INTERNATIONAL LABOUR CONFERENCE

Right Hon. W. L. MACKENZIE KING (Prime Minister):: I beg to lay on the table draft convention and recommendations filed at the third session of the International Labour Conference on the 25th October, 1921. This is the document requested by the right hon. leader of the Opposition yesterday.



MEMORIAL TO THE LATE COLONEL G. H. BAKER, M.P.

[Stage Direction]
On motion of Mr. W. F. Kay (Missisquoi) the second report of the Special Committee appointed to confer and act with the like committee of the Senate in further considering and determining the form of the memorial to be erected in the Parliament buildings to the late LieutenantJColonel George Harold Baker, member of Parliament for Brome, was concurred in.

[Stage Direction]
On motion of Right Hon. W. L. Mackenzie King (Prime Minister) Bill No. 203 for carrying into effect the Treaties of Peace between His Majesty and Hungary and Turkey was introduced and read the first time.
On motion of Mr. Mackenzie King that the bill be read the second time:
Right Hon. ARTHUR MEIGHEN (Leader of the Opposition) :: Could not the second reading stand over till a later hour of the day?


William Lyon Mackenzie King: Yes.


Hon. T. A. CRERAR (Marquette) :: What is the explanation?


William Lyon Mackenzie King: The bill is simply to provide machinery to enable the Government to deal with former enemy property and debts in Turkey and Hungary in a manner similar to that which is already provided for dealing with former enemy property and debts in Germany, Austria and Bulgaria. The House will remember that treaties between the Allied1 and Associated Powers and the latter countries were ratified by His Majesty, and that subsequently legislation was adopted to enable the Government to give effect to certain provisions of those treaties. A similar enactment was not passed with respect to the treaties with Hungary and Turkey, for the reason that they were not ratified at the same time as the others. The treaty with Hungary has been ratified by His Majesty, but not the treaty with Turkey, although it has been signed.


Thomas Alexander Crerar: Are We likely to get anything out of Turkey?


William Lyon Mackenzie King: That the
House may see the significance of the legislation asked for I might mention that one concern in Canada has a claim against these countries amounting to $600,000. I am informed that steps cannot be taken to deal with that claim until machinery is provided which will give the Governor in Council power to act under authority conferred by statute.


Sir HENRY DRAYTON:: Is the bill printed?


William Lyon Mackenzie King: Yes.


Mr. SPEAKER:: By unanimous consent the second reading of this bill stands until a later hour this day.



DOMINION CHAIN COMPANY LIMITED

[Stage Direction]
On motion of Mr. S. W. Jacobs (George Etienne Cartier), Bill No. 196 respecting a Patent of The Dominion Chain Company, Limited, was introduced and read the first time.
Mr. JACOBS:: If I am in order, I would ask that this bill >be read1 a second time and referred to the Committee on Miscellaneous Private Bills.

Assiniboine River Floods


Hewitt Bostock: 1 would ask the hon. member if the requisite petition has been lodged with the Clerk of the Private Bills Committee?


Samuel William Jacobs: I believe it has, but I cannot sipeak positively.


Thomas Alexander Crerar: What is the explanation of the bill?


Hon. J. A. ROBB (Minister of Trade and Commerce) :: I would ask that the second reading stand until we can get from the department a report on the bill.


Hewitt Bostock: The second reading
stands.



UNEMPLOYMENT

[Stage Direction]
On the Orders of the Day:
Arthur Meighen: On the 24th of April this House passed a resolution, which was accepted by the Prime Minister for the Government, in the following words:
That, in the opinion of this House, in vietv of the widespread unemployment with which the municipalities and provinces find themselves unable to cope, it is desirable that the federal government should devise some means of dealing effectively with the situation.
That was the order of Parliament; would the Government tell us now, before we prorogue, what means they have devised, since this resolution was passed, dealing with the situation?


Hon. JAMES MURDOCK (Minister of Labour):: The explanation, I think, can best be given in the language of a letter recently addressed to the mayor of one of our western cities, in which it was stated:
The intention is that the general question of unemployment and relief for distress growing out thereof will toe the subject of further careful general review within the near future and in anticipation of the needs of Canada during the coming winter.	-
It seemed inadvisable to convene a gathering of representatives of organizations in the various provinces interested in this matter while Parliament was in session. As soon as possible after Parliament prorogues the matter will be given the attention which it deserves and of the importance of which the Government is fully advised. It is only proper to say, though, that we think the unemployment situation has materially improved during the past few weeks.
223i


Arthur Meighen: It very usually does
in summer time. The answer of the minister is- that nothing has been done by the Government but that others will be called in to do something later.



CHAIRMAN OF THE RAILWAY COMMISSION

[Stage Direction]
On the Orders of the Day:
Arthur Meighen: On the 10th day of June, attention being called by the member for Macleod (Mr. Coote) to certain commitments of the present Minister of Agriculture (Mr. Motherwell) as regards the removal of the Chairman of the Railway Commission, the Prime Minister stated, as reported on page 2872 of Unrevised Hansard, that the Minister of Agriculture had made certain representations to the Government as regards such removal; that the same had been considered, but that no definite conclusion had been reached. May I ask if a definite decision has been reached, and if so, what is it?


William Lyon Mackenzie King: No conclusion has been reached. The matter is still being considered.



ASSINIBOINE RIVER FLOODS

[Stage Direction]
On the Orders of the Day:
Arthur Meighen: On
the 19th of May the attention of the Government was called to a very great flood disaster between Portage la Prairie and Winnipeg. The Prime Minister stated that that was being considered but that the Government had not come to a decision whether to grant relief or not.
Mr. STEWART	(Argenteuil) : The
Assiniboine river?


Arthur Meighen: Yes. I have not observed yet that any relief has been provided. Has the Government decided to do anything or not to do anything, and if to do anything, what is it?
Mr. STEWART	(Argenteuil) : The
matter was taken up with the provincial government and an offer made that a survey of the whole situation in connection with the flooded areas of that river be undertaken at the expense of the federal government, on the clear understanding that that would not involve on the part of the federal government responsibility for

Assiniboine River Floods
the carrying out of any plans that might be suggested; that matter was to be decided upon later. The idea was primarily to get a complete survey and a knowledge of what would be required to obviate, if possible, a recurrence of the floods on that river.


Arthur Meighen: I can see that the survey might have something to do with preventing floods in the future, but what it has to do with relieving the damage caused by a flood of the past I do not know. Has the Government decided to relieve those who suffered, or not, and if so, to what extent?


Mr. STEWART (Argenteuil) :: So far as I know, no claims have been made by any individuals to this Governmnet.


Arthur Meighen: They were made by the member for Portage la Prairie (Mr. Leader), on May 19th and consideration was promised.


Charles A. Stewart: I would say-though I am not saying it in any way to make it official-that this matter should come through representations from the provincial governments, and I have so intimated on the occasions when the question has been brought to my attention. I do not think it would be the business of this Government to step into the province of Manitoba in this respect unless requested by the provincial authorities so to do, or to assist.


Arthur Meighen: If so, I think that should have been the answer given to the bon. member for Portage la Prairie.


Mr. BELAND:: I do not know what the views of my right hon. friend are on this subject, but I may direct his attention and the attention of the House to the fact that in a district in the province of Quebec called tfhe Chaudnere valley, as a result of rains last week continuing for forty-eight hours, the whole of the area of the valley was flooded, and at least a thousand farmers lost all their crops. I do not understand, however, that they are submitting any claim to this Government. I believe, though, that they are submitting some claim for relief to the provincial government. I may say that a similar unhappy situation developed four years ago in the same valley, and no application was ever made to this government for relief.


Hewitt Bostock: Of course, this debate is out of order.


Arthur Meighen: I was not arguing the matter; I merely called the attention of the Government to their promise and asked what they were doing. What I object to is the holding out of false hopes.


Mr. CALDWELL:: May I ask one question in regard to this matter? While on the subject of floods, I may point out that according to recent reports in the press a very serious flood has occurred in New Brunswick, with the result that much property has been swept away and considerable damage done. If relief is to be afforded by the federal government in the matter of floods in other parts of the country, I think we will have to put in a claim from New Brunswick. The destruction has included about six million feet of lumber, a sawmill, some bridges, farm property-


Hewitt Bostock: Order.


Mr. MICHAUD:: I wish to endorse what my hon. friend (Mr. Caldwell) has said in that respect.


Mr. BAXTER:: Mr. Speaker-


Mr. ARCHAMBAULT:: Who started the flood?


Hewitt Bostock: I must remind hon. members that we cannot be flooded with a discussion of floods at this stage. The attention of the Government has been directed to these floods, and I think we should leave the matter there at present.


Mr. HARRY LEADER (Portage la Prairie) :: As one of the members most concerned with the overflowing of the Assiniboine river, I should like to ask if there will be an opportunity to discuss this matter when the Supplementary Estimates come up..


Hewitt Bostock: Certainly. The hon. member will have full opportunity for discussing the matter when the estimates are before the House.



PRIVILEGE-MR. BAXTER

[Stage Direction]
On the Orders of the Day:
John Babington Macaulay Baxter: Mr. Speaker, I wish to bring up a matter which

Privilege-Mr. Baxter
is not a pleasant one to deal with, but it is serious in its character, and I think as a matter of justice it ought to be brought to the attention of the House. Hon. members have always an opportunity of defending themselves from any attack made upon them within the walls of this chamber, and I am glad to say that such attacks seem to be rare. Persons outside of this House, officials- in the public service, striving to do their duty, have no opportunity to defend themselves except in the way in which I have been asked to present a defence on behalf of a gentleman who was attacked on the twelfth of this month by the hon. member for Victoria and Carleton (Mr. Caldwell). My hon. friend, in the course of his remarks, reflected very severely on the returning officer for that constituency. The returning officer has had his attention called to the report in Hansard of the remarks of the hon. member, and he desires to have a statement made on his behalf. He was charged with having made electoral subdivisions which were not warranted by law. He desires that this House should understand-


William Lyon Mackenzie King: May I ask,
Mr. Speaker, if the hon. member is in order?


Hewitt Bostock: I was just about to
remind the hon. member that there is no such privilege. Bourinot at page 302 says:
Questions ot privilege may always be considered in either house without the notice necessary in tihe case of motions generally. By the 47th rule of the Commons it is provided:
"Whenever any matter of privilege arises, it shall he taken into consideration immediately."
It is the practice in the House of Commons to bring up a question of privilege after prayers, and before the house has taken up the orders of the day. Only in very aggravated cases, requiring the immediate interposition of the house, will any business be suddenly interrupted. If a member be insulted or attacked, or some disorder suddenly arises, a debate may be interrupted ; for as it has been cleariy expressed by an ancient authority, "Whether any question is or is not before the house; and even in the midst of another discussion, if a member should rise to complain of a breach of prvileges of the house, they have always instantly heard him."
Sc it must be a question affecting the honour of a member of the House. Hon. members cannot take up the cudgels on behalf of all the officials in this country. They have their recourse.


John Babington Macaulay Baxter: I bow to your ruling, of
course, Mr. Speaker, and I give notice that I shall take up this matter when the House is moved into committee of Ways and M'eans.



ELECTRICAL STORM IN THE WEST

[Stage Direction]
On the Orders of the Day:
Mr. O. R. GOULD (Assiniboia):: The morning newspapers make note of the fact that there has been a severe electrical storm involving loss of life and considerable damage by hail in the western country. Hon. gentlemen laugh. It is no laughing matter when people lose their lives as the result of a severe storm. I rise to ask if the Government has received any more definite information than was contained in this morning's papers concerning the loss of life and property in that storm.


Charles A. Stewart: If my hon. friend is referring to the storm in western Canada, we have no information other than the press reports.



CHINESE IMMIGRATION

[Stage Direction]
On the Orders of the Day:
Mr. T. G. McBRIDE (Cariboo):: Has the Prime Minister any information with respect to the Chinese immigrants I inquired about yesterday?


Charles A. Stewart: I have made inquiry and our information is that none have landed. However, I learn from another source that there are supposed to be that number on board ship.



TRENTON HARBOUR

[Stage Direction]
On motion of Hon. Ernest Lapointe (Minister of Marine and Fisheries) the House went into committee to consider the following proposed resolution, Mr. Gordon in the Chair:
Resolved, That it is expedient to bring in a measure to make better provision for the improvement and management of the harbour of Trenton, in the province of Ontario, and to provide-
1.	That boundaries of the harbour be defined: harbour commissioners and a harbour master be appointed; and rules and regulations, and a tariff of rates and dues, be made.
2.	That the commissioners shail keep separate accounts of all moneys received and expended, and account therefor annually to the Governor in Council in such manner as may be directed.
3.	That the commissioners shall expend the moneys collected, after payment of the salary of the harbour master and the necessary expenses of maintenance of the harbour, in improving the harbour and its appurtenances according to plans to be approved by the Minister.
He said: The town of Trenton possesses the larger part of the harbour property, and they have quite recently incurred a
Trenton Harbour
[Stage Direction]
rather heavy expenditure for the acquisition of another property. It has been represented to me by the town authorities, and strongly urged and recommended by my hon. friend from West Hastings (Mr. Porter) that the only way in which the town could collect dues was by the organization of a harbour commission. The town desires to get some revenue on the capital they have expended, and this resolution is simply for the purpose of enabling them to organize a harbour commission. It will not involve any expenditure on the part of the Government. It is simply for the purpose of allowing the town of Trenton to get some return on the investment they have made.
Resolution reported, read the second time and concurred in.
On motion of Mr. Lapointe, Bill No. 204, respecting the Harbour of Trenton was thereupon read the first and second times, and the House went into committee thereon, Mr. Gordon in the Chair.
On the preamble.
Mr. GERMAN:: I would like somebody
to explain why it is necessary to create a harbour commission at Trenton. There is not water enough at the present time for a vessel of any size to reach that harbour. Coming through the channel from the west there is only twelve feet of navigation. From the east up through the bay of Quinta there is certainly not fourteen feet of navigation, and the channel is a very crooked one. I cannot understand why it is necessary to have a harbour commission at Trenton, and I would like to have an explanation as to why this bill is necessary from the Minister of Marine and Fisheries. I know something about the harbour of Trenton- having been there many times in my boyhood days, and on a number of occasions since then-and to my mind it is absolutely unessential to have a harbour commission there.


