Then we might have an acquittal, and have the public wondering whether justice had been done, or whether something was being covered up.
With regard to civilian offences. I say to my hon. friend I have rather leaned toward the idea of having offences under the criminal code dealt with by the civilian authorities, even though committed by a soldier. On the other hand, with regard to army offences I have taken exactly the opposite position, because I consider offences such as neglect to the prejudice of good order and military discipline are matters which should properly be dealt with by army authorities.
In this instance I do not know what the case was about. From what the hon. member


War Appropriation-Army
said it would seem to me that this might have been a plain charge of theft; I do not know what else it could be. If it was theft, then I say to him that theft is a civilian offence. These arc cases which I believe the public will be better satisfied to have dealt with by civilian authorities. They are offences against the laws of the land, although committed by soldiers. Courts are set up for that purpose, and it seems to me that they could probably deal with such cases to better advantage. Then no suggestion could be made that the army is covering up something in connection with its own administration.
Before I could give my hon. friend a categorical reply as to whether or not that particular case represents the policy of the department, I would want to know all the facts, and the reasons for what took place. He can be sure of this, that I will know before this time to-morrow just what the circumstances were, and'be prepared to tell the committee about it.


Clarence Gillis: I agree with the minister.


Joseph-Arthur Bradette: I allowed the hon. member for Cape Breton South to put his question, although he said he realized it might be out of order. We have had a general discussion on item No. 1, and we are now on item No. 2, dealing with pay and allowance. It will be readily realized that I must ask the committee to remain within the item.


Clarence Gillis: Mr. Chairman, I have no intention of transgressing the rules of the house, but the minister did say that this item was sufficiently broad to permit of discussion of almost anything. It will be realized that in the matter I have brought to his attention I have touched only a very small part of the situation which exists at that point. I realize that the minister has not the facts, and cannot get them unless he approaches the authorities at Camp Borden. However, as I saw it, the matter was entirely a military one.
A box of revolvers was shipped to the camp. This boy was in charge of the stores and one of the revolvers was found to be missing. There is the provost corps, the unit police and other machinery for investigation within the camp, and I cannot understand why the provincial police were called in to investigate something that happened within the confines of the camp. I am not concerned with the boy being charged with a military offence because that would be something between him and the army, but when he is tried and convicted in a civilian court he is given a criminal record. He is then automatically discharged and he carries the stigma of that
record for the rest of his life. I agree with the minister that anything of a civilian nature should be tried in a civilian court, but anything that happens within the confines of the camp should be handled there.


James Layton Ralston: I do not think the camp area is the thing that is the determining factor; the nature of the offence is more properly the principle which should guide.


Agar Rodney Adamson: Do I understand the minister to say that the new regulations with regard to hospitalization provide that irrespective of a man being a captain, major or colonel, he receives only a lieutenant's pay as allowance?


James Layton Ralston: I think that is right, but I have learned too well that one cannot summarize three or four pages of a departmental memorandum in a sentence or two.


Mr. TUCKER:: The hon. member for Cape Breton South has just brought up a question that I think raises a question which is of interest to this whole House of Commons. He feels that in considering these estimates he is justified in bringing up the case of a soldier who is being tried in a civilian court and asking the minister to answer for what is being done there. He has taken up the time of this committee to discuss such an individual case. If he can do that, then every hon. member is entitled to do the same thing and if they did so, it would take up so much time that our whole system of parliamentary government would break down. I have heard the hon. member say that every case he has put up to the minister has received careful, considerate, generous and sympathetic attention, and there is no reason in the world that I can see why a case like this should not have been taken up privately with the minister. On his own admission it would have received: the same sympathetic attention given to other matters and the time of this House of Commons would not have been taken up in dealing with this individual case.


Mr. NICHOLSON:: On a point of order, what item is being discussed by the hon. member for Rosthern?


Joseph-Arthur Bradette: This goes back to what I said a few moments ago. I thought the hon. member for Cape Breton South was out of order for the moment, but I allowed the question to be put and the minister had to answer. I believe the hon. member for Rosthern is in order now.


Clarence Gillis: He is creating a lot of discussion on this.


Walter Adam Tucker: This is not the first time that the hon. member for Cape Breton South

War Appropriation-Army
and members of his group have brought up individual cases. On their own admission any cases they bring to the minister's attention receive careful attention and I ask them why they bring them up in the house. I think most members of this House of Commons are tired of their bringing up individual cases in this house for purposes which we all understand.


Clarence Gillis: I rise to a question of privilege. I brought up this question to avoid a possible wrong being committed to-morrow, or to offset a possible wrong which may have been committed to-day. I make no apologies to the membership of this house or to any hon. member for taking up the cudgel on behalf of the underdog.


Joseph-Arthur Bradette: There is no question of privilege.


Clarence Gillis: My question of privilege is this-


Joseph-Arthur Bradette: There is no question of privilege raised. You may answer what has been put forward, but it is not a question of privilege.


Clarence Gillis: The hon. member for Rosthern definitely stated a few moments ago that I raised the matter for political purposes.


Walter Adam Tucker: I said nothing of the sort.
I said that the hon. member raised it for reasons which we all understood.


Clarence Gillis: The hon. member is committing an infraction of the rules of the house by imputing motives. I brought this matter to the attention of the minister to-night because I expect that he will now get in touch with Camp Borden and a soldier may be prevented from being designated as a criminal to-morrow, or a sentence of a court may be offset.


Mr. ROSS (Souris):: The hon. member for Winnipeg South Centre raised the question of hospitalization. Where a dependent wife or child of a soldier serving on active service becomes ill and hospitalization is necessary, does the department become responsible? Where a man is on active service I think it is unfair that the municipality should become responsible for the cost of hospitalization of his dependents. Has anything been done to correct this situation in any way?


James Layton Ralston: I would say that assistance in connection with the hospitalization of dependents makes up from fifty to seventy-five per cent of the expenditures of the dependents' board of trustees. That does not mean that the department becomes responsible-to use my hon. friend's words-automatically for the 
hospitalization of the dependent, but it does mean that this particular item has been regarded by the dependents' board of trustees as being a proper one to be considered and in connection with which assistance should be given under the special powers granted to the board if the conditions under which the board acts exist. As I say, large amounts have been paid out on account of families who are in need and who require hospitalization.


James Arthur Ross: Is that a recent amendment?


James Layton Ralston: No; it has been in practice since January 1, 1942.