Mr. LAPOINTE:: I can only refer my
hon. friend to the hon. member for West Hastings (Mr. Porter). He has succeeded in convincing me and I hope he will convince my hon. friend from Welland of the necessity for this legislation.


Mr. PORTER:: I am afraid it is so
long since my hon. friend from Welland (Mr. German) was familiar with conditions at the port of Trenton that he has either forgotten what they were or he has not been keeping track of what has been going
fMr. Lapointe.]
on there in recent years. Trenton is at the southern terminus of the Trent canal where that canal enters the bay of Quinte, the latter being the outlet for shipping from either direction. Trenton is a town with a population of about 6,000 people, and a very Large amount of shipping passes through the port, apart altogether from what may be developed by the use of the Trent canal.


William Manley German: Can my hon. friend
give me any figures as to the extent of the shipping?


Edward Guss Porter: I will give the information in a general way; I cannot at the moment offer any exact details. The freight that enters the port of Trenton consists of material brought in from the United States to supply the large creosote works there, and the fertilizer works that are now manufacturing fertilizer and creosote in Trenton. There is also a large amount of coal shipped to the port of Trenton for distribution to various sections of Midland, Ontario. In addition a very large lumber industry is about to be developed there. A company has been formed with a capitalization of about $5,000,000. They have acquired the timber limits of other companies in the vicinity containing large quantities of timber and it is their intention to manufacture this timber into lumber in the town of Trenton and ship it from the port. Now Trenton heretofore had only owned a small portion of the dockage or wharf privileges at Trenton but recently, by expropriation proceedings, have acquired the whole or major part of these privileges. That involved the expenditure of a large sum of money on their part. The dock and wharf facilities have been acquired by the municipality for the purpose of enabling them to develop the harbour as far as they can. They will necessarily be put, to considerable expense in maintaining the harbour but, as conditions now are, will be unable to collect any harbour dues whatever, or any revenue enabling them to maintain the harbour in proper condition. The present bill is for the purpose of enabling the municipality to collect such dues as will afford them means to improve and keep the harbour in a proper state of repair. As to the number of vessels that trade at the port of Trenton, I may say that the same boats trade at Trenton that trade at the port of Belleville, which has been a government harbour, and under a commission, for a period of from twenty to twenty-

Trenton Harbour
five years. The same class of boats and of freight passes through the port of Trenton as through the harbour of Belleville. I may say that although the town of Treniton is considerably smaller than the city of Belleville, yet the tonnage which passes through the former is very nearly equal to that which passes through the latter. This legislation will not entail the expenditure of a single dollar on the part of the Government, it is only a matter of protection dn the interest of the municipality of Trenton to enable them to maintain the harbour in good condition and improve it whenever found necessary. The depth of water in the harbour is from fourteen to sixteen feet, which is ample to accommodate any and all boats passing through.


William Manley German: Does my hon. friend
say that there is fourteen feet navigation in either direction?


Edward Guss Porter: Coming by way of the
Murray canal there would not be fourteen feet, but in the other direction. Through the Narrows at the port of Deseronto there is a depth of fourteen feet or more. There was that depth last year and the year before, when the water was very low as I am advised.


William Manley German: I would ask the Minister of Marine and Fisheries if there is any intention on the part of the Government to spend a dollar of the public money on the Trenton harbour?


Ernest Lapointe: Not a dollar that I
know of.


William Manley German: As a result of this
legislation I am afraid we shall see a demand in future for the expenditure of public money on Trenton harbour. Notwithstanding what the hon. member for West Hastings has said there is not a sufficient depth of water in the approaches to Trenton harbour to permit navigation by a vessel larger than a few hundred tons, and to construct a channel navigable for larger vessels through the Murray canal or the bay of Quinte from Kingston will need a very large expenditure.


Edward Guss Porter: Let me tell my hon.
friend that the sum of $100,000 has already been expended in improving Trenton harbour and the approaches thereto, so that what my hon. friend is apprehensive of has already taken place.


Ernest Lapointe: The hon. gentleman's statement is a strong argument in favour of the bill. The only way to recoup the town for the money spent on that harbour is by collecting dues from the ships. As far as the fear of these gentlemen coming back and asking for more money is concerned, I would refer them to the hon. Minister of Finance.
Bill reported, read the third time and passed.



SECOND READING

[Stage Direction]
Bill No. 196, from the Senate, respecting a patent of the Dominion Chain Company, Limited.- (Mr. Jacobs).
[Stage Direction]
The House again in Committee of Supply.

[Stage Direction]
For the -purchase of five machines for affixing a distinguishing device and serial mimher on each Dominion Note, after the notes have been delivered by the printer and engraver to the Minister of Finance, and while the notes are in the custody and control of the officers of the Department of Finance, as provided for by Sub-section 2, of Section 3, of the Dominion Notes Act, 1914, $12,500.
Mr. FIELDING:: The object of this item is to make a change with regard to the method of issuing Dominion notes. The notes are printed under proper supervision and they bear the signature of the deputy minister. Then, when they came to the Finance Department, there is a counter signature put on them by one of the young ladies employed for that purpose. It is a matter occupying a good deal of time, and it is proposed to substitute for that a stamp which will be kept in the Finance Department, dispensing with the services of these young ladies. Considerable economy will be effected in that way.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
JUSTICE DEPARTMENT. Department of Justice

Salaries-
James White, Technical Adviser to the Minister of Justice, transferred from the Conservation Commission $6,000
Assistant Private Secretary	 1,600
Two Clerk-Stenographers at $960.00
each	 1,920
Assistant Structural Engineer, Penitentiary Branch		2,700
Mr. MEIGHE'N: It would look from this as if the minister has been imposed on, and the whole balance of the staff of the Conservation Commission wished on his department. Really, I do not know how Mr. James White can be a technical adviser to the Justice Department. He
Supply-Justice
[Stage Direction]
may be one of those men, quite a number of whom I have met, who believe themselves natural lawyers.
Mr. GRAHAM:: They have their uses.


Arthur Meighen: I know something about this matter, and I suggest to the minister that in self defence he ask that this item be deferred.


Sir LOMER GOUIN:: I may say that Mr. White was previously on the Commission of Conservation, and he has been transferred and put in charge of research work in connection with the Department of Justice.
He has been engaged recently upon the Labrador-Newfoundland boundary. We have some work to perform in connection with that, ,and Mr. White has been employed upon it. He is very useful, I am told, to the staff and the deputy minister, and, I understand, he is to be there for one year.


Arthur Meighen: Is there not some danger there? I do not know what special qualifications he has for investigating the boundary of Labrador. I have no fault to find with his qualifications for the position he held as secretary of the Conservation Commission. I am not discussing that at all, but that position was done away with for the sake of economy. Now there is no economy at all, if the members of that commission are going to be drafted back into the departments, into more or less artificial and ornamental positions. Mr. White was retired, and he was entitled to his pension. I do not know just what it was, some $4,000 odd for life, and I do not think he has any complaint. If he comes back now, I presume it would mean that the higher salary, if he is getting a higher salary now, for this short term, will be utilized to add to this $4,000 pension that he is entitled to for the remainder of his life.


Lomer Gouin: His present salary is $6,000. If he had been pensioned last year, it would have meant a difference of about $1,500 or $2,000 at the most. If he was retired the Government might save $2,000 per year. I may say that the expenses of the Conservation Commission were over $300,000 per year. The only officer retained is Mr. White, and one shorthand writer, who draws a salary of between $900 and $1,000.


Arthur Meighen: This is only the commencement of it.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
[Mr. Meighen.j
Administration of Justice
To provide differential salary for certain judges of the Court of King's Bench and Superior 'Court of Quebec, from July 1 to July 25,	1920, notwithstanding anything in the
Judges' Act, 32 at $1'34.30, 15 at $268.81, $8,332.95.
Mr. GUTHRIE:: Will the minister give us some explanation of this item?


Lomer Gouin: The salaries of all the judges were substantially raised by 1011 George V, chapter 56, dating in the case of every province except Quebec from; 1st July, 1920, on which day the act came into effect. By section 5 of the act, however, it was provided that the section raising the salaries of the Quebec judges would come into operation upon and after a day to be named by proclamation of the Governor in Council. This proclamation was made on July 26, 1920, only, the result being that the judges of Quebec were twenty-five days behind the other judges of Canada ini receiving their increases. This item, I understand, was approved by my predecessor, but we could not have it voted before.
Mr. LEWItS: Has any provision been madte in the Supplementary Estimates for a judgeship at Gravellbourg in Saskatchewan, and have any other similar appointments been made in Saskatchewan?


Lomer Gouin: Representations have been made to us with regard to the appointment of a judge at Gravelbourg, and I hope we shall be in a position, after the session, to 'give satisfaction to the people of that district.


Arthur Meighen: May I make this suggestion to the minister? The province of Quebec has, of course, a different system from that of the rest of Canada.	In Quebec, there is no county or district lourt, as it is known in other provinces. In the other provinces these district court judges do not rank with the superior court judges, either as to salary or as to jurisdiction. They have jurisdiction up to small amounts running from $300 to $1,000, and they receive a salary of $5,000. The province of Quebec has no such court, and as a consequence all the judges are superior court judges, and draw the $9,000 salary of the superior court judges, although most of the time they are trying only $600 or $900 cases. Of course, nothing could be done that would disturb the status of any judge now appointed. Nobody would ask that; but not only would it be in the interest of economy, but it "would

Supply-Justice
be more in accord with common sense, if it could be effected, necessarily by provincial legislation, that a county court would be established in Quebec, thereby bringing the courts of that province into harmony with the courts of the other provinces of Canada. There would, of course, have to be new appointments to the county court, and the others would lapse only as the
4 p.m. members of the court were to retire or to die. That would seem to me a great reform, and the Minister of Justice (Sir Lomer Gouin) having very considerable influence in the government of Quebec as well as in this Government, he would seem to me to be particularly designed by Providence to exert some really great influence to produce this reform.


Lomer Gouin: We have superior court judges in Quebec, and in the city and district of Montreal we have four circuit court judges. As to cases of minor importance referred to by the leader of the Opposition (Mr. Meighen), a change was effected in Quebec lately. At the last session of the provincial parliament, amendments were made giving jurisdiction, in circuit court cases up to $100, to the magistrates, so that there would be so much less work for our judges of the superior court. The number of our judges is certainly not too large with the increase in population in the different districts. With this amendment, which I have just mentioned and which has been brought about by the provincial government, I have reason to believe that the representations now made by the leader of the Opposition will be met; that is to say, no objection could be made for the future as to the jurisdiction given to our superior court judges. Small matters will be decided by the magistrates.


Arthur Meighen: I see clearly that that will in time effect the same result. With the growth of the province, if magisterial jurisdiction is expanded instead of the superior court being expanded in point of numbers, the same result will be achieved.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.

[Stage Direction]
To provide for the establishment of three detachments, two on Ellsmere Island and one on or near Bylot Island, Arctic Regions, $60,000.
Mr. GARLAND (Bow River) :: Are
these new stations?


Lomer Gouin: Yes.


Edward Joseph Garland: For
what purpose?


Lomer Gouin: For our Mounted Police.


Edward Joseph Garland: What
is the necessity for these stations?


Lomer Gouin: It is necessary to protect our rights against foreigners; to protect our fisheries, and to take care of our property generally.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
To assist in the suppression of the White Slave Traffic, $2,500.
Mr. HANSON:: It seems to me that $2,500 is not at all adequate in connection with work of this character if anything effective is to be accomplished.


Lomer Gouin: The same amount has been voted since 1914 under the recommendation of Colonel Sherwood. I am informed by the Chief Commissioner that the appropriation is sufficient.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Amount required to pay legal expenses etc., in connection with the case, Dominion Iron and Steel Co., Ltd., vs. The King re ships plates, $8,200.
Arthur Meighen: Should this item carry
in the absence of the hon. member for Laprairie and Napierville (Mr. Lanctot) ?


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Grant to R. G. Chamberlin, for special police service on the occasion of the visit of His Royal Highness the Prince of Wales to Canada in 1919, $1,000.
Hugh Guthrie: How does this come up now after an interval of three years?


Lomer Gouin: Mr. Chamberlin's services were retained because Colonel Sherwood was engaged at the time and the government had to appoint someone to take his place. Mr. Chamberlin never received anything from the government.


Hugh Guthrie: Did he ever send a bill in?


Lomer Gouin: It was left to the government and Colonel Sherwood. Mr. Chamberlin was always expecting something, and we now propose that $1,000 be paid him. I do not think it is too large a sum.


Arthur Meighen: One cannot remember
all the particular items here of this character. Doubtless claims were made at the time and were refused by the late government for pretty good reasons. Of course, if the presentation of additional facts dis-
Supply-Justice

closes that an error was made at the time, that error should be corrected now, but I do not want the minister to undo all the good work the late government did.


William Lyon Mackenzie King: Unless my
right hon. friend wishes this item to go through, I am perfectly agreeable to let it drop.


Arthur Meighen: I do not know anything about it.


William Lyon Mackenzie King: The Under
Secretary of State, Sir Joseph Pope, at the time of the Prince of Wales' visit thought it necessary to have some officer to take charge of the whole; tour. That work would naturally come to Colonel Sherwood if he was available, but he was not, and Mr. Chamberlin was borrowed from the Canadian Pacific Railway Company in whose employ he was at the time. On the representations of both Sir Joseph Pope and Mr. Newcombe, Deputy Minister of Justice, Mr. Chamberlin contends that he had good reason to expect the government would give him some remuneration for the services he rendered. He received no compensation from the government, but he did receive his regular salary from the Canadian Pacific Railway Company. The work -he was doing throughout the tour was different in character from his regular work. This happened while my right hon. friend was in office, and unless he wishes to have the undertaking of Sir Joseph Pope and Mr. Newcombe implemented, the passing of the item is immaterial to us.


Arthur Meighen: I was in office, but not in the Department of External Affairs.


George Perry Graham: You were on the exterior.


Arthur Meighen: No, I was very much in the interior. I remember though that Mr.-Cham-berlin, who was at that time the head of the constable service of the Canadian Pacific Railway, did accompany the Prince of Wales. If Sir Joseph Pope and the officers of the department state that Mr. Chamberlin had a right to expect compensation upon the understanding they arrived at, I have no objection to the item passing; but no such representations were made to me.


Samuel William Jacobs: Was not Mr. Chamberlin paid by the Canadian Pacific Railway?


William Lyon Mackenzie King: No.


Samuel William Jacobs: He was in the employ of the Canadian Pacific Railway Company.


William Lyon Mackenzie King: Yes; but had he been at his regular work his duties would have been much less exacting. lie had to spend his entire time going all over the country with the Prince. For that extra service he got no remuneration from the Government or from the Canadian Pacific Railway Company.


Samuel William Jacobs: Could we not get out of our liability by giving him a decoration or something of that kind?


Mr. GOOD:: I understand the gentleman was receiving a pretty good salary from the Canadian Pacific Railway Company during the time he was engaged in this work and undter the circumstances I would think the honour accruing to him would be sufficient recompense. I think we are under no particular obligation unless we entered into an agreement with him at the time. The item ought to be dropped.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
MILITIA AND DEFENCE Civil Government - Department of Militia and Defence-Salaries-
To provide for arrears of salary due to Alexander Tetu from the 15th July, -1919 to the 31st March, J.922	$ 120
Secretary to Executive	 1,800
Senior Clerk-Stenographer	 1,320
Clerk-Stenographer	 960
Confidential Messenger	 960
Hugh Guthrie: Are these all additions to the present staff?


George Perry Graham: The first item explains itself: this gentleman was promoted but strange to say was never paid the additional salary of $120. The other items refer to secretaries to the executives!. Under the Order in Council and by the full consent otf the Civil Service Commission, each minister is entitled to make appointments to these positions. Should any of the temporaries on my staff be refused re-classification, I would be -in a peculiar position if I had not some way of making such appointments.


Hugh Guthrie: The idea would be to take them on again?


George Perry Graham: In some instances we
may, in others we may not take them on again.


Arthur Meighen: I understand that if it had not been for the amalgamation and resultant "economy" these expenditures would not be necessary.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.

Supply-Departments
Militia and Defence-Civil pensions-
Life pension to Robert Allen.. ..	$269	52
Life pension to Ronald Morrison.. 330 00
Life pension to Walter Pettipas.. 515 90
Mr. KYTE:: These items have appeared for some years. I would like to have some explanation as to why they are paid.
Mr. .GRAHAM:	These pensions were
granted before the act was passed by which such pensions may be paid year by year without a special vote. They have been voted in thiis way each, year since 1917.


George William Kyte: They are for persons who were formerly employed in the Militia Department-ordinary pensions?


George Perry Graham: Oh, yes.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
'Gratuity to the widow of the late H. N. P. Chesley, $466.67.
George Perry Graham: Mr. Chesley had been in the employ of the government for forty-one years. He was retired on the last day of April. Had he died on the last day of April his widow would have been entitled under the act to two months' pay, but he died four days after, and this item is to give his widow the two months' pay as if he had not been retired.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Department of Secretary of State-Salaries-
One Clerk-Stenographer	 $ 960
One Senior Clerk-iStenographer-
Further amount required	 15
Contingencies-
Further amount required	 2,320
Arthur Meighen: Why is the minister asking for contingencies at this late hour?


Mr. COPP:: My officers gave me an itemized statement, but I do not happen to have it with me. It is' for further contingencies required.


Arthur Meighen: Let it stand.
Item stands.
Miscellaneous-expenses under the Canada Temperance Act-further amount required, $20,000.


Hugh Guthrie: How is this money to be spent?


Arthur Bliss Copp: At the last session of the Prince Edward Island legislature authority was taken for the holding of a plebiscite during the year and this is to make the necessary provision for it.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Air Board-to provide for the "7 ustruction of a 'building to house a wind tunnel for aeronautical research, $5,000.
Mr. KENNEDY (Edmonton) :: Explain.


George Perry Graham: For some years Toronto University has been carrying on experiments in aeronautical research. They wish now to carry on their work in another part of the grounds and we are assisting in the erection of a new building for the purpose. The work is of great value to the Air Board.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Department of Immigration and Colonization-'Salaries-
To provide for one new Chief Clerkship	 $3,360
To provide for a further amount for a promotion from Head Clerk to
Chief Clerk	 120
To provide for a further amount for
one Head Clerkship	 480
To provide for a further amount for a promotion to a Principal Clerkship	 240
To provide for a new Division Immigration Inspector, Grade 1 .	..	2,040
To provide for one Senior File Clerk	1,320
To provide for one Senior Clerk-
Stenographer	 1,320
To provide for a further amount for
a promotion to Senior Clerk-Typist	180
To provide for eight Clerk-Stenographers at $960	 7,680
To provide for nine File Clerks at
$960	 8,640
To provide for one Clerk	 960
To provide for five Junior Clerk-
Stenographers at $600	 3,000
To provide for one Junior Clerk..	600
To provide for one Office Boy.. ..	330
Charles A. Stewart: This vote is necessary owing to the fact that the Civil Service Commission will no longer allow us to carry thirty-three temporary employees-. There are two new positions here, one occupied by Mr. Buskard, who has been transferred from the Prime Minister s office to the Department of Immigration, and one division immigration inspector. Of the thirty-three employees mentioned in the item, thirty-one have been in the employ of the department at Ottawa for a number of years in a temporary capacity, and their salaries have been provided and paid for out of the vote for immigration contingencies. The positions of these thirty-one employees are now declared to be of a permanent nature, and the payment of salaries is no longer to be made from the appropriation for contingencies.


William Charles Good: Will this mean a saving so far as the main estimates are concerned?
Supply-Immigration


Charles A. Stewart: Yes, with the exception of three new officials on the Continent. There of our men are operating in the Baltic ports this year for the purpose of putting the vise on passports, which has heretofore been done by British consular officers. This will obviate the necessity of continental immigrants passing through England in order to have their passports vised. Outside of that there will be a saving.


Mr. SALES:: Where is the new immigration inspector to be stationed?


Charles A. Stewart: Eastern Canada.


Thomas Sales: At what point?


Charles A. Stewart: These
men travel between the ports of Quebec, St. John and so on. This official will not be stationed at any particular place in that respect.


Samuel William Jacobs: Has the Government considered the question of merging the Department of Immigration and Colonization with the Interior Department and having the three branches administered as they were before 1917? Everyone understands why this Department of Immigration and Colonization was created in that year. There was no immigration and no colonization in the midst of the war, but a position had1 to be created for Mr. Calder, who was at that time taken into the Government. Now that Mr. Calder is settled for life in a higher Chamber, does the Government not think that we might get back to the old system? The Department of the Interior handled this question of immigration from 1896, when Sir Clifford Sifton took charge, and has brought into this country millions of immigrants. The policy of the department now seems to be to prevent immigrants from coming to this country altogether, because an Order in Council was passed on the 9th of May declarting that after that date immigration into Canada is prohibited. That being the case, it does seem to me, it is the part of unwisdom to continue this elaborate department, which costs I do not know how many millions of dollars annually. The department was very well run as an adjunct of the Department of the Interior by the different ministers of the Interior who occupied that position and by the very efficient Deputy Minister of the Interior, Mr. Cory. This Department of Immigration seems to be

used as a kind of refuge for every individual and official Who is being dispensed with or whose services are of little value. For instance, we find that Doctor Black, who, I think, occupied prior to November or December, 1921, the position of official organizer of the National Liberal and Conservative party, was found to be such a valuable assistant to that organization that when his services were no longer required he was forthwith made Deputy Minister of Immigration and Colonization, just immediately before the government went to the country, and when they were in what I might call articulo mortis. The government knew they could never come back, but evidently Mr. Black had to be provided for, for some reason unknown to me, and he was given this position of deputy minister at $6,000 a year, while other officials who had been in both the Immigration Department and the Interior Department were ignored and passed over. As I said before, inasmuch as we are not admitting immigration into this country at all, with the exception of female domestics and farm labourers, it does seem to me that these millions of dollars which are being spent might be saved, and the department go back to where it was before it wad separated from the Interior Department. I have no doubt that the very efficient Minister of Immigration and Colonization, who is also the Minister of the Interior, could function just as well from his department in the Langevin block, as when he is divided up and spends half his time in the Norlite building and the rest of his time in the Langevin block.


Arthur Meighen: The hon. member did not fail to disclose what the originating impulse was of his desire for economy. He seems to have something :n his bosom against Doctor Black.


Samuel William Jacobs: None whatever. I never spoke to Doctor Black in my life.


Arthur Meighen: Perhaps th?t is why it is in his bosom. I am pretty sure that if he had, the prejudices he now entertains would be very soon swept away. I only rose to say a word with regard to Doctor Black. It is true he occupied the position of organizer of the party for a time, and while doing so he gave his entire time to it, but if that is an offence While a man is free, drawing no public money, disqualifying him from public office, then I am afraid the decks would have to be swept clean of very many deputy ministers, and

Supply-Immigration
very many other high officials, and included in those not only men appointed twenty or twenty-five years ago, but an almost equal number in the short but miserable term in office of my hon. friends.


Samuel William Jacobs: Miserable?


Arthur Meighen: Perhaps the word
wretched might have been better. I have in mind now Mr. Duncan Marshall, appointed without reference to the Civil Service Commission, a job created for him and trips found, etc. The position Doctor Black occupies was not created for any one. It is an office of great importance, and can only be filled by a man of efficiency and high qualifications.


Samuel William Jacobs: Will the right hon. gentleman allow me to tell him that before Doctor Black's appointment we never had a Deputy Minister of Immigration and Colonization? The position was created for Doctor Black.


Mr. CASGRAIN:: Hear, hear.


Arthur Meighen: The hon. member says "hear, hear." I assure him he knows as little about it as the hon. member who spoke. When the position was created, Doctor Black was Commissioner of Agriculture for Canada, had not the slightest thought of moving from his position, and was in a position for which he was eminently qualified. Those were the facts when this position was created. Subsequently he became head of the Soldier Settlement Board'. It would not look from that as if the position had been created for him, when he was promoted to a very much more responsible position, even more responsible than that which he holds to-day. Hon. members of this House of all political persuasions, and I refer particularly to hon members to my left who were in the last House, were not at all ungenerous in their tributes to the very great success of Doctor Black's work as head of the Soldier Settlement Board.


Samuel William Jacobs: He wrote the tributes himself.


Arthur Meighen: I am sorry for my hon. friend's opinion of other hon. gentlemen in this House. I have in mind the hon. member for Victoria and Carleton (Mr. Caldwell). Does the hon. member suggest that his speech relative to Doctor Black was written by Doctor Black? I did not know that hon. gentlemen were so impotent either in the way of forming opinions or in the way of their utterance. No, the
work done there by Doctor Black was as eminent public service as has ever been rendered by an official of this country. It is a comparatively easy task to-day, with the lines laid down, the trail blazed, and all the main difficulties surmounted, to take a piece of machinery and by a little sandpapering and oiling let it proceed with its work, but the big difficulties and the big dangers were faced by Doctor Black, and they were surmounted by him, and surmounted with eminent success.


Samuel William Jacobs: And' his present position is a reward for his services in that direction.