Mr. JACKMAN:: I should like to ask a question with regard to the issuing of official notices of presumed death. I have one case in my riding where a claim for pension is being made by the parents of a young man who was presumed to have lost his life at Dieppe. The first letter from the Department of National Defence is dated March 4, 1943, and it reads in part:
It is with deep regret that in view of the 1 [DOT] tlme a"d tlle absence of any further official information regarding your son, since he was reported missing as a result of the action at Dieppe on the 19th day of August, 1942, it is now proposed to take action to presume his death for official purposes.
The parents of this boy are in necessitous circumstances and have applied for a pension because they need some means with which to carry on. On January 11, 1944, the best part of a year later, the pension commission replied,, and I quote one paragraph as follows:
I have to-day received notification from the Department of National Defence to the effect that the marginally named is still listed as missing in action. Under the circumstances, tliG commission are unable to take any action to have a claim considered on behalf of the parents until such time as the soldier is officially reported dead or a presumption of death may be issued.
The parents cannot proceed with their claim for a pension until official notice of presumption of death is issued. I would ask the minister what the policy of his department is in such a case, so that the parents may proceed with the Department of Pensions and National Health?


James Layton Ralston: My hon. friend understands, in the first place, that pay and allowances are continued all the time?


Harry Rutherford Jackman: Unfortunately this was a case where there was no dependents' allowance because of certain circumstances. But there is a claim for a pension.


James Layton Ralston: Generally speaking, the
practice under K.R. and 0. is to have what

War Appropriation-Army
may be the final examination of the facts within six months after the man is first reported missing. I cannot tell my hon. friend about this particular case, but I shall certainly look into it. If my hon, friend will permit me, I should like to put on the record what the provisions are with regard to dependents' allowance and presumption of death:
Pay Account. Pay and allowances are credited to the end of the month in which an officer or soldier is reported dead or missing.
Dependents' Allowance and Assigned Pay. The dependents' allowance board may make monthly payments to the dependents comprising the dependents' allowance in issue and a supplement up to fifteen days' pay of rank.
Should dependents' allowance not be in issue to persons to whom pay had been assigned at the time the officer or soldier is officially reported dead or missing, the board shall investigate and if dependency is established may put into effect the monthly payments referred to above. If at the end of the period of six months the officer or soldier is still reported missing, or should the eligibility of his dependents for pension be undetermined, the monthly payments referred to shall be adjusted to the amount of the maximum pension rate which would be payable on the death of the officer or soldier and may be paid to the dependents until status is determined.
That seems to me to fit the case of which my hon. friend speaks. There is an adjustment to the amount of the maximum pension which would be payable on the death of the officer or soldier if at the end of the period he is still reported missing. May I ask if any payment was made at all?


Harry Rutherford Jackman: I have not had an opportunity of taking up the case with the department. The family did not have any dependents' allowance; I am not certain about assigned pay. The case came to me in the mail and I have not yet had an opportunity of following it up, but I shall be glad to follow the suggestion of the minister.


James Layton Ralston: They wish to apply for a pension?


Harry Rutherford Jackman: That is right.


James Layton Ralston: I was saying that the
board was required to pay the maximum pension rate up to the time the actual decision was made that the officer or soldier must be presumed dead. I am very much interested in the case because I want to see how these regulations are working out. They were framed after a good deal of thought after Hong Kong and Dieppe. The memorandum 1 was reading continues:
If pension is awarded to such dependents prior to the expiration of six months, the monthly payments of dependents' allowance and fifteen days' pay of rank shall cease-
That is, if definite evidence comes that the man has died before the six months, then, of course, the monthly payments cease and pension is taken on. The memorandum continues:
-but if the pension awarded is less than the monthly payments a grant amounting to the difference between the monthly payments and pension for the remainder of the six months period shall be issued in a lump sum to the dependents.
Should a pension be granted retroactive to date of death the monthly payments, referred to herein, shall be recovered from such pension but only to the extent of the amount of pension payable for period during which the monthly payments were made, i.e., if monthly payments were in excess of amount of pension awarded no refund of difference is called for.
That is, if the monthly payments were in excess of the pension awarded, no refund of the difference is called for. They get monthly payments, which comprise the dependents' allowance and fifteen days' pay of rank, and that is payable up to six months at least. If pension is awarded before that, the amount of money which is represented by that dependents' allowance and fifteen days' pay of rank continues up to the end of six months, notwithstanding that the pension awarded may be smaller than the amount.


Mr. CARDIFF:: I would ask the minister to clarify a statement he made a few minutes ago. If a theft takes places inside a camp, is that considered a civilian crime?


James Layton Ralston: It is an offence against the criminal code.


Mr. EMMERSON:: This afternoon there was a discussion of pay and allowances, and unfortunately I was not able to be present for the first few minutes of the discussion this evening when the minister may have covered the point I wish to raise. It has to do with a dependents' allowance for a widowed mother. The mother is dependent upon the father at the time the soldier enlists. The father dies. Prior to death he had been living on a retirement allowance, which of course ceased upon his death, leaving the widow in needy circumstances. Is a dependents' allowance granted in a situation of that kind, where it is really needed?


James Layton Ralston: I cannot put my finger on the exact regulation, but the board interpret dependency to mean this: if at the time of the application the soldier was the logical support of the mother and was willing to support her, then she would, even though at the time of the enlistment the soldier's father was her support, be entitled to a dependents' allowance and assigned pay. I am saying that subject to correction, but I think that is the
War Appropriation-Army

principle they work on. I take it that my hon. friend has had some difficulty in a case of that kind and that it has not turned out that way. If he will give me the particulars I shall be glad to look into the case.


Mr. ROSS (St. Paul's):: I understood the minister to say a little while ago that a bill was to be brought down dealing with a gratuity allowance after discharge, and that at that time the one month's pay and allowance would be under review and would likely be increased. Will the clothing allowance be also under review? We have had the clothing allowance increased from $35 to $65, but the higher rate was not made retroactive. It seems to me very important that something should be done about this soon, because otherwise those who are now being discharged will not benefit unless the provision is made retroactive. I do not think $65 is sufficient for clothing allowance, because a man has to buy a whole new outfit. It certainly does not go nearly far enough to take care of him.


James Layton Ralston: I say to my hon. friend that I cannot tell him what will be in the new measures with regard to rehabilitation and gratuity. I have indicated that returned soldiers' problems and veterans' welfare will be considered, and when it is brought down my hon. friend will have an opportunity of seeing it and discussing it. I cannot make any further announcement now. I assure my hon. friend that there will be more features in it than simply the feature of war service gratuity alone. May I say something else? It seems to me that the farther we go-and I am not taking any particular credit for it- the farther some hon. members feel we should be pressed. If I were talking about retroactivity I would suggest that we make it retroactive to the l^st war. I want to remind my hon. friend that all the way through the last war the clothing allowance was $35. It was $35 at a time when $35 were not worth what $35 are worth in 1944. I should like my hon. friend to remember that. There seems to be considerable criticism and strictures about the amount of this allowance, as if it were something that nobody had ever heard of before. The clothing allowance was put into effect in this war because it was the clothing allowance of the last war, and it was known that the purchasing power of that sum to-day was more than its purchasing power of 1914-18. Whether the increased clothing allowance should be made retroactive I cannot tell my hon. friend at the present time.