Arthur Meighen: If it were, it would be eminently justified, but it is not. His services there most clearly show that he is big enough, yes, more than big enough, for the position he holds now, and whether the functions of the Department of limmi-gration are concerned more with bringing immigrants in or with sifting immigration and seeing that only the right kind come in, no matter which function is the more important, there is no officer of this Government, I venture to say there is no one outside the realms of the service, who is better qualified to perform that work than is Doctor Black. I would ask those who have been acquainted with his. work, whether in one office or the other, if it has not been performed with a single eye to duty and with marked efficiency, demonstrating no ordinary powers.
The hon. member says the office was created for him. There is no hon. member of this House who thinks that. It is utterly inconceivable. Doctor Black was in an office, he had previously .been president of the Manitoba Agricultural College, he was filling an office after the creation of this, one, let me repeat, and was promoted to that most responsible position of head of the Soldier Settlement Board, whose responsibilities he discharged with much success, and during a period of about three years. No, the Department of Imtaiigration and Colonization was made a separate department, or rather, a branch of the Interior was made a separate department, in order that that work growing in importance in this country might have the undivided attention of a minister. That 'became inpossible, with the contraction of the government later, 'but while it remained a separate department, the Mines Department was brought back into the Interior Department. The Mines Department is now added
Supply-Immigration

to the responsibility of that office, and, as well, the functions of the Interior Department have grown and multiplied in these years, and! I venture to say that the Interior Department, as administered to-day by the minister is four times in magnitude what is was in 1906.


Samuel William Jacobs: When the natural resources of the western provinces are returned to those provinces what will be the functions of the Interior Department?


Arthur Meighen: That will be the occasion for a re-consideration of the subject, but if my hon. friend expects that in the very near future then, in the words of the Finance Minister "I have not seen so great faith, no not even in Israel". We will pass that milestone when we rea.ch it. But let me impress this on the Government: I do not object to the expansion of the Department of Immigration and Colonization; I do not emphasize one function more than another-both are of paramount consequence; the getting of the right immigrant and the exclusion of' the wrong immigrant. Far better have the Mines branch in the Department of the Interior and have a separate Immigration and Colonization branch than to move the Mines branch out and to bring the Immigration branch back. I think it is one of the most important services the Government can render to expand the functions of that department and Increase its usefulness. And in doing so they cannot get a better man than the present deputy-in fact I doubt if they can get his equal.


Samuel William Jacobs: By reason of his success as organizer for the National Liberal Conservative party?


Arthur Meighen: I do not know that
I should answer that question. If I did it would be in the affirmative, but I do not want that to be any inducement to the minister to get him for his own purposes.


Samuel William Jacobs: I suppose the fact that
the hon. gentleman is now sitting on the opposite side of this House indicates how successful Dr. Black was.


Arthur Meighen: If a man has to be a success as a political organizer to get into the government service-that apparently appears to he the view of my hon. friend- I assure him that his party seems to be living up to that 'policy.


Samuel William Jacobs: May I point out to the
right hon. gentleman that there was no

Deputy Minister of Immigration and Colonization prior to the appointment of Dr. Black, and the department got along fairly well. Mr. Cory, who was also the Deputy Minister of the Department of the Interior performed the duties of both offices and discharged those duties very well, and Mr. Scott, Commissioner of Immigration, acted as a sort of deputy minister in that branch. Now why should we be paying $6,000 a year to this gentleman when the work was done as well, and perhaps better, before he ever came into the department?


Arthur Meighen: Well, I would say this as to why there was no deputy before: The minister of the day was not able to find just the man he wanted for the position; but as the hon. gentleman ought to know there have been two or three officers of that department, one very prominent one, who have not been able to perform their services for some time. I have nothing in the world to say against Mr. Cory, he is an able man, but Mr. Cory or any other man cannot really perform the functions which the Deputy Minister of Immigration really performs-not merely by proxy but performs in his own person-and at the same time do justice to the office of Deputy Minister of the Interior.


Samuel William Jacobs: Does Mr. Cory agree
with that statement?


Arthur Meighen: I have not conferred
with Mr. Cory on the subject for some time, perhaps my hon. friend has; but I do not always take men 'at their own valuation in respect of ability to discharge the duties of several offices.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Immigration and Colonization. Outside Service, Salaries-
Further amount required, $35,000.
Charles A. Stewart: This is identical' with the other item except that it applies to the outside service. I want to say to the committee that I have endeavoured, in administering three, four or five different branches to get to understand the Civil Service Act, and I must confess that I do not understand it yet. The last item referred to the inside service, that is the service here in Ottawa. This is to provide for the appointment of employees at agencies and inspection points whose positions have been filled for some years by temporary appointments, but which positions are now considered of a permanent nature. All of these positions

Supply-Immigration
are to be advertised in the usual way, by the Civil Service Commission, and appointments made from the list of those who have qualified under competitive examinations held under the regulations of the Civil Service Commission. No doubt the appointment in a permanent capacity of properly qualified employees to these positions will lead to greater efficiency and be of benefit to the department.


Donald MacBeth Kennedy: Will
the minister explain where these officials are located?


Charles A. Stewart: They are located at Toronto, Montreal, Quebec, St. John, Halifax, Fort Erie, Lacolle, Niagara Falls, Walkerville, Port Arthur, Winnipeg and Vancouver.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Repatriation Expenses, $25,000.
Charles A. Stewart: I think this money was formerly paid out of the demobilization vote, but there is no demobilization vote for this year. Last year, I think the sum of $165,000 was spent in repatriating soldiers who had remained in Great Britain. I presume these were soldiers who took their discharge in Great Britain and subsequently desired to come back to Canada. We are voting $25,000 this year to take care of cases of that kind.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
To ,pay the balance due on rent of house leased by "W. T. R. Preston, while engaged as 'Commissioner of Emigration, in London, England, $1,509.95.
Hugh Guthrie: What are the facts in connection with this item?


Charles A. Stewart: It appears that when Mr. Preston was in the immigration service in London, part of his remuneration consisted of the rent of a house in which he lived. When he was transferred to the Department of Trade and Commerce part of this rent was due him. In the estimates of 1913-14 a sum was voted by Parliament to meet the claim but Mr. Preston objected to the amount and refused to accept it. Subsequently the amount was again voted but through some oversight Mr. Preston was never made aware of the fact. He contends that although the item was voted he did not receive the money and has made a fresh application to be paid this amount which he claims he is entitled to from
the government. I am therefore asking for the sum of $973.33, which is the amount voted in 1913-14, plus 5 per cent interest, thus accounting for the total of $1,509.95.


Hugh Guthrie: I think it must be twelve years since Mr. Preston left the government service. This, therefore, is a pretty old claim, and if the sum of $973.33 was the amount of the claim allowed in the session of 1913-14, and Mr. Preston objected and would not accept it, I do not see why we should now pay him five per cent interest on it. It looks to me like a pretty stale claim. I draw the minister's attention to these facts. In his own statement he says that for some reason or other Mr. Preston objected to the amount.


Charles A. Stewart: That was in reference to the vote on the first occasion. I understand that the amount of $973 was acceptable, but, he being in China at that particular time, through some oversight the vote lapsed before it was paid. That is the explanation I got of it.


Mr. BRETHEN:: Can the minister explain why it was not paid the following year?


Charles A. Stewart: It would lapse on the 31st March.


Hugh Guthrie: Has there been any application in the intervening years for payment?


George Arthur Brethen: Would it not be brought forward in the following year?


Donald MacBeth Kennedy: Is this one year's grant or two years'?


Charles A. Stewart: I cannot tell that. The sum asked for was the amount voted in the session of 1913-14, which apparently was agreed upon, and was satisfactory to Parliament at that time.


Donald MacBeth Kennedy: Was it one year's rent?


Charles A. Stewart: I cannot say.


Hugh Guthrie: There is this rather outstanding fact. I think a man who has a claim against the government of Canada is disqualified from sitting in this House, and certainly he was the government candidate in the last election in the riding of Durham. It does not look as if Mr. Preston considered he had a claim. However, if Parliament adjusted it at $973 in the
Supply-Immigration

year 1913, I have no objection to paying the money, but why should the Government be called upon to pay a fixed sum of $600 interest in a case of this kind?


Mr. MARTELL:: If a person has a claim against the government, he is not disqualified from being a candidate in an election. That is a most peculiar contention.


Hugh Guthrie: Read the statute.


Lewis Herbert Martell: My hon. friend cannot show such a provision in the statute.


Hugh Guthrie: I am going to move to reduce the item by the amount of the interest, $600.


William Lyon Mackenzie King: My hon.
friend's motion amounts to this: he admits the claim is just and proper. It was agreed to by an administration that was opposed to the present Government. There was no dispute in Parliament about it being a perfectly right and proper amount at that time, and the government has had the use of this money ever since. My hon. friend would deprive a citizen of the country of the proper rate of interest on an obligation owing by the government for a period of years. I think my hon. friend ought to be ashamed of anything so small and mean.


Arthur Meighen: There has been no admission of anything on this side. I have no reason, from my own knowledge, to dispute what the minister says, that this money was voted in 1913-14. I know nothing about it, nor does the hon. gentleman from South Wellington (Mr. Guthrie) or any one on this side of the House. We assume it to be correct. Then, it being correct, nothing has been shown in the way of default on the part of the government, or wrongful refusal to pay on the part of the government. Consequently, there is no right to interest, except what the minister says, and he does not allege facts that give any right to interest.
Amendment (Mr. Guthrie) negatived on division, yeas 39, nays 70.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Office of the Auditor General-contingencies- further amount required, $20,000.
William Stevens Fielding: This amount is required for the publication of the Auditor General's report. The practice in former years was to have a general vote for printing out of which this work was paid for. Now each branch of the service is providing for its own printing.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.

Department of Finance-'Salaries-additional amount required to provide for the salary of the Commissioner of Tariff, as voted in .Supplementary Estimates, 1921-22, $2,100.
William Stevens Fielding: The salary of this gentleman was fixed in the supplementary estimates. This is the corresponding item. Item agreed to.
Department of Agriculture-Salaries-
Confidential Messenger Clerk ....	$1,140	00Assistant to Chief, Fibre Division..	1,440	00Senior Clerk-Stenographer	
1,320	00
Amount required to pay difference in salary between Senior and
Principal Translator	 240	00
To provide for salary of Secretary-Clerk from February 15th to
March 31st, 1922	
397	50Allowance for Private Secretary..	200	00


Donald MacBeth Kennedy: Are
these new employees in the department?


Mr. MOTHERWELL:: One of them, the assistant to chief, fibre division, is. Two years have been spent in endeavouring to get a gentleman to fill this position, and success has, at last, crowned our efforts; but as this did not occur until after the main estimates came down, we have to provide this salary.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Post Office Department-To provide for the payment of salary of Alfred BeKey from the 17th October, 1921.to the 28th December, 1921 at the rate of $3,500 a year, during which period he acted as Private 'Secretary to the ex-Postmaster General, the Honourable L, G. Belley, $696.24
Joseph Philippe Baby Casgrain: I cannot for myself vote in favour of this item, and I would certainly move that it be struck out. I do so for different reasons. The item provides for the payment of salary to a private secretary to the ex-Postmaster General, the Hon. L. G. Belley, during the period from the 17th October, 1921, to the 28th December, 1921. This was, as every hon. member will recall, during the last election. The ex-Postmaster General, as soon as he was sworn in, took as his private sec-
5 p.m. retary, Major Pacaud; the gentleman who is mentioned in this item, Alfred Belley, is the son of the ex-Postmaster General, and during the whole time of the campaign, nothing more was done by him than to conduct the campaign on behalf of his father in the county which I have the honour to represent in this House. I object to this item, because it would foe the payment by the Parliament of Canada of certain expenses of a defeated

Steamship Subsidies
candidate at an election, and this would be creating a very bad precedent. At any rate, the minister was in office only until the 6th of December last, and I do not see why this salary should be voted until the 28th of December, 1921, when he was not in office at that time. For that reason I would move that this item be struck out. I consider it nothing less than political robbery.


Mr. MURPHY:: I have no personal
knowledge in regard to this item, except the information that was given to me in the department. The gentleman referred to was, I am informed, private secretary to the Postmaster General who occupied the position prior to the advent of the present Administration. My further information is that there was no money available to pay the private secretary of the former Postmaster General, and that his salary would have to be voted at the ensuing session of Parliament, that is at this session. Accordingly, in pursuance of the practice that has hitherto prevailed and in accordance with what one and, perhaps, two of my colleagues have already done this session, I inserted this item as an obligation to be discharged by this Administration irrespective of who the incumbent of the office was. I do not know anything about the length of service. I merely reflect in this item what was given to me by the department. Personally, I leave the item in the hands of the committee.


Joseph Philippe Baby Casgrain: I do not see that in
the case of the other Quebec ministers in the former administration, for instance, Mr. Monty, ex-Minister of. Justice, and Mr. Fauteux, former Secretary of State, items were inserted for the payment of private secretaries. It seems to me that this is the only instance where provision is being asked of this House to pay the salary of the private secretary of a defeated minister. None of the other defeated ministers in the late administration have filed with any department of the Government any claim for payment of their private secretaries1, and I do not see why we should make an exception in this case.


Charles Murphy: My hon. friend is in
error in regard to that. The salary of the private secretary of the former Secretary of State was inserted in the estimates in precisely the same way as this item has been.


The CHAIRMAN:: The amendment is
not in order.
Item agreed to: Yeas, 67; nays, 43.
Mail subsidies and steamship subventions- Eietou, Mulgrave and Cheticamp steam service between-further amount required, 53,500.


Hugh Guthrie: Are these new services?


James Alexander Robb: No. Last year a very heavy loss was shown in the operation of this service, which is of very great importance to the west coast of Cape Breton.


Hugh Guthrie: Why were these sums not included in the Main Estimates?


James Alexander Robb: The contractors would not accept the amount in the Main Estimates and give the service. We had to make the increase to maintain the service.


Hugh Guthrie: Is this an additional amount over last year?


James Alexander Robb: Yes.


Hugh Guthrie: I notice there are eight or nine of these items, and if they are ordinary annual current items I do not see why they are all boosted this year by these large amounts. I think the minister should give some explanation.


James Alexander Robb: There are quite a few of these items which we were compelled to increase this year to maintain the services. These subsidized services are compelled to supply the department with a financial statement and a schedule of their freight and passenger rates. They have satisfied the department that they have been operating at a loss and could not continue the service. As my hon. friend is aware, these services are the only means of transportation for people along the coast.


Hugh Guthrie: It is pretty heavy.


James Alexander Robb: It does not amount to very much after all.


Arthur Meighen: Could not the minister give the total in each case? It does seem strange that now when ocean rates are only a fraction of what they were this Government is not able to make as good contracts as the old government did under much higher rate conditions.


James Alexander Robb: The reason is that the subsidized companies have come forward and shown a loss in operation. My -right hon. friend will remember that in the Main Estimates there were some reductions. Last year a heavy loss was shown in the operation of this service, which is of great importance to the west coast of Cape

Steamship Subsidies

Breton. In view of this and also of arrangements then made to increase the number of trips between Mulgrave and Cheticamp from two to three per week during the coming season from May 15th to September 15th, we have agreed to give this additional $3,500. The committe will observe that the service is being improved.


Donald MacBeth Kennedy: The fair wage clause holds good in connection with certain government contracts, and I cannot see why it should not apply to contracts with companies receiving subsidies. What is the practice?


James Alexander Robb: I speak subject to correction, but I would not think there is such a clause in these subsidy contracts.


William Charles Good: The statement the minister read is simply that these companies showed a loss in operation. Are their statements audited by the department?


James Alexander Robb: Oh, yes, and the department has a travelling inspector, Mr. Tupper, on the Atlantic coast. He is constantly supervising the subsidized lines.


Donald MacBeth Kennedy: Could
any of these routes be served by ships of the Canadian Government Merchant Marine which are now lying idle?


James Alexander Robb: Our vessels are not of the right draft for these services.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Charlottetown, Pictou and or New Glasgow steam service between-Further amount required, $6,000.
Richard Burpee Hanson: This is a very substantial increase. What was the amount voted in the Main Estimates, and why is there such a large increase?


James Alexander Robb: Last year and again this year $2,000 was included in the Main Estimates for steamship services on the above route. The service performed last year was very inadequate, and two offers were received for an improved service during 1922-23, one being from the Charlottetown Steamship Company, who offered the steamer Magdalene for a subsidy of $8,000, and the other from last year's contractors, the Pictou Steamship Company, who offered to bring a large boat from England for a subsidy of $12,000, which offer was afterwards amended to $7,000. Our inspectors made a careful examination of each vessel and reported the Magdalene to be the more suitable of the two, and the contract was awarded

to the owners for a daily service between Pictou and Charlottetown up to October 1st, after which three round trips a week are to be run to the close of navigation. This vote is therefore required to make the total up to $8,000. Only $2,000 was voted in the Main Estimates.


Richard Burpee Hanson: This route has been
established for a number of years, but it is in direct competition with the Canadian National Railways between the island and the mainland.


James Alexander Robb: No, it is not the same
route.


Oliver Robert Gould: The minister, replying to a question, stated that the inspector examined the books of steamship companies to which subsidies are granted. It seems to me that that inspector should have power to audit the books at any time. Further, I think the department itself should have all the financial statements of those companies on file so we can be given more information than we are receiving when these votes are being put through. The minister fixes the amount of the item on the report sent in by his inspector, which perhaps is not based on as thorough an examination as the House has a right to expect.


James Alexander Robb: I can assure my Jhon.
friend that a very careful examination of all these accounts is made by an officer in the department who gives his entire attention to this work. It is not the amounts we are voting here that should count; it is the demands that we have resisted.


Edward Joseph Garland: Do any of the subsidized services come in competition with our National Railways?


James Alexander Robb: Most of these services are for the population along the coast where there is practically no railway service at all.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Charlottetown, Victoria and Holliday's Wharf, steam iservice between-further amount required, $500.
Edward Joseph Garland: In order to have the facts on record, I should like the minister to state briefly the necessity for the vote as he has done in relation to some of the other items, as I think the information will be valuable to members next session.


James Alexander Robb: Yes. The provincial government contributes really more than we.

Steamship Subsidies
do. This service has shown a considerable loss to the operating company annually for some years past. The loss in 1921 was $1,561.24; in 1920, $1,240, and there was a small loss in 1919. The service is an important one, as all the ports are a considerable distance from the nearest railway station. The contractors are giving an excellent service and state that they cannot carry on without an increase in the subsidy. Their present subsidy is $3,500 from the Dominion government and $5,000 from the provincial government. They asked for $1,500 in order to bring the subsidy from the Dominion government to the same level as the other. We are giving them an increase of $500 instead of the $1,500 asked for.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Halifax, Can so and Guysboro', steam service between-further amount required, $2,000.
Donald MacBeth Kennedy: Do I understand that money has been voted for these routes already and that these are additional amounts to be voted?


James Alexander Robb: This is an additional $2,000. The records show that during the past two years the contractors lost $1,500 on this route.


Thomas Wakem Caldwell: Is this $2,000 in excess of what they got last year?


James Alexander Robb: Yes, I should think so.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
St. John and ports on the Bay of Fundy and Minas Basin, steam service between,-further amount required, $500.
Thomas Wakem Caldwell: Does this include the route between St. John and Digby?


James Alexander Robb: No.


Thomas Wakem Caldwell: Is there any subsidized steamship service between St. John and Digby?


James Alexander Robb: I think so; we will come to that.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Port Mulgrave, St. Peters, Irish Cove and Marble Mountain and other ports on the Bras d'Or Jakesi, steam (service |between-further amount required, $1,500.
James Alexander Robb: The financial statements
respecting this service indicate that the Richmond Company, who operate it, have suffered heavy losses during the last three years. The manager of the line states that during last year he had to pay $5,000 out of his own pocket to keep the steamer
running. The subsidy has remained at $6,500 for a number of years; it received no increase during the war period or afterwards with the exception of a temporary increase in 1918.


Thomas Wakem Caldwell: What proof does the department require that a contractor is losing money? Is a letter sufficient for that purpose?


James Alexander Robb: No. They submit their
statement and we go into it very carefully. If we have any doubt about it we send it down to our inspector and ask him to go over their books.


Donald MacBeth Kennedy: Are the rates charged by these steamboats subject to any regulation by the government?


James Alexander Robb: They are subject to the approval of the minister.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
St. John, Bear River and other way (ports, steam service between, $2,000.
Arthur Meighen: The conclusion of the minister, from a review of all these matters, appears to be that the late government carried economy too far.


James Alexander Robb: I am bound to say, in justice to my predecessor, that I think he pared to the bone, and that in some places the service was even crippled.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.

[Stage Direction]
Ocean and river service-amount required to provide a suitable boat to replace the C.G.S. Lambton, recently lost in Lake Superior, $100.-
000.
Lewis Herbert Martell: Would it not be possible for the minister to put a few derricks on one of the ships of the Merchant Marine and use it for this purpose?


Ernest Lapointe: Unfortunately I am told that none of the Merchant Marine vessels are suitable for that service.


Lewis Herbert Martell: They are not much good for anything.


William Charles Good: Was this vessel owned by the Dominion government?


Ernest Lapointe: Yes. it was used in connection with lighthouse and buoy service. We need another boat to replace it.


Thomas George McBride: What were the dimensions of the boat that was sunk?


Ernest Lapointe: Length, 108 feet;
breadth, 25.12 feet; depth, 12.75 feet; gross tonnage, 322.77; registered tonnage 181.85;
Supply-Marine


Mr. RYCKMAN:: Was the boat insured?


Ernest Lapointe: No; government boats are not insured.


Donald MacBeth Kennedy: I understood that the cost of building steamships had decreased very considerably during the last few years.


Ernest Lapointe: I was not made aware of that.


Mr. COOTE:: Is it proposed to build a new boat, or is it the intention to purchase one already built?


Ernest Lapointe: No decision has been reached as to that, we will try to make the best bargain possible.


Mr. SIMPSON:: Has the department decided what the size of the boat shall be?


Ernest Lapointe: Not yet. We want to have a strong boat.


Thomas Edward Simpson: Having in mind the unfortunate accident that overtook the Lamb-ton and also the fact that these boats have to go out early in the season to put up the buoys and place lighthouse keepers in their stations before navigation is open, and have to go out late in the fall after navigation is closed to take in the lightkeepers and the buoys, you should have a fairly substantial craft in order to meet the weather conditions at those seasons of the year.


Ernest Lapointe: I entirely agree with my hon. friend.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Amount required to pay Captain Frank Murphy for the loss of his schooner and personal effects as the result of a collision with the departmental steamer Aranmore in the month of August, 1917, $2,201.70.
Oliver Robert Gould: Why has the payment of this amount been deferred until this time?


Ernest Lapointe: An otfer was made to Captain Murphy in 1918 of practically the same amount, but that offer was refused. He is now quite willing to accept it, and he is entitled to it.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Lighthouse and coast service-administration of pilotage-further amount required to provide for Sydney pilotage district, $44,000.
Some hon. MEMBERS:: Explain.


Ernest Lapointe: This is merely a
matter of bookkeeping. We get the money back at the end of the season.


Thomas Wakem Caldwell: Where does the
money go that you got back last year? Would that not finance this year's operations?


Ernest Lapointe: The Sydney pilotage district was placed under the Minister of Marine as pilotage authority by Order in Council in April, 1922. This is the first year. We have figured out the pilotage receipts for the district last year, and we are advancing the money. The money comes back to the department.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Amount required to pay freight to point of delivery on steelplates belonging to department at present at Sydney. Also to adjust a difference of 10 cents per 100 lbs. for Lloyd's specification on the steel delivered to the department, $35,000.
Thomas Wakem Caldwell: Does the minister propose to build more ships when the Government have more than they know what to do with already?


Ernest Lapointe: Wei had to take delivery of these steel plates under contract between the Government and the Dominion Steel Company. We disposed of them, but we have to pay the freight to the point of delivery.


Thomas Wakem Caldwell: How did you dispose of them?


Ernest Lapointe: An agreement was made with Messrs. Drummond, McCall and Company, Limited, for the disposal of these steel plates on the following basis: The terms of sale to be determined by the base price for plates f.o.b. Pittsburg, to which was to be added the cost of freight from Pittsburg to point of delivery, the exchange on American currency, etc. The department had to pay freight to point of delivery on steel plates shipped from Sydney, and the Dominion Iron and Steel Company, Limited, were requested to prepay the freight, the sales tax, etc. This is simply a reimbursement.


Thomas Wakem Caldwell: How will the department come out on the deal? Will what you get for the plates cover their cost under the contract?


Ernest Lapointe: I am unable to say definitely.

Supply-D epartments


Thomas Wakem Caldwell: Have you any fear of losing on the deal?


Ernest Lapointe: I am rather afraid so.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Department of External Affairs-salaries and contingencies, $6,575.
Richard Burpee Hanson: Why is $5,000 required for contingencies when we voted the Main Estimates only a week ago?


William Lyon Mackenzie King: I am glad my hon. friend asked that question. In an effort to be economical I cut down the amount for contingencies by $10,000 but my officers tell me they will not be able to manage on that, so I am asking for $5,000. The contingencies vote will then still be $5,000 less than was voted last year for my right hon. friend.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Civil Service Commission-salaries, $4,765.
Thomas Wakem Caldwell: Is this to provide for an increase in the staff of the commission?


William Lyon Mackenzie King: This item is just as it has been handed in by the commission.


Thomas Wakem Caldwell: Do they set their own
salaries?


William Lyon Mackenzie King: Yes.


William Charles Good: Perhaps the Government would look into this matter. It seems to me there ought to be some kind of control over the commission.


William Lyon Mackenzie King: I think we all agree with my hon. friend.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Legislation-Senate-To provide for the payment of the full Sessional indemnity for the Session of 1922 to members of the Senate for days lost through absence caused by illness, public business, or on account of death. Payment to be made as the Treasury Board may direct, $16,500.
Some hon. MEMBERS:: Explain. *


William Stevens Fielding: I am afraid the explanation is similar to the one given regarding the Civil Service Commission item The Senate have sent in this item.


Thomas Wakem Caldwell: I thought members were not paid if they were absent. If they are, it is a very poor inducement to members who stay here every day in the session and work day and night.


George Newcombe Gordon: It is allowed every
year, for days lost by illness.


Thomas Wakem Caldwell: The chairman says
it is allowed every year but I submit that that does not make it right.


Mr. STEVENS:: I recall one particularly sad case where one of the senators was called to the deathbed of his wife, a very long distance, and he would suffer severe financial loss by a rigid application of the rules. Occasionally in this House cases of that kind arise, and votes are made. I do not think there should be any criticism of the vote.


William Charles Good: What is the meaning of the last sentence, "Payment to be made as the Treasury Board may direct"? Is it left to the discretion of the board to make the payment or not?


William Stevens Fielding: Many of these items are voted that way. They are left in some measure to the discretion of the board, but, of course, the board is bound by the language of the item. There will be some of these matters which will be more or less of a debatable character, and that is why .some measure of discretion is left to the board. My hon. friend from Vancouver Centre referred to the case of a senator who was called away from his duties under sad circumstances, and there is another case in which a senator died before the end of the session. I imagine it is contemplated that his family will probably get the indemnity. I think that is the intention, though I have not the details beyond what is contained in the item.