Mr. FAIR:: What happens in the case of a soldier or an airman who is captured and

held as a prisoner of war? Do the assigned pay and allowances continue to be paid to his dependents?


James Layton Ralston: Yes.


Howard Charles Green: Some days ago the minister dealt with the question of the retirement of officers. Would he tell us whether there is any distinction made with regard to retirements between the officer who is a permanent force officer and the officer who is not a permanent force officer? Some people have made the suggestion that non-permanent officers are being retired in some cases and their places taken by permanent force officers who perhaps have not had the experience in that particular work or who may not be as efficient, or perhaps are older than the man who is going out. There is a feeling that it is very unfair during the war and after these men have served so well, that regardless of whether officers are permanent force or non-permanent force there should be no distinction made in the retirements. In other words, if a man is no longer needed and could be retired he should be retired even though a permanent force officer. Can the minister tell us whether or not that distinction is made?


James Layton Ralston: I do not know of any such policy, although I can say from the treasury point of view that policy might very well be put into effect because the permanent force officer is entitled to pension, and goes out on pension to which, of course, he has contributed over the years; whereas the nonpermanent officer does not. There has been no such policy put into effect. If my hon. friend has any case in mind and he would care to mention it to me personally I should like to know of it. I know what is sometimes said with regard to permanent force and nonpermanent force personnel, that there is generally a disposition in this war, as was said also in the last war, of course, to suggest that non-permanent men are not receiving the recognition they should. I assure my hon. friend I have been alive to that possibility and criticism and have endeavoured to check all instances. I have endeavoured to check it with the officers who I think would know. Notwithstanding the fact that a great deal has been said along that line, I do not think my hon. friend will find that that policy exists. As far as I know, merit has counted in appointments in this war.


Howard Charles Green: I am not dealing with the question of appointments so much as the question of retirements.

War Appropriation-Army


James Layton Ralston: Well, the same thing applies. I do not think my hon. friend will find-	y


Howard Charles Green: The suggestion is that the non-permanent officers are not given the consideration to which they are entitled.


James Layton Ralston: I do not know of any such policy. Let me say frankly to the committee what I think I would do in a case where there were two men of equal merit. I would favour the retirement of the nonpermanent man because he is going into civil life one of these days. He is not going to stay in the army permanently; whereas the permanent force officer is. He is in the army. The non-permanent man ought to go and become reestablished in civil life as soon as he can. On the other hand, if you retire the permanent force officer you would subject the country to a considerable obligation on account of pension. As my hon. friend knows, in a number of cases we have retired permanent force officers on substantial pension because the 60-year rule came into effect. We felt we ought to carry it out, and non-permanent officers have been given appointments in some cases to take the places of permanent officers.


Agar Rodney Adamson: Has any consideration been given to paying an officer who retires at his own request. In some cases officers are retired automatically or imperatively. We know of a lot of officers who might be willing to retire if that clause could be put into the act. I think it might be easier not only for the officers in the army-


James Layton Ralston: And for the minister.


Agar Rodney Adamson: but for everybody.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Army services-
S.	Travel, transportation and freight, $92,957,866.
Mr. DIEFENBAKER:: I presume that this item gives me an opportunity to ask the question which I brought up some three weeks ago, with respect to which there has as yet been no answer. The question whether or not consideration has been given to the establishment of a rotating system of furloughs for our men overseas, so that after the expiry of a given period of active service they will be enabled to come home to their loved ones. In bringing this matter up I realize that difficulties would be encountered, but I do not
believe that they are insurmountable, A system of rotating furloughs is now being brought into effect in the United States. I think this is a matter that would do much to improve the morale of the men who serve in the army. In so far as those who serve in the air force are concerned, after a period of tour of duty an opportunity is given them to come home on furlough. The men who serve in the navy are given opportunities of furlough; after a period of service they are permitted to return home on furlough.
The system that has been considered over a period of time and is being adopted in the United States is one that is enabling men in the armed forces, particularly in the army, to return home. I think I can do no better than to quote from a periodical some of the provisions and the comments on the provisions that are made in respect thereto:
The military services are giving more and more attention to the problem of rotating men who have served long periods overseas. Plans already have been v'orked out by the war department to provide trips home and furloughs for men serving in certain areas, and consideration is being given to similiar rotation for men in some of the foreign theatres.
I point out that many of our men have spent five Christmases overseas.
A limited number of men in the North African theatre, who have eighteen months' foreign service behind them are being rotated home each month. The marine corps tries to bring home each month three per cent of its men serving overseas.
I realize there are difficulties. One of the difficulties would naturally be the question of reinforcements. We have the assurance of the minister, if I understood him correctly, that the necessary' reinforcements are available. Another difficulty would be the question of the necessary shipping. I do not think that is an insuperable difficulty any longer, having regard to the production of ships. Quite a number of the loved ones of these men who have been overseas for four and a half years have asked me whether it would be possible to bring into effect in Canada a system similar to that now being put into operation in the United States, to the end that men in the army shall receive a measure of the consideration in this regard as do those who serve in the navy and the air force. It is a matter which I am sure would meet with the favour of the men who have been overseas and are denied the opportunity of being with their loved ones for a long period. I w'ould like a statement from the minister in this regard.


James Layton Ralston: I am not in a position to make a statement on a matter of that kind, and the committee will understand why Great

War Appropriation-Army

events are pending and, if I took down correctly what my hon. friend said, he refers to a plan for rotating furloughs from certain areas and consideration being given to some foreign theatres. My hon. friend knows the location of our troops generally speaking, and I am not in a position to make an announcement of that kind to-night.


James Arthur Ross: I endorse the remarks of the hon. member for Lake Centre. I am one of those, from all quarters of the house, who have been rather keen about free transportation under certain conditions for members of the armed forces. From the start of the war I advocated that consideration be given the men in this regard, because I think the members of the armed forces in Canada are in much the same situation as those of us who were situated in the British isles in the last war. We travelled free on warrants issued in that war. I do not say that members of the forces should travel free at all times, and I want to say a word in appreciation of the Minister of National Defence because, having argued with him for some time that these men should be given free transportation and having finally asked him in March, 1941, if he would negotiate with the railway companies with a view to having some arrangement put into effect between the government and the companies for a reduction for the men, steps were taken to bring this about. At that time civilians were granted week-end excursions at reduced rates, and I am happy to know that, as a result of the representations made, members of the armed forces can travel to-day to their homes at greatly reduced rates. Notwithstanding all that, however, I submit that they should be allowed free transportation on their annual furloughs and embarkation leave. It would not add greatly to the cost at this time if the minister could bring this about in regard to annual furlough and embarkation leave. It should be done if at all possible.