Richard Burpee Hanson: Would the minister see that that interpretation is placed on the item, especially with respect to the Senate?


William Stevens Fielding: I think it is intended. I cannot say more definitely.


William Charles Good: The point I raised was
whether the board had power to withhold payment of part of this amount.


William Stevens Fielding: Hardly that. If any
question arises, the board will exercise whatever discretion it has, but it must be bound by the terms of this vote; it must keep within the four corners of this appropriation.


Mr. CHEVRIER:: Will the same consideration be extended to the civil servants who are absent through sickness?


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Fishing Schooner Race
[Stage Direction]
To enable assistance to be given in fitting out a Canadian fishing schooner tor the International Ashing Schooner Race, $5,000.
Mr. WOODSWORTH:: It seems to me that in view of the heavy expenditures the country is called upon to make just now it is going a long way to vote a grant of this character. We have in Canada all sorts of athletic competitions, and interprovincial as well as international matches. There are also horse races and in particular, ploughing matches, and other similar events taking place. It seems to me that it is hardly fair to pick out one particular boat race and ask Parliament to contribute towards it.


Ernest Lapointe: This is to give effect
to a resolution which was introduced by the hon. member for Lunenburg (Mr. Duff) during the present session and in respect to which the House seemed desirous of acting generously.


James Shaver Woodsworth: Was the resolution passed?


Ernest Lapointe: No, I moved the adjournment of the debate on it for the purpose of considering the matter, with the intention of later on announcing the decision of the government. That decision finds expression in this item. It gives effect to what seemed to ibe an expression of opinion from all quarters of the House on that particular day.


Thomas Wakem Caldwell: Just in this connection, may I be permitted to say that a resolution was unanimously passed in the early stages of the session to grant a pension to widowed mothers; no hon. gentleman demurred to that motion. I did not agree with the resolution in its entirety. Nevertheless when the matter was before the Pensions Committee I urged very strongly that some small concession be made to the widowed mother. I urged the same thing when the Pension Bill recently came before us, but the matter received absolutely no consideration. In view of that fact I will vote against the present grant, if some hon. member will move that this item be not passed.


Ernest Lapointe: Because one wrong
was done must it be followed by another?


Thomas Wakem Caldwell: But this vote is a
wrong one; the other was right.


Mr. POWER:: Any such sum as this
would only be a drop in the bucket when it came to making provision for widowed

mothers. From the sporting point of view the item deserves to be supported.


Thomas Wakem Caldwell: The question involved is the principle, not the amount of the grant we are voting. The minister has referred to the fact that a resolution in favour of the grant was moved here as a reason why this vote should carry.


Ernest Lapointe: Because a resolution
adopted by the House in another case has not been followed by legislation is no reason why I, as Minister of Marine and Fisheries, should not give effect to the wishes of the House in the present instance. I thought I was doing well in recommending this grant. I am not responsible because the recommendation to which my hon. friend from Victoria and Carleton, N.B. (Mr. Caldwell) alludes was not carried out. Let me point out that there is an international aspect to this matter, and the purpose behind it is to encourage the fishermen of Nova Scotia. I understand that last year races took place on the coast of Nova Scotia in which American fishermen participated, and it is proposed that the fishermen of that province should be represented at races in the United States this year. These events are a good advertisement for Canada and a great encouragement for the fishermen.


Mr. JOHNSON (Moosejaw):: I would
like to ask the minister if the Nova Scotia government has made any contribution for this purpose. I know that when we have competitions in the western provinces any grant of public funds for the purpose comes from the provincial government. That is what should be done in this case.


Ernest Lapointe: My hon. friend will
understand that the fisheries of Nova Scotia are under federal control.


Lewis Herbert Martell: I may say as well that competitions of this kind will have the effect of encouraging the building of vessels in the province of Nova Scotia. The town *of Lunenburg is practically maintained by the fishing industry. The United States and Canadian fishermen enter into these international races and the American government takes so much interest that it sends a patrol boat, or man of war, for the purpose of facilitating the proceedings. As the minister has said, the fisheries do not come within the purview of the local government, but are under federal authority. By making this grant the Government is going to encourage the people of Nova

Fishing Schooner Race
Scotia to (build the fastest kind of schooners for the fishing industry. My hon. friends on the Progressive side of the House, I think, have no reason to complain of the demands we are making from the province of Nova Scotia. I know that there is a tendency among some hon. members to criticize votes for mail subsidies in the province of Nova Scotia, and elsewhere in the maritime provinces, hut such subsidies are matters of vital necessity to the people of the communities which these mail vessels serve.< They do not enjoy railway facilities as do the communities in the western provinces. Now in view of the fact that my hon. friendfe came here and asked for a Wheat Board, for which we from the province of Nova Scotia voted, I think we are perfectly justified in applying for this grant for the purpose of encouraging the fishing industry in Nova Scotia, particularly when it is borne in mind that the Wheat Board is a provincial matter, whereas the fishing industry is directly under the control of the federal authority.
Upon Mr. Hanson rising:


Charles Gavan Power: Too much wind, no race.


Richard Burpee Hanson: I do not know whether that remark was intended for myself or for the hon. member for Hants (Mr. Mar-tell)-


Ernest Lapointe: You do not know whether it is history or prophecy.


Richard Burpee Hanson: -hut I do think it is rather a dangerous precedent for this House to establish. This race is a purely sporting event and I happen to know a little about it. It is something that ought to be encouraged but it should be encouraged by the people down there, not by the people of the whole country. It should be encouraged by the fishing industry in Nova Scotia, particularly in the county of Lunenburg. That (Course has always been adopted heretofore but I fear in this case-


Mr. HATFIELD:: Is not this race more or less international in character?


Richard Burpee Hanson: No, I think it is being participated in only by the fishermen on the Atlantic coast.


Paul Lacombe Hatfield: I would like to ask my hon. friend!-


Richard Burpee Hanson: All right, if you want to make a speech I will let you have the floor. I say this is a sporting event, it is not a business proposition.


Paul Lacombe Hatfield: I think the idea is to encourage the buiding of a better type of fishing schooner and so promote the welfare of the fishing industry.


Richard Burpee Hanson: I know (that idea is given out but I doubt very much whether there is any ground for it. A fishing boat is not a racing schooner; the vessels that engage in these competitions are racing schooners.


Ernest Lapointe: Why did not my hon. friend ventilate his Objection when the resolution came before the House the other day and everybody was favouring it?


Richard Burpee Hanson: I do not think everybody favoured it; there were lots of members who spoke against the resolution.


Ernest Lapointe: Perhaps you were not here.


Richard Burpee Hanson: I was a new member and did not care to thrust my views on the House at the time.


Mr. BUREAU:: My hon. friend is getting wiser.


Arthur Meighen: Nobody took this proposition seriously.
Mr. HANiSON: 1 thought it was a mistake at the time. As a matter of fact, I am going to oppose this item now.


Oliver Robert Gould: I wish to associate myself with the sentiments expressed by the hon. member for York-Sunbury (Mr. Hanson). It does seem to me that it is an excessive demand on the generosity of Parliament to ask that public money be voted for the promotion of races of this nature. I do not gather from the item itself whether it is a race between boats sailing point to point or whether it is a competition, as (between American and Canadian fishermen, to see which can secure the largest catches of fish. In the latter event it may transpire that our representatives may have to toil all night and catch nothing. I do not think this House has any right to establish the precedent of voting money, raised' by the people of Canada as a whole, for any such purpose. The real object of this is to provide a little recreation, a little sporting event, for a few thousand Canadians who happen to live down in that particular part of the country. Consequently, I am going to move that this $5,000 be deleted from the item.


Mr. SPEAKMAN:: I am another farmer who does not know a thing about fishing,
Fishing Schooner Race

and I am not going to display my ignorance by discussing it. I was one of those who rvoted for that resolution when it went through, because I took the ground -and until it is proved differently I still take the ground-that it is something similar to grants to encourage agricultural societies, and so on. It is an encouragement to adopt better methods of boat building and better handling of boats; in other words, to encourage the fishing industry, in the same way that certain grants are made to agricultural societies to encourage agriculture. I am going to vote for the item which implements the resolution I supported previously.
Mr. LOGAN My hon. friend from As-siniboia (Mr. Gould) is moving to strike out this item. This is a matter pertaining to the fishermen of Nova Scotia. If this item is to be struck out, let us be consistent and move that the next item, $125,000 for briquetting plants in the province of Saskatchewan, in which my hon. friend from Assiniboia is interested, be struck out, because I say that the fishing industry of Nova Scotia, yielding a product of about $14,000,000, is just as important to that province and to Canada, as the investigation of the briquetting of lignite in Saskatchewan. The item which we will be asked to pass in a few minutes, of $125,000, will bring the amount which this country is paying for the investigation into lignite briquetting in Saskatchewan to nearly a million dollars, and my hon. friend, when a vote is asked for a mere matter of $5,000, to encourage a great international event in this country, moves to strike it out. I am surprised at my hon. friend from Assiniboia. In my humble opinion this $5,000 is not sufficient for this purpose. We cannot live in any country on material things alone. We must have some pride in our people and some pride in our sports. Year after year we have had to suffer the rathdr unpleasant experience of seeing the boats of our good friend, Sir Thomas Lipton, Shamrock I, Shamrock II, Shamrock III, defeated. Last year the hardy fishermen of Nova Scotia went out to the sea and defeated the best boat they could construct in the United States. If these people should not be encouraged, I do not know who should be encouraged, and if you are going to strike thisi item out, let us strike out the item which provides for the investigation of lignite in Saskatchewan.


William Stevens Fielding: There is something
of a sporting character in this appropria-

tion, that I admit, but that is not a reason against it. There is a manly sport in the world we all ought to admire. Some people say that the battle of Waterloo was won on the cricket fields of England, and we know the devotion Englishmen have to manly, honourable sports, and therel is no more manly sport than this race, which so much interests the fishermen of the lower provinces. I do not think anybody has any anti-Nova Scotian feeling in this matter. We should all put aside feelings of this kind. This eivent has attracted great attention. It is in one sense international. I do not think it is international in the sense that the United States government has taken any part, but the're is a large and interested population in the United States concerned in all maritime affairs, who are taking an interest, and the American people are putting up the money. The fishermen of Gloucester are very much concerned in this matter, The fishermen of the New England states are doing their utmost to turn out a type of schooner which will beat our boat. This interests the fishing population of (the lower provinces. I am glad to hear one of my friends of the Progressive party state that he is interested in this matter. He shows that he takes a broad view. You have not any salt water out west. My hon. friend from York Sunbury (Mr. Hanson) lives up the river and does not know the smell of salt water. There are many appropriations in these estimates which could be criticised, but I desire to say that if this bvent is carried on in a manly spirit, and it is an international affair in the sense that our American friends are taking part in it and helping, we might do very much worse than pass the item in order to encourage the fishermen of the lower provinces.


Mr. TOLMIE:: While I am interested in agriculture, I feel that we are not going to get Canada anywhere so long as we adopt a narrow policy. I feel that while this is a sporting event to a certain extent, it does a great deal, not only to stimulate our fishing industry, but also our skill in shipbuilding and I can assure Nova Scotians that while it creates a great deal of interest in the maritime provinces, it is also looked on with interest in British Columbia. I therefore feel that I would be quite justified in supporting this item.


Mr. BROWN:: I yield to no one in my desire to do anything that will put Canada on the map if it can be done by such an event as this but I would like to ask a

Fishing Schooner Race
question in regard to this item. Will it have a tendency to make this race a purely sporting event or not?
iSome hon. MEMBERS: No, No.


John Livingstone Brown: We know that the cup races that have been, sailed by those schooners that have come across the Atlantic have almost degenerated into a farce, from the fact that the ships built to compete in this race are not capable of sailing, as the hon. gentleman (Mr. Power) remarked, if there is too much wind, and then it is declared no race. If the intention is to encourage this as a sporting event, I think it would not be well to encourage it. At the same time if we are given the assurance that it is not simply a sporting event-much as I dislike sporting events myself-(but that the Continuance of these grants will not lead to the development of a type of vessel that cannot go to sea if there is any wind, I would be inclined to favour it. But if the result will be the development of the type of vessel which has been referred to, which cannot go to sea, we will not accomplish the purpose we have in view of developing the fishing industry, and we should be careful how we proceeed.


William Stevens Fielding: Some of the yacht races which the hon, member refers to might well be celled toy races, but here is a real ship race. It is a condition that a boat must be a bona fide fishing boat and must go out into the ocean, and be in the service a season at least on the fishing banks; otherwise the boat will not qualify. My hon. friend's criticism about the toy ships is correct, but this is a real race with real fishermen and real water.


Mr. MILLAR:: Notwithstanding the enthusiastic remarks, of the Minister of Finance, I think I must voice my objection to this proposal. I believe that I have as much sympathy with the fishing industry in Ntova Scotia as any one from the maritime provinces, and I might say that if it were an item of $10,000 or $15,000 to help the fishing industry, I would vote for it at once, because that is where the money should be expended-in the development of the natural resources of the country, but it seems to me that this is about 95 per cent sporting event and 5 per cent fishing industry. When the hon. member for Lunenburg spoke in this matter, as expressed by my right hon. friend to my right (Mr. Meighen), I thought it was a joke. I did not take it seriously at all.