James Layton Ralston: I do not want to give my hon. friend a short answer, but I have dealt with the question two or three times and I will not take up the time of the committee further to-night. I did indicate that there was one matter very much in my heart, though it did not go to the extent my hon. friend has indicated. I am working out something, and as a matter of fact I have it under consideration now, but I am not making promises. However, it has to do with the railways, the government and my colleagues. I refer to the possibility of a ceiling. I have not given further consideration to the matter of free transportation, for the present at least.
[Mr. Ralston.!


Robert Fair: As another member who has
advocated for quite a while the granting of free transportation for annual leave and embarkation leave, I support what other hon. members have said in this connection, and I wish to thank the minister for what he has done.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
!,. Construction, purchase, repairs and operating expenses of properties-
(a)	Capital expenditure, $28,987,000;
(b)	Repairs, operating expenses and rentals, $51,059,856.
James Arthur Ross: I am not sure whether the matter I wish to discuss comes under this item, since it is involved with the Department of Pensions from the point of view of hospitalization. I refer to the casualties from Dieppe and other places. I know of some hospitals where these casualties are placed in the same ward with very sad cases of human wrecks from the last great war. In fact I have been told that there are casualties from that war who are placed in the same wards with men from this war and who have passed out. That is rather an unfair state of affairs. Surely at this time these chaps who have gone through the stress and strain of the war and have become casualties should not be put in such a situation. I believe that happens sometimes. I am wondering if in the building of these hospitals to-day provision will be made to obviate such conditions. I hope that the men will not be placed in such locations as Christie street hospital, in the midst of all the din of a manufacturing centre. They should be put in some quiet isolated part of the country where they can enjoy the peace of the countryside. Certainly they should not mingle with casualties of the last war. I realize that the matter is involved with the Department of Pensions, but probably the minister will have something to say in this connection. I hope he will use his influence to ensure that proper conditions are established for the care of th.e casualties of this war so that they may be placed by themselves and every opportunity be taken advantage of to nurse them back to a state of health.


James Layton Ralston: I will take note of what
my hon. friend says. I thought at first he was thinking that such a situation exists in army hospitals. Such a situation does not exist in army hospitals unless it is the odd case of a member of the veterans' guard who happens to be ill.


James Arthur Ross: I realize there is a
difference.

War Appropriation-Army


James Layton Ralston: I will bring the matter to the attention of my colleague.


George Hugh Castleden: Mr. Chairman-


James Layton Ralston: The next item, No. 5, includes medical and dental stores and services. The hon. member for Souris rather ingeniously got in his remarks under construction, though they should perhaps properly come under the next item.


James Arthur Ross: I realize that, but I
was thinking of the construction of hospitals.


George Hugh Castleden: My question was along the same lines.	.


Agar Rodney Adamson: Is this $80,000,000 for
construction in Canada, or does it apply to overseas as well? It seems a lot of money.


James Layton Ralston: The actual construction item is $28,000,000. repairs $11,000,000. operating expenses $40,000,000. The operating expenses
include rental of properties as well.


Agar Rodney Adamson: Can the minister give a
break-down of items of $5,000,000 and up or
$2,000,000?


James Layton Ralston: I will break this down again. Of this amount $15,000,000 is for construction that was started in 1943-44 and will not be completed or paid for by April 1 next. Then $5,000,000 is for C.W.A.C. accommodation if required.


Agar Rodney Adamson: That is a contingent item.


James Layton Ralston: Then $1,200,000 is for ordnance buildings; my hon. friend knows as well as anyone the need in this connection in Toronto, where they are using the post office building.


Agar Rodney Adamson: That is so.


James Layton Ralston: Now to break down the figure in another way, about $2,000,000 is for overseas; $4,800,000 is for operational units in Canada; about $5,000,000 is for home war [DOT] establishments in Canada, that is the nonoperational units, and miscellaneous activities and equipment not included elsewhere account for $16,000,000. I can give my hon. friend a break-down of that if he desires it.


Agar Rodney Adamson: Would such items as fire damage and repairs at Camp Borden come under this vote?


James Layton Ralston: In connection with fire damage we put in an item for repair construction, looking forward to the sombre possibility that there will be fires.


Agar Rodney Adamson: Would this item include the repairs necessary after the fire at Camp Borden?


James Layton Ralston: Yes, it would.


Howard Charles Green: Would the minister explain why it should be necessary now to devote practically $29,000,000 to capital expenditures during the coming fiscal year; and when he does so, would he also explain whether any consideration has been given to what is to be done with the army camps in various parts of the country that are becoming vacant?


James Layton Ralston: As to what has been done?


Howard Charles Green: Has any consideration been given to what is to be done with the army camps as they become vacant? There has been a large expenditure on these camps, and I am wondering if any plans are on foot for making use of them.


James Layton Ralston: There are three or four ways in which these camps could be used. In the first place some of the camps are standbys for operations in connection with demobilization-I think of two large camps in particular in that connection-and that is one thing for which they can be used. Then they can be used by the Department of Labour in connection with instructional programmes and vocational training.


Howard Charles Green: After the war?


James Layton Ralston: Yes. Then they can be used by the Department of Pensions and National Health for the same thing, and in the fourth place they can be used by the Crown Assets Corporation, about which my hon. friend knows, if it should become necessary to dispose of them. However, I am not anxious to plan for the simple abandonment ot many camps in Canada, in view of all that is ahead of us. Some camps are closed down either permanently or temporarily, but generally speaking use is being made of most of them in some capacity, if not actually for the purpose of training.


Howard Charles Green: The minister did not answer the first question, as to why it should be necessary to spend $29,000,000 during the coming year.


James Layton Ralston: My hon. friend was not in the committee when I dealt with that. Some $15,000,000 is for finishing items which were started and which will not be paid for by April 1 next. About $5,000,000 is for C.W.A.C. accommodation if required. Then $1,200,000 is for ordnance buildings. Then $2,200,000 is for overseas and $4,800,000 for operational units in Canada; that is for finishing some camps.
War Appropriation-Army


Agar Rodney Adamson: Has the minister resolved his differences with the Postmaster General in regard to ordnance?


James Layton Ralston: This does resolve the difference.


Mr. STIRLING:: The minister referred to $40,000,000 for operational charges.


James Layton Ralston: 


Grote Stirling: Practically $40,000,000.


James Layton Ralston: That is right.


Grote Stirling: Would the minister give us a little information in regard to the expenditure of that amount? Does it cover the expenses of ordnance used for operational purposes?


James Layton Ralston: M3' hon. friend means ordnance equipment?


Grote Stirling: Yes.


James Layton Ralston: I would not think so.


Grote Stirling: How is it to be expended? Would operations in connection with the ordinary military camp in Canada come under this $40,000,000?


James Layton Ralston: Yes, and it covers fuel, light, water, disinfectant, barrack services, all sorts of rentals which we have to pay all over Canada, and so on. All rented buildings are included here, ranging from the Sun Life building in Montreal, which is used as headquarters in that city, to C.M.H.Q. in London and the building in Prince Rupert.


Grote Stirling: And all the Ottawa buildings?


James Layton Ralston: Yes.


Howard Charles Green: Is any of this money intended for internment camps in which prisoners of war are kept?


James Layton Ralston: No.


Howard Charles Green: I understand that the care of those prisoners comes under the Depart-mcnt of National Defence. Could the minister tell us whether or not there has been any change in the handling of prisoners in view of the fact that so many of them are now allowed to work on farms? As I understand it, the discipline within camps is handled entirely by the nazis themselves; they have a little gestapo inside which handles all the occupants. I understand there have been certain cases of men being murdered in the camps and of other men who have come running to the wires for help. I am just wondering whether there has been a change in the administration or in the sort of control that is exercised over the nazis in the camps.
fMr. Ralston.]


James Layton Ralston: I want to say to my hon. friend that I do think the statement he makes is a bit ill-advised. I have not heard of the occurrences of which my hon. friend speaks. Within the last three weeks a representative of the protecting power has visited internment camps all over Canada. Of course he will make his report to the German government, and we endeavoured to show him everything there was to be seen. I have not heard of any such events as those to which my hon. friend refers.


Howard Charles Green: That has nothing to do with the guards; it is all within the camps.


James Layton Ralston: As my hon. friend knows, a certain number of these men are out on parole, and I think they have done very good work; but that is a comparatively small percentage of the number we have in camp. There has been no change in the camp organization to which he refers; and that organization, under which there are camp leaders, is the organization that has been adopted from the very beginning, the usual organization in connection with internment camps. In fact, I think it is by all means, so far as I can find out, the best way to run an internment camp, namely, to have the camp leader responsible to the camp commandant, or to his staff, for order and discipline among the men.


Howard Charles Green: The German leader inside is responsible?


James Layton Ralston: He is the one who represents the wishes, representations and complaints of his fellow prisoners of war. Everything to be brought to the attention of the camp officials is done through the camp leader. Generally he is the one who deals with the representative from the protecting power, when that official visits the camp to ascertain what the conditions are, in order that he may report to the German government. On the other hand, we also get a report from camps in Germany.


Howard Charles Green: The German leader in the camp is responsible for the discipline?


James Layton Ralston: I would not say he is altogether responsible for the discipline, because he has not himself any power to enforce. However, he is the head of the organization in the camp, and the one who is regarded as the representative of the men. I suppose they have the same troubles as similarly organized democratic bodies have. Sometimes a leader does not always represent everybody in a camp. But it seems to me that this is eminently the most desirable and the best way to run these camps efficiently.

War Appropriation-Army


Agar Rodney Adamson: Do these men have to give parole?


James Layton Ralston: As a matter of fact, I think there are different conditions in different places for different work and different classes of internees. As my hon. friend knows, there are some prisoners who are first class, and others in different classes. There are different nationalities, and even within one nationality these are different types.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
5.	Personnel supplies and services: food, medical and dental stores, clothing and personal equipment, $159,566,238.
George Hugh Castleden: Could the minister tell us how much of this amount is to be spent on military hospitals within Canada. Then, can he tell us what is now being taken care of in army hospitals?


James Layton Ralston: The number?
Object of expenditure
Clothing and necessaries	
Personal equipment	
Camp, barrack and miscellaneous equipment....
Supplies-food, forage	
Medical stores and services	
Dental stores and services	
Laundry	
Casual labour


George Hugh Castleden: Then will the minister give us the government's policy with regard to the discharging of men from hospitals. How long do they keep the men in the army before they are discharged and passed over to the Department of Pensions and National Health?


James Layton Ralston: I believe my hon. friend asked with respect to the building of hospitals. The buildings themselves would be included in item No. 4. Have I misled him in that
respect?


George Hugh Castleden: No.


James Layton Ralston: If not, shall I give a break-down of the item?


George Hugh Castleden: Yes.


James Layton Ralston: The break-down is as follows:
Change
^_________A___________
Estimate	More than Less than
1944-45	1943-44	1943-44
$40,574,900	  $10,479,344
17.229,120	  8.870,779
14,015.459	  10,992,587
64.502,018	$3,969,783		
16.571.556	  387,076
3,227.535	712,291		
1,657.290	  542,710
1.788.360	288.360		
It will be noted that this is a table showing personnel supplies and services, including food, medical and dental stores, and services, clothing and personal equipment. The objects of expenditures are listed as follows:	Clothing
and necessaries; personal equipment; camp, barrack and miscellaneous equipment; supplies, food and forage; medical stores and services; dental stores and services; laundry and casual labour.
The estimates for clothing and necessaries, personal equipment, and barrack camp and miscellaneous equipment show considerable decreases because the initial equipping of the army is now largely complete; it is now chiefly necesary to provide for original issues to new recruits and for wastage. The decrease in laundry services is due to increased activity of mobile and static laundries overseas and to the reduction in the size of the army in Canada.
Shortage of military personnel in ordnance depots has necessitated employing civilians, and an increase in casual labour.
The increase for supplies of food can be attributed to an increase in the army overseas, and to the higher cost of rations in Canada.
Medical stores have increased slightly due to the necessity for quantity ordering in advance and to a slight increase in basic costs. That is a general statement of this item.


George Hugh Castleden: What are the facilities for military hospitals in Canada? How many cases are we dealing with under the army system, and what are the facilities for increase?


James Layton Ralston: I cannot answer my hon.
friend, because I have not the aggregate before me showing the total accommodation in military hospitals. From memory I could speak about hospitals across the country from Cogswell street in Halifax to hospitals on the coast. However, I know that would not suit my hon. friend, and I would prefer to have a statement with respect to it. I shall get the information for him under another item.


George Hugh Castleden: Shall I be able to get it later?


James Layton Ralston: Yes. I am not sure when I say this, but I do not think the Department of Pensions and National Health is giving the capacity of hospitals. I do not mind giving that information privately to hon. members, but it just occurs to me that perhaps I should not give the total hospital accommo-

War Appropriation-Army

dation in Canada. However, I can give the locations, and anyone who wishes to ask me privately as to the accommodation available will be given the answer.


John George Diefenbaker: I presume that
under this item one might discuss the matter of army boots. I should like to secure a statement from the minister in regard to allegations made in the press early in February.


James Layton Ralston: Perhaps this is not the_
correct item; however, we can hear it now. This involves the inspection board, and would come under sundry services.


John George Diefenbaker: Would not boots
come under this item?


James Layton Ralston: Yes, that is correct.