Paul Lacombe Hatfield: Why does the hon. member say it is 95 per cent sport and 5 per cent otherwise?


Some hon. MEMBERS:: Carried, carried.


John Millar: It is not carried until I finish. A short time ago we had a little discussion on the question of the Hudson Bay railway. I spoke briefly on that matter myself; and following the hon. member for Prince Albert (Mr.. Knox) I said that it was not wise to expend money there at the present time, because money is so badly needed for other things, for instance, branch lines. Frequently, when we ask for these things, we are told that the money is not available* Therefore, to spend $5,000 and thus to set a precedent in regard to what is entirely a sporting matter, is a great mistake. While these items have been under consideration, when we have asked for an explanation of a large item, frequently ministers would say: "We have always voted that amount," or "for years back we have voted that amount." I suppose, in coming years, when a grant is asked for an international baseball match, the Minister of Finance will say: "This is a great event, an international event, and we will back it up," and the precedent which we are forming now by granting $5,000 for a boat race will be cited. Therefore, if I have an opportunity, I am going to vote against this item.


Mr. HOCKEN:: I come from a section of the country where we have no salt water and no fire water.


Jacques Bureau: Plenty of it in hiding.


Horatio Clarence Hocken: We have an international yacht race on our lake, something after the same class of sporting event that it is proposed in this item to subsidize. I am not going to object to this item; but I would suggest to the Government that they make a grant of an equal amount, say for the assistance of those who want to engage in a contest for the Canada cup which is sailed on the lake at Toronto.


Mr. DUFF:: I do not intend to keep the committee very long, because I am convinced that most hon. gentlemen are seized with the fact that this appropriation is to help in the development of a great fishing industry in the maritime provinces. My hon. friend (Mr. Millar) said that this was 95 per cent sport and 5 per cent fishing industry. I do not need to have to contradict that statement; but men who come
Fishing Schooner Race

here and are willing to ask this Parliament to vote money of this country for country fairs where horse racing takes place, should not object to races with fishing vessels; neither should the hon. member for West Toronto (Mr. Hocken) object to our voting this $5,000 item, when this country has spent millions of dollars in the construction of a park in the city of Toronto.


Horatio Clarence Hocken: I do not object to this item.


Mr. ARTHURS:: I have absolutely no objection to this item passing; but a friend of mine in Ontario has a very decided objection to an item of this kind, and on behalf of the Hon. Mr. Raney of Ontario, I would like to ask the Minister of Finance if he will give us the assurance that no betting will take place in connection with this event.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
At six o'clock the committee took recess.
After Recess
The committee resumed at eight o'clock.

[Stage Direction]
Amount required to settle, on the basis of 50 cents on the dollar, the claims of the creditors of the Prince Rupert Dry Dock and Engineering Co., Ltd., for material supplied or services rendered directly or indirectly in connection with the construction of the "Scottish" and "Britisher" in P'rince Rupert, B.C., $130,000.
George Gibson Coote: The minister might explain an item of this size before he asks the House to pass it.


Ernest Lapointe: In February, 1919,
the Department of Marine entered into a contract with the Prince Rupert Drydock and Engineering Company, Limited, for the building of two ships of the Canadian Merchant Marine at a price of $1,603,800 each. As a guarantee the contractors gave a bond for $321,000. In case of default the bonding company was to complete the contract or permit the government to complete it. , The contractors failed after the government had paid them $2,449,388.34. The bonding company declined to complete the contract, and the government called for tenders. A new contract was given to the Wallace Shipbuilding Company, under which the department paid the company $1,226,038.51: When the department took over the vessels it was found that the Prince Rupert Drydock and Engineering Company before going into bank-

ruptcy had failed to pay for certain labour and materials, the amount outstanding being about $453,000. The wages owing represented $113,000, and the balance was for materials, machinery, board of men, and so forth. The wages were paid by authority of an Order in Council on the 3rd December, 1920, out of the appropriation for the shipbuilding programme. A subsequent Order in Council was passed in June, 1921, authorizing a compromise with the creditors who supplied the materials which entered into the construction of the ships, and the department paid $45,000, covering a claim of $90,000 on the basis of fifty cents on the dollar. The clause in the Order in Council governing the matter reads as follows:
The minister therefore recommends that he be authorized to pay the creditors of the Prince Rupert Drydock and Engineering Company Limited who furnished the materials which have been or are to be used in the construction or completion of the vessels 50 per cent of the price payable for such materials.
The Auditor General interpreted that clause as meaning that only the materials which actually went into the construction of the ships should be paid for. So, what was spent on meals for the men, kitchen utensils, claims for workmen's compensation, freight, storage, insurance, tools, coal and other materials which were evidently necessary in the construction of the ships, were not paid for under this Order in Council. Those creditors have always urged their claims, and we have come to the conclusion that we ought to settle them. The creditors are claiming the full amount of their accounts, but we propose to settle on the basis fixed by the previous Order in Council, namely, fifty cents on the dollar. There are, of course, other claims which we will not consider. For instance, there is an amount of $50,558 for which the Royal Bank of Canada presented a claim, there is an item of $63,000 claimed by Albert Kelly, and various other items which the department did not consider as having been necessary to the construction of the ships; with those creditors we do not propose to settle. I may say that this settlement has been urged upon us from everywhere in British Columbia. Members on both sides of Parliament have demanded it.


John Livingstone Brown: It represents a liability already incurred?


Ernest Lapointe: Yes.


Arthur Meighen: I do not think the minister should have answered in that Way. There is no liability whatever.

Supply-M arine


Ernest Lapointe: Was there liability under the Order in Council which was passed last year?


Arthur Meighen: None at all, no.


Ernest Lapointe: It is just to extend the provisions of the 'Order in Council, which the Auditor General found1 would not include the claims of which I have spoken.


Arthur Meighen: That is quite correct; it extends the provision of the order of last year, but there was no liability on the part of the Government and such could never have been claimed. The Government let the contract, and under the terms of the contract it had no responsibility at all for wages or for materials supplied. It did, however, supervise these expenditures, as had always been done. After the failure of the company it turned out that there were large amounts in wages outstanding and materials supplied and actually put on the ground, and the claim was made that the material wTould not have been put there and the wage-earners would not have worked had they not felt they could rely upon the Government for payment. They could not, of course, have any legal claim at all, but there did seem some justification for their expecting to be taken care of, the contract being with the Government. So, by the terms of the Order in Council, we decided that all who should come within that class we would settle with-that is, we would pay the wages in full and settle with those who supplied the material at fifty cents on the dollar. In the latter case the persons affected were only those who had actually contracted and put the material there; we drew the line at those who directly supplied, we did) not go back to those who supplied the suppliers, who loaned money for the purpose, who carried freight to make the supplies, and that kind' of thing. We thought the utmost you could ask the Government to consider at all were those who supplied the actual material, but the Government now proposes to go back of those to the indirect suppliers. I know the pressure is very strong; it certainly was very strong upon us. But 1 venture to express the fear that this is in pursuance of a preelection promise.


Ernest Lapointe: Well, I hope the hon. member for Vancouver will not say that.


Arthur Meighen: He does not know.


Ernest Lapointe: If there was any preelection promise it was made by the friends
of my right hon. friend, and not by us. It it only upon being convinced of the merit of the claim that I have come to the conclusion to settle on the basis which I stated a few moments ago. If there is any strong opposition, I may say that I will move to strike out the item.


William Charles Good: What is the total amount which has 'been paid out for these two vessels up to date, and what is the total contract price?


Ernest Lapointe: The total contract price was $3,207,600. We have alreadjy paid $4,155,477.69.


William Charles Good: The vessels are completed?


Ernest Lapointe: Yes. We have already paid over $700,000 more than the contract.


Donald MacBeth Kennedy: Did I understand the minister to say that when the contract fell down the bond company refused to complete the contract?


Ernest Lapointe: Yes.


Donald MacBeth Kennedy: Can the minister give the name of the bond company and the reason why it was not possible to compel them to fulfil the contract?


Ernest Lapointe: That is very easy to understand. The amount of the guarantee was $321,000. The company is not pledged for more than that amount. I have shown that we have spent over $1,000,000 to complete the contract. It would be better for the company to pay the $321,000 than to complete the ships.


William Charles Good: The company has paid! the $300,000?


Ernest Lapointe: Not yet.


Donald MacBeth Kennedy: Can they be compelled to pay it?


Ernest Lapointe: I hope they will.


George Gibson Coote: Has any action been taken to force them to pay?


Ernest Lapointe: Not yet-not until this whole matter is cleared up.


George Gibson Coote: To whom is this $130,000 to be paid, or at least the large items in it?


Ernest Lapointe: It is a very long list, but I am quite willing to read it. It comprises five pages. Perhaps my hon. friend would look at it.
Supply-Marine


George Gibson Coote: I will not ask the minister to read five pages. I thought it strange that the board of these men should be still unpaid and I wondered if the minister would tell us to whom payments for the board of the men would go.


Ernest Lapointe: I can give my hon. friend the names of the firms who have sent in claims:
, P. Burn & Company, Limited.. .. $1,188 47
Atkins Meat Market	
116	00Brackman-Ker Milling Co., Ltd..	..	474	30Cassidy's Limited	
42	39Canadian .Steam Laundry	
896	81The Clark Fruit and Produce..	..	273	73Edmonton City Dairy Limited	....	62	72G. J. Frissell	
7,955	91Gault Bros	
664	72The Le Casse Baking	
1,929	01Tom Lee Company	
2,006	77Munro Bros	
16	87W. H. Malkin & Company	
437	85National Grocery	
196	27The Royal Fish Company	
338	97


Some hon. MEMBERS:: Dispense.


Ernest Lapointe: There are only five or six others.


John Livingstone Brown: The minister mentioned the firm of P. Burns and Company, Limited. They, I suppose, would furnish meat to the men who boarded the workingmen?


Ernest Lapointe: I should think so, yes.


John Livingstone Brown: The boarding house
keepers got their pay, but the men who furnished supplies to the boarding houses did not; is that it?


Ernest Lapointe: I think the company had a boarding house itself and these were the supplies that were furnished to the company.


George Gibson Coote: I think we are establishing a very dangerous precedent if we are going to meet all unpaid accounts indirectly connected with the construction of vessels.


Ernest Lapointe: I am afraid that will always happen when the government is party to a contract. Those who stand to lose will always have a claim on the coun try, and it is hard to refuse them compensation.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
To provide for railway and steamship charges for freight on goods for the "Save the Children Fund" for relief of distress in Russia.- further amount reuired, $20,0.00.
William Stevens Fielding: This is to supplement the amount previously granted. We agreed

to bear the expenses of the transportation of food supplies to save the children of Russia under what is known as the "Save the Children Fund."


William Charles Good: Did the railways give any special rate on those shipments?


William Stevens Fielding: I am not able to answer my hon. friend. The one of my colleagues who has personal knowledge of the matter is absent. When he comes in, I shall be glad to ask him.


Mr. WOODS  WORTH@: Are these grants from the Government confined to this one organization? I know that in Winnipeg and through the West we have had for the past year or so an organization for the relief of distress in Russia, and some little time ago they wished to ship some grain from the Doukhobor colonies through to Russia. It was then stated, I believe, that they could not avail themselves of this grant for the "Save the Children Fund". I think that any organizations that are really .trying to assist the people in Russia ought to be able to come in under some such scheme as this and take advantage of the special rates that are provided.


William Lyon Mackenzie King: I might inform my hon. friend that when this question came before the Government it became necessary to have some one responsible organization that would undertake the work for the whole of Canada, and a voluntary organization having been formed for that purpose, on the understanding that it would permit any other organizations to share with it such opportunities as it might have of transporting commodities the Government agreed to recognize that organization as an official organization for the purpose of the assistance it was giving in the way of transportation. I think that if any association in Canada that has food or clothing to transport to starving people in Russia will communicate with the officers of the "Save the Children Fund", they will see that whatever benefits there may be in the way of transportation of these commodities will accrue also to these other organizations.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
To provide for the payment to the Canadian Pacific Railway, for removal of span of bridge over False Creek, B.C., at different times since 1918, to permit of the movements of vessels, $32,600.
Arthur Meighen: When did this account come in?

Supply-Interior


Ernest Lapointe: The Canadian Pacific Railway constructed a bridge across False creek in 1886. The bridge was replaced by a larger one in 1898, and in 1918 it transpired that the vessels constructed at the Coughlan shipyard for the Imperial Munitions Board could not pass to sea without the removal of a span of that bridge. There was there a difficulty as between the Canadian Pacific Railway and the Department of Public Works. The Canadian Pacific contended that their plans for the bridge and the construction of the bridge itself had all been approved by the Department of Public Works at the time they were made. On the other hand, speedy action had to be taken so as to allow the vessels to get to sea. The department came to an understanding with the Canadian Pacific that the work should be done, and that afterwards whoever was compelled by law to pay would bear the cost. The work has been done, and the Department of Justice, through Mr. Newcombe, has advised the Department of Public Works that we have not a shadow of a chance in a legal action, that the Canadian Pacific had its bridge constructed and built according to the regulations, that everything had been approved by the Government at the time, and that we must pay.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Library of (Parliament-two Chief Reference Clerks-further amount required, $400; one Cataloguer, $1,620 ; one bookbinder $1,500 ; to authorize the payment of the difference between superannuation allowance and salary, in lieu of leave of absence, to A. D. de Celles, former librarian of Parliament, $556.96 ; total, $4,076.95.
Hewitt Bostock: Although there appears to be an increase over last year's vote, as a matter of fact, from the information I have received from the two librarians, there will be a saving greater than the amount asked for in the Supplementary Estimates. Four of the present officials will be eliminated, and a saving will thereby be effected of $4,518.75, so that really there is a decrease in the expenditure on the Library of Parliament. Actually there will be expended of the appropriation of $45,180, only $40,661.25, thus making a saving of $4,518.75.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.