John George Diefenbaker: Although I am not going into details in the matter, I desire to ask certain questions with regard to one James Clark, a former chief inspector of the inspection board of the United Kingdom and Canada, and allegations made by him, to which reference has been made in the press to the effect that in the supplying of shoes for the Canadian army materials were not in accordance with specifications, in connection with about a million pairs of boots, and that 30,000 pairs were made on lasts contrary to specifications.
My questions are these: Have these allegations by the former chief inspector been brought to the attention of the minister? What investigation has been made by him of the allegations made by Mr. Clark? Will the minister lay on the table the findings of any investigation that was made? Finally, what does the government intend to do toward having a judicial investigation into the allegations?


James Layton Ralston: I cannot believe that my hon. friend really understands the genesis of this matter when I consider the questions he has asked.
Mr. DIEFENBAKER,: What does the min ister mean by the genesis?


James Layton Ralston: The genesis of this inquiry. These allegations were made by a man who was dismissed last August. As I remember it, he started out with the allegation that he had discovered, I think in November, 1942, nine months before, that some other inspector had received a bottle of liquor as a present from one of the contractors, and he admitted that he himself had participated. Having been dismissed in August, 1943, Mr. Clark has several times since insisted that he be reinstated because, as he say's, that he was wrongly dismissed. He has accompanied that request with certain charges. In November or Decem-
(Mr. Ralston.]
ber, 1942, he alleged that there were irregularities on the part of other inspectors nine months; that was about nine months before he was dismissed. The allegations he made with regard to the boots were with regard to boots that had been inspected-I have not the dates before me-I believe in 1941 and 1942.
It is necessary for the committee to understand that the board for which Mr. Clark was working was the joint inspection board of Canada and the United Kingdom. That board was set up in 1940 under Major-General Sir Robert Lock, a British officer, and it has approximately 15,000 employees. It does the inspection in the United States of munitions and supplies purchased for the United Kingdom and Canada, and in Canada of munitions and supplies for Canada, China, Great Britain, Russia and other countries purchasing Canadian goods. It is a joint board which reports to the British government through the Right Hon. Malcolm MacDonald, the High Commissioner for Canada, and to the Canadian government through the Minister of National Defence. Neither the Minister of National Defence nor Mr. MacDonald have interfered in any way with the administration of that board. All wre have done is to follow the terms of the order in council with regard to salaries and appointments of employees and to see that the financial commitments were within the terms of the order.
I feel it is necessary to say this because my hon. friend has asked whether the minister made an investigation of these charges. I say at once that the minister did not make an investigation of these charges. The matter was referred to the board and the board made an investigation. I understand that Colonel Currie, my deputy minister, went into the matter again so far as the Canadian government was concerned, and the board later filed a categorical answer to each one of the allegations made by Mr. Clark.
When these charges were made, Mr. Clark felt that he had not received satisfaction from the minister, from the Department of National Defence or from the board, and he intimated that he was going to publish his charges. It was felt that it would be distinctly against the interest of our war activities if allegations of this kind were made, particularly in connection with boots, the quality of which I think has been par excellence so far as I can find out from the troops themselves. It was thought that possibly the publication of this article would be reconsidered when the report, of the board was received. Therefore Mr. MacDonald and I took the unusual course of furnishing such information as the board had at hand on

War Appropriation-Army
each of the points mentioned in the draft article submitted We did that instead of allowing the article to be published and the matter to be plunged into the maelstrom of controversy.
As I say, this board has some 15,000 employees and it inspects guns, Bren guns, tanks and all sorts of equipment purchased by the allied nations in Canada and the United States. To have a statement made by an employee of the board that there had been wrong inspection or something of that kind would undermine confidence, and it was felt that the examination which had been made indicated that publication perhaps would be unwarranted. At the same time as I have said, full information was given by the board.


John George Diefenbaker: Who made the
examination?


James Layton Ralston: The examination was made by the board, by Brigadier Howard, who is now chairman of the board since Major-General Lock has resigned, and his officials. The result was that a full statement was made with regard to these matters. I shall just give my hon. friend an answer to two of them.


Grote Stirling: Was the reply published?


James Layton Ralston: Yes. The first thing my hon. friend mentioned was that about a million pairs of boots were made with inferior material.


John George Diefenbaker: I said that was the allegation.


James Layton Ralston: Mr. Clark's allegation was that about one million pairs of army boots had been made with ground cork mixed with resin used as a filler between the outer sole and the inner sole in place of tarred felt filler that had formerly been used. Then follows a statement in brackets:
(Mr. Clark explains that heat from summer pavements and the heat from the soldiers' feet combined with the weight of the body when walking caused this ground cork to creep into mounds as large as two fingers inside the boots.)
The answer was:
Tarred felt or leather filler was specified and supplied until May 28, 1940-
That is nearly four years ago.
-on which date specification was changed to ground cork and resins compound (as a filler between the middle and inner soles) as the felt was unobtainable -when stocks on band were exhausted. Furthermore, skilled workmen were not available to process the leather filler, which was not in general commercial use. On December 16, 1941, when tarred felt again became available, the specifications were changed back to tarred felt. After this change in specifications had been implemented no further boots were accepted with the cork and resins compound filler.
That is the first allegation my hon. friend has made. The answer, to make it short, was that because of a lack of materials the specification had to be changed in May, 1940. The changed specifications were in effect until December 16, 1941. After December 16, 1941, tarred felt again became available and the specifications were changed.


John George Diefenbaker: I do not understand what the minister means when he says, "the first allegation my hon. friend has made". I said that that was the allegation made by Mr. Clark.


James Layton Ralston: My hon. friend has taken the responsibility for bringing it up in the house.


John George Diefenbaker: I am asking what the government is going to do.


James Layton Ralston: He has taken a serious responsibility. I was going to bring down the papers which have been asked for by my hon. friend, but he has seen fit to bring it up and he will have to have the statement; that is all. I do not propose to have anybody get the idea that there is anything wrong with the boots being inspected by the joint inspection board for Canada, which board has, I think, done as magnificent a job in the way of inspection of Canadian equipment as any institution anywhere in connection with this whole war. For my hon. friend to bring this up now, a two-year old complaint, made by a man dismissed in August, 1943, is for him to take quite a responsibility, and I do not blame him for trying to get out from under by saying that this is Mr. Clark's allegation.


John George Diefenbaker: I only asked questions which the people of Canada have the right to have answered.


James Layton Ralston: They have been answered already in the newspapers.


John George Diefenbaker: My hon. friend does not answer them by not answering them.


James Layton Ralston: I have answered them just as my hon. friend has asked them. My hon. friend is bringing into this house an allegation made by a dismissed employee of the board, dismissed last August, and this dismissed employee himself admits, in November, 1942, that he received presents of whiskey, an irregularity which he says occurred nine months before that. That is the man my hon. friend now cites as making these charges. I am pointing out that the first charge is just two years old now, and has to do with boots the last of which were supplied two years ago. I have given the statement which was given
War Appropriation-Army

me by the board and which I have verified through the Department of Munitions and Supply, that on account of lack of materials a change was made in the specifications. That is the million pairs of army boots as to which Mr. Clark, my hon. friend says, makes changes, but I say that my hon. friend is in effect making the charges himself and taking responsibility for them. According to the report of the board these million pairs of inferior boots were delivered according to specifications, the specifications having had to be changed because of a lack of material.
What was my hon. friend's other question?


John George Diefenbaker: It had to do with thirty thousand pairs.


James Layton Ralston: The statement was:
More than thirty thousand pairs of army boots were made by one contractor on lasts contrary to the specifications. These lasts had hunks of leather called cheaters built on them to give the approximate measurements of the proper lasts. This practice, he says, is wrong and would produce ill-fitting boots, and is never adopted by manufacturers of good quality boots when proper fit and comfort are demanded. '
And this is the answer of the board to that:
One contractor was permitted by the inspection board to use so-called "increasers" for a period of approximately three months early in 1941 as a temporary expedient at a time of change-over in lasts because he could not obtain new lasts in time to meet urgent delivery requirements.
That charge is in regard to 1941, and my hon. friend knows it. He has read this statement, and yet he stands here to-night and makes himself the mouthpiece of Mr. Clark in connection with this charge. The board's answer continues:
During that period it is estimated that he produced on these altered lasts less than-
Howt many?

4,500 pairs of boots.
That was early in 1941.
. . . The fit of such boots was considered satisfactory by the inspection board.
There are the two charges to which my hon. friend has referred. The matter was brought to the attention of the department. As I say, the minister never investigated the charges. I have not time to investigate charges of that kind under those circumstances. I handed the matter over to the deputy minister; the deputy minister had the inspection board examine it, and there is the board's answer with regard to it. I say to my hon. friend that if he wants an investigation-I have consulted the Right Hon. Mr. MacDonald, the High Commissioner, and regrettable though it is that this matter should be brought up

under these circumstances and at this stage two or three years after the thing occurred,. Mr. MacDonald did concede that if my hon. friend wants any investigation he is welcome to it and we will see that the papers are furnished to the war expenditures committee or whoever is the proper authority to deal with it.


Mr. POULIOT:: Mr. Chairman, I have one complaint against this item. It is like a salad, made up of things that are not supposed to go together. There is first of all: Personnel supplies and services; then food, medical and dental stores; then clothing and personal equipment. There should be a separate item for each. We should know how much is to be spent for food, how much for medical stores, and how much for dental stores.


James Layton Ralston: My hon. friend was not in when I gave the break-down.


Jean-François Pouliot: We should not have to ask for it in the house. It should appear in the estimates before us. It should not be necessary for the minister to put it on Hansard. The estimates should be complete in the first place. Moreover, I complain because the minister appears to think he is gracious to give us this information. We are entitled to it; we have a right to it. He is not doing a favour to any hon. member by giving the details. We have a right to get them at firsthand, in the estimates themselves. It should not be necessary to give them in the house. They should appear in the estimates, I repeat, as was done in the last war. Why has this change been made? The minister is responsible because he is perpetually the acting Minister of Finance. It is nothing to make a joke of, and if it is to be treated as a joke I will tell again the story of Barclay's bank-and even about the empty bottles of John de Kuyper "compound gin." All these items I have mentioned are mixed up together, instead of appearing separately in the estimates, and they are mixed up deliberately in order that members of parliament may remain in a fog.
I do not agree often with the hon. member for Lake Centre, although he is a friend of mine; but he was right, from the start, in bringing forward the case he did to-night. Every member who has asked for information was right. I do not agree with their political opinions; but if an hon. member is thirsting for information, he has a right to have his thirst quenched. It is not a matter for laughter; 'it is nothing funny. We are responsible to the electors of this country for the expenditure of this money. Moreover, we are responsible to the army for the expenditure of this money, in order that the army


War Appropriation-Army
may get the most benefit from it. That is my point. It is no joke; it is a very serious matter.
The other day I mentioned to the parliamentary assistant to the minister the case of a young man who suffered with heart trouble, and who asked for a doctor and was refused a doctor, and who died that night. Then there was a case at Barriefield, where soldiers do not have the proper care they are supposed to receive. How is it that members of parliament have to complain of these things? It is a real shame that they have to be aired in the House of Commons of Canada, when there should be no complaint at all about the medical services being provided for our army. When I complained about that last year I was jeered at by the minister, but afterwards I made my case and established clearly that I was not exaggerating. Here again I should like to praise the parliamentary assistant to the minister, and I give credit to the minister, too, for understanding afterwards that the case was serious and deserved special consideration. It is not fun for me to rise now and mention these things. There is no excuse for that in our country. Soldiers should not be dealt with by the medical corps as they have been. There have been numerous instances like those I have mentioned, and it is not only in the province of Quebec that they take place. It happens also in the Simon-pure province of Ontario.. You have only to go to Barriefield, and many other places to see that.
For the edification of my colleagues from other provinces I will say that in the province of Quebec we have at least fifteen non-Aryan doctors, some with names that are not even Jewish. There are some with names like Ashkezany, and other names I cannot spell. Where do they come from? They are not British. They are not French Canadian. Where do they come from? They are the doctors who examine our boys. There are at least fifteen non-Aryan, to use classical language. At least one-third of the doctors in the province of Quebec are English-speaking. When I complain that the boys have not been attended to as they should have been I put the blame on the organization as it is. It is impossible to get reforms in the province of Quebec unless the district medical officer there is fired. I have complained, but he is kept there by political strings. That is why there is no order in the medical corps in the district of Quebec.
I can speak about Montreal, too, and about the way young men are dealt with at Longueuil, how they were attended to by the non-Aryan doctors. I am thinking of a young man who suffered from a heart condition and
who was told to shovel stones in a cart for a whole day. I looked after him. I fought his case for a long time. The parliamentary assistant to the minister must remember the case. He helped me. I thank him for that, but I, as a member of parliament, should not have been forced to go to the parliamentary assistant to the minister to have that wrong redressed. It is a shame that I was forced to go there. The father and mother were so thankful that after the boy, who had a weak heart and could hardly walk, was discharged from the army, they told me that they had no objection at all to the boy staying in the army if he was well enough, if his health permitted it. But when a fellow is sick like that, why should he stay in the army? He should be discharged at once, if he were examined by competent doctors.
I am not exaggerating now, but the father and mother were so thankful that they motored from Montreal at six o'clock in the morning and came to see me at Riviere du Loup the same evening. They came there to thank me for what I had done. I had not done anything except brought to the attention of the department the incompetence of some doctor.
I have other cases. I recall a boy who was staying on the farm for some time due to some misunderstanding. He was brought to the camp, and this is what happened. He was confined to barracks as a deserter, condemned to ten or twelve months. I fought his case again, and successfully. They finally decided to free him, and after months and months they found that he was unfit. He should not have been called into the army. He should not have been put in the C.B. He was unfit. Why was he a prisoner, and why did he have the shame of a deserter on his brow? It was precisely on account of the incompetence of those doctors.
Not only that, but they are snobs. Why is it that dentists and doctors have commissions and druggists have not? The druggists are snubbed by the medical corps. They are not considered as doctors although they could kill the whole German army with poisons they could prepare, and they could cure lots of our boys by giving them the proper treatments. I bring this to the attention of the minister. I hope he will reconsider it. I hope he will realize that the druggists are suffering an injustice by not receiving the same commissions as the medical doctors, the dentists and the nurses in the army. The nurse is an officer. Why should not the druggist be an officer? He is a responsible man. When somebody prescribes without being qualified the consequences must be serious. These men are leaving a profession which is honourable
War Appropriation-Army

and which deserves the same credit as the medical profession. I do not see why they are snubbed, why they are given the cold shoulder in the army. Those who get easy promotions in the, army are those who are backed by powerful drug [DOT]companies. I do not know what strings they pull, but when they belong to some big drug-making organization then they are sure to be captainized and majorized, made captains and majors. Everybody knows about that. Is it fair for a man who has taken the same course of study, incurred the same expenses to be a dentist and who belongs to that honourable profession to be treated like that? I have sent letters to the parliamentary assistant to the minister from the president of the society of druggists in the province of Quebec. I hope that matter will be considered and that the letters will be answered in due course.
Now I shall scandalize you, Mr. Chairman. There is an item in the estimates for clothing. For several years while the present Minister of National War Services was deputy minister of the Department of National Defence and when his successor, a very good man, Colonel H. Desrosiers, was in office, I succeeded in getting some second-hand clothing, especially long coats that had been worn by the soldiers, for the poor and needy, and one year just before New Year's I obtained 300 coats like that which I divided in two. I gave 150 to the needy families at Riviere du Loup, one for each family. I then had bales made of the second group, and this second-hand clothing was sent to the settlements and distributed by the parish priest or the mayor to needy families whose children could not go out in the winter because they had no clothes. I paid the freight from Quebec or Ottawa to Riviere du Loup and from Riviere du Loup to the other places where it was distributed. That clothing was of no use to the Department of National Defence. It was worn, but it Was still good when it was tailored by the mothers for little children who are poor and could not go out in the winter, could not breathe fresh air, could not play in the snow. The present Minister of National War Services did it very well and so did the present deputy minister of National Defence. But finally I had a lot of difficulties on account of what had been decided by the war expenditures committee of the house. With all their learning the members of that committee decided, on the advice of some outsider, naturally an expert, that it was better to sell that kind of clothing; but there was an exception. The Indians have a right to it, but the whites cannot have it. It has gone to the

Indians because if they did not get that clothing the government would have to purchase some new clothing and give it to them. They are given the second-hand clothing. If it is good for the Indians, why is it impossible for the good, red-blooded Canadians to have it? There is something else. It is sold at 12i cents a pound to the Jews. I have been informed, and I wish to inform the minister, that some clothing has been sold to the Jews for 12^ cents a pound, some changes made and re-sold to the government afterwards as new. I do not say that as a definite matter, but I hope that the department will make an investigation into it.
I will go further than that. A friend of mine, who is the head of the colonization department in my county, wrote to someone who looks after the distribution of war material after the war and asked him if he would be given the same privilege as the Jew and if he could buy these clothes for 12i cents a pound to distribute to the needy settlers and the poor, and he was told that he could have an answer only after the war. Well, after the war the quantity of military clothing will naturally be much less. If Canada decides to occupy the whole of Europe then we may have some old clothes, but it will be pretty hard to bring them back here.
I hope that this matter will be considered. I do not believe in these pink soap-bubbles of future felicity. If we are to have a post-war that will not be worse than the present we must organize the present at once and realize that the health of little children, not only in the cities but also in the settlements and in any other part of the country, is most valuable and is a great national asset. What is the use of thinking of doctors and of remedies when the illness of the future can be prevented? Is it not better to prevent it than to cure it? The minister would be playing the role of Good Samaritan if he would see to it that this stupid recommendation of the war expenditures committee is overruled. I do not blame the members of the committee for that; they did not know. It was suggested to me that I should get in touch with all the members of the cabinet and I waited for a time to put the matter before the committee and to bring the committee to a consideration of brass tacks and the reality of facts.
This country will never be saved by dreams, however beautiful they may be. We must realize that there is poverty in our midst and that those who are poor deserve help. It is not a pleasure to go around the departments asking for old clothes; but when it helps even a few of our fellow citizens it is worth doing; and at the present time when wool is so scarce,

Radio Broadcasting Committee
when it is impossible to get good woollen clothing for the little ones, is it not reasonable to ask for the crumbs that fall from the table of the rich? Is it not reasonable to ask for the clothes that do not serve the army any longer, but which could very well serve another purpose for the betterment of living conditions in this country? _
It is a serious problem. It is not a problem of rags. It is a problem of giving the needy as much as possible under the hard circumstances we are going through, and I insist upon it. I am sure that what I have said has been a revelation to many hon. members who honour me by listening to what I am telling them. But there is no humiliation in speaking of these matters when good comes out of it. Is it not possible to come to an agreement about it?
I have no objection to the Indians having their share; they were the first citizens of the country. But when they get something I do not see why the whites cannot have it too. Moreover, let us not live in the future but in the present; and let us try to improve present conditions before discussing the future. The future will be what the present is. If the present is chaotic the future will be chaotic, and there will be no order in the future unless there is order now. But we can make the present orderly, provided we have no fancy schemes suggested by brilliant economists to make us forget what the present is. We must look the present in the face and try to do our bdst to remedy what is wrong by using sometimes the very simple means which are at our entire disposal. The only thing for the cabinet to do is to say yes; then to-morrow the matter will be settled for this year and for the year after, and every member will be in a position, if he needs it, to have some help for his constituency. This must not be neglected; it is important.
There is a lot I could say about the health of the boys in the army, and I am greatly surprised that it was left to a layman to speak about it. I waited for a long time because I expected some doctor to raise the point. I expected some doctor to explain how the pulhems system is working. It is a most absurd concoction from the British war office.


James Layton Ralston: My hon. friend does not know what he is talking about. It was not invented by the British war office.


Jean-François Pouliot: I will tell the minister it is very dangerous to speak to me in that way, and to-morrow I will take the trouble to explain to him what the pulhems system is. I will ask him to explain to us-


An hon. MEMBER:: Address the Chair.


Jean-François Pouliot: I will ask my hon. friend to keep quiet. It is a question of geography, and he is not interested in anything except the civil service and increases in salaries. I hope he will give me an opportunity to fight for my own people while he does his best to ' increase the salaries of the civil servants.
Progress reported.


[Stage Direction]
At eleven o'clock the house adjourned, without question put, pursuant to standing order.
Friday, February 25, 1944