[Stage Direction]
Dominion Lands and Parks-to pay F. Nelson for services while acting as Secretary of the Department of the Interior, $500 ; to provide for the payment to Mrs. E. S. Forbes of a compassionate allowance equal to one-half of the salary of her husband, payable monthly, $1,050 ; grant to the Canada Forestry Association-further amount required, $5,000 ; total, $6,550.
William Stevens Fielding: The item of $5,000 is an error. I move that it be reduced to $4,000.


[Stage Direction]
Amendment agreed to.
Arthur Meighen: I do not understand the first two items.


Charles A. Stewart: The secretary of the department died on the 31st December, 1920, and Mr. Frank Nelson, assistant secretary, has been performing the duties of secretary from that date up to the present time. This has entailed quite an amount of additional work for Mr. Nelson, and this amount is asked for to compensate him therefor. The question of the appointment of a secretary is before the Civil Service Commission. I do not know the reason, but there is some difficulty about this appointment. Apparently this man has been doing the work without being promoted to the position.


Arthur Meighen: Mr. Nelson is a very fine man but there is very little work.


Charles A. Stewart: I confess I do not know why he has not been permanently confirmed in the position.


Arthur Meighen: The minister has not explained the second item.


Charles A. Stewart: I have
a memorandum with respect to this item which reads:
Mr. Edward Stanley Forbes was appointed as a temporary clerk In the Department of the Interior on the 1st May, 1908, and he became permanent on the 1st April, 1910. Mr. Forbes was ill for some time, and as his case was reported to be of such a character that he would never be able to come back to the office, he was retired from the Government Service in August 1921, under the provisions of the Calder Act, and the following allowances were paid to Mrs.
Forbes, namely:
2	months' salary gratuity	
$ 3503	months' retiring allowance.. ..	525Double gratuity on account of protracted illness	
525Total	
$1,400
Mr. Forbes is still in the Broekville Asylum and the compassionate allowance above mentioned, is to provide for the payment to his wife of half the amount of salary he was receiving at the time of his retirement, namely:- $2,100.
In reporting on Mr. Forbes' illness, his physician makes the following statement:-
"The onset of the disease which incapacitates Mr. Forbes dates back about twelve years, when, as Secretary to the Minister of the Interior, he was subjected to unusual exposure and strain during a trip on foot through Northern Alberta. The symptoms complained of at the time were those of a peripheral neuritis. In spite of remissions the condition has become progressively worse, and now the patient is
Supply-Interior

helpless mentally and physically, with a life expectancy according to the neurologist at present attending him in the Ontario Hospital, Brockville, of but a few months at best. The actual pathology in the case seem* not to have been definitely determined but it was thought on X-ray examination to be vertebral caries of tubercular origin associated with Tabes Dorsalis and a terminal General Paresis."
Mr. Forbes is now in the Ontario Hospital at Brockville, and the Superintendent in charge states that he does not think there is any probability of his becoming well again.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Eailways-Canadian Pacific Railway; original construction, $250.
Arthur Meighen: I hope this is not the beginning of another transcontinental railway.


Donald MacBeth Kennedy: I think not.
This is to pay an old account to the Indian Department in connection with land that was granted at the time the Canadian Pacific Railway Company was given its charter in 1881.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Canals-Chambly canal improvements-Additional amount required, $36,000.
Some Hon. MEMBERS:: Explain.


Arthur Meighen: Cannot we get any
explanation of this item at least as good as the last one?


Donald MacBeth Kennedy: I will give
my right hon. friend an explanation as good as the last one if it will satisfy him. This is an item for expenditure in connection with the building of a roadway on the Chambly canal to cover the cost of re-grading and laying water macadam surface over 7.2 miles of roadway situated in the parishes of St. Jean, St. Luc and St. Joseph. An arrangement has now been made with the different municipalities whereby the department will put the road in shape, the municipalities undertaking for all time to keep it in repair, consequently there will be no further charge so far as the Department of Railways and Canals is concerned.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Railways-to provide for allowance of full railway pay including their military pay and field allowance, on and after May 1, 1915, to certain employees of the lake Superior branch of the Transcontinental Railways who enlisted prior to May 1, 1915. (Revote), $60,000.
Mr. LOGAN:: May I ask the minister
for an explanation of this vote, and as to the reason why it was not applied to employees of the Intercolonial railway who went overseas at the same time?
	.


Donald MacBeth Kennedy: The matter
was before the House last year and an item was (placed In the supplementary estimates to provide for it. But there was some question as to whether they were employees of the Grand Trunk Pacific Railway or of the Canadian Government Railways. I think, through some misunderstanding it was felt they were employees of the Grand Trunk Pacific Railway after May 1, 1915, and that the government was not responsible. It subsequently transpired that they were employees of the Canadian Government Railways on and after that date. It appears that under Order in Council passed on and after August 4,
1914,	the Government railway employees at the outbreak of the war weer entitled to be paid their full pay or civil less military pay, if they enlisted for overseas service. Likewise Orders in Council were passed on the 18th of April, 1916, and the 6th of September, 1918, respectively, granting authority to give to employees on the railway and in the shops of the National Transcontinental Railway who were in the employ of the railway at the outbreak of war and continued in such employment until the taking over of the line and thereafter until their enlistment in the Canadian Expeditionary Force for service overseas, the same treatment as accorded to other employees of the Canadian Government Railways as of date of enlistment effective the 1st of May, 1915.
It has been found that there are certain employees on the lake Superior branch of the National Transcontinental railway who meet the requirements necessary to make them eligible for the above allowance except that they enlisted prior to May 1st,
1915,	and that the employees of the Grand Trunk Pacific railway were promised their positions on the lake Superior branch on their return from service overseas, and, therefore, may be considered as employees of the government from May 1st, 1915, the date the line was taken over by the Dominion government for operation to the date of their discharge from the Canadian Expeditionary Force. This vote of $60,000 is to provide money to pay allowances that may be granted to the employees of the lake Superior branch of the Transcontinental railway, who were in the employ of the Grand Trunk Pacific Railway at the outbreak of war, and continued as such until the date of enlistment in the Canadian Expeditionary Force, or other forces of His Majesty or His Allies, in the Great War, prior to May 1st, 1915, so

Supply-Railways
that they may be granted the same treatment, commencing May 1st, 1915,-the date this branch was taken over-as was accorded to the employees of the Canadian Government railways who enlisted prior to November 1st, 1915, provided they are found eligible in so far as service with the Canadian Expeditionary Force and the Grand Trunk Pacific railway is concerned.


Hugh Guthrie: These men have really been entitled to this amount for a considerable number of years, in fact since 1915.


Donald MacBeth Kennedy: They have.


Hugh Guthrie: In the Preston case this afternoon we established a precedent in regard to the payment of interest. Although interest is not payable, as a rule, by the Crown, yet in the case of Mr. Preston the government decided to break that rule and pay interest. Will any interest be paid to these men?


Donald MacBeth Kennedy: I do not know that there is any provision for the payment of interest in connection with this claim. It would seem to me, however, that if there is any claim for interest, and the men are entitled to it, they should be paid.


Hugh Guthrie: I do not think the men are entitled to interest, but the Government having broken the rule in the Preston case is there any reason why it should not break it in this case also?


Hance James Logan: I have no cause for objecting to paying the claims of these men, but I would like to ask the minister how far this rule has been carried out in reference to other government railway employees in Canada. I know personally of men who left the Intercolonial Railway and enlisted with the promise that they would be given their railway pay, and that their positions would be kept open for them until they returned, or in other words that their positions would be restored to them. I know of cases where men did so enlist, and for a few months they received their railway pay. Then that pay was stopped. They remained overseas for two, three, or four years, and when they returned they received neither their pay nor their position. Now, I desire to know why these men who are working on the lake Superior branch of the Transcontinental railway should be treated in this way, while men on other government railways are treated in an entirely different manner.


Donald MacBeth Kennedy: Since I have been in the department this is the only claim of the kind, to my knowledge, that has been made to the department. There has been no claim made on behalf of the men on the Intercolonial railway nor any representations made with respect to them that I am aware of. If such a claim is made it will come up for consideration and the members of the House will have the same opportunity of judging of its merits as they have had in this case.


Hance James Logan: I was not criticizing the present Minister of Railways. I do not know of any claim made to the present Minister of Railways in reference to a matter of this kind, but I know that claims were made in years gone by, in 1918 and 1919, and that these claims were refused. They were just exactly in the same position as the claims of the men on the lake Superior branch of the Transcontinental. Why there was this discimination I know not. I am quite satisfied with the statement of the Minister of Railways, that if these claims are put in they will be considered, and that these men will be treated the same as the men are treated on the lake Superior branch.


Arthur Meighen: I do not like to contradict my hon. friend, because his knowledge would be better than mine. I have never heard of any such claims, and I certainly know of no such refusal. If there are claims in the same position as these, I will cheerfully support a vote in favour of them. There is no reason why one should be treated in one way and another in a different way.


Hance James Logan: I do not want to go into details and' worry the committee, or to refer to very many cases. I know of one case of a young man on the engineering staff at Moncton, who was receiving about $2,500 a year. He left the railway, and enlisted as a private at $1.10 a day; incidentally, he came back as a lieutenant-colonel. He had resigned his position and he went overseas with the distinct promise that he would be paid his salary as an engineer during his absence. He was not paid during the time he was overseas. That is one case; and there are many others.


Mr. MacLAREN:: I certainly heard very frequently of complaints arising from men who had been employed on the Intercolonial. It has been a grievance amongst the men who have formerly been employed on that road, and who subsequently went
Supply-Railways

overseas, that on their return their positions were not held for them, nor did they receive their pay for the period during which they were absent. That is a familiar complaint to me. It came to me not personally, but I read it in the papers. I understand from the minister that it will be quite in order if the attention of these men now is drawn to it, and that their claims will receive equal consideration with those provided for in the vote we are now considering.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Miscellaneous-to Increase the amount of loan authorized fay vote No. 138, Main estimates- 1922-23-additional amount required, $800,000.
Donald MacBeth Kennedy: This vote is
to increase the amount of ithe loan authorized by item 138 in the main estimates, to take care of the interest maturing on the bonds of the branch lines in Alberta and Saskatchewan.


Arthur Meighen: What road?


Donald MacBeth Kennedy: The total
amount is $1,470,409. There are ten branch lines.


Arthur Meighen: What system?


Donald MacBeth Kennedy: Of the Grand Trunk Pacific branch lines. Before an Order in Council was passed recommending this, payment, I had the executive of the Board of National Railways, Mr. Hanna, make a report, and he reported that in his opinion, in the interests of the National Railways, the interest on the bonds of these branch lines should be paid.


Mr. LEWIS:: Could the minister give
us the names of the branch lines in Saskatchewan?


Donald MacBeth Kennedy: The branch
lines are as follows: Yorkton branch, Melville branch, Regina-Boundary branch, Weyburn branch, Regina-Moosejaw branch, Moosejaw-Northwest branch, Prince Albert branch, Biggar-Calgary branch, Oban-Bat-tleford brdnch, Cutknife branch-ten in all.


Arthur John Lewis: I would like to know why there is a discrimination in the two branches that are in my constituency. I understand for the last three or four years this Parliament has promised to get the branch lines extended in the constituency to Swift Current. Some time ago they told the people to go into the village, to build and live there, and that last fall the railway would be taken up to a point called Hodgeville-Gravelburg and Swift Current

branch. That it is on record and the late Minister of Railways promised it would be done last year. I brought this matter up once or twice in Parliament this session, and the minister promised that, as far as possible, he would look into this matter. He has looked into the matter, but he has overlooked it altogether. It seems to me that there has been a discrimination; the people in my district are, in some instances, twenty to forty miles from a railway, as a result of the non-fulfilment of the promises of the various governments that have been in power during the last three or four years.


Donald MacBeth Kennedy: I assure my
hon. friend there has been no discrimination. This money has not been used for building branch lines, but rather for paying interest on bonds outstanding on lines already built. As far as the lines he speaks of are concerned, they will be taken up and considered.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Agriculture-destructive Insect and Pest Act- further amount required, $5,000.
George Gibson Coote: If there is one branch of
agriculture which the minister (Mr. Motherwell) should carry on with more vigour, it is this one. I want to bring to his attention, in case it has not 'been done before, the seriousness of the situation in the southern part of Alberta, on account of the grasshoppers. I saw the statement in a local paper published in that district that on one farm 400 acres of wheat had been eaten up by grasshoppers. That is not an uncommon thing. I would like to know whether the department is furnishing any help to the people in Alberta in fighting this pest. I know that the provincial government are spending a lot of money and there may be overlapping. I think $5,000, the amount in this item is too small. Does the minister appreciate the seriousness of the situation that exists?


William Richard Motherwell: The trouble has become quite serious in certain parts of the West; but up to the present time the municipalities are largely responsible for taking care of the work, and they have succeeded pretty well in doing so. The department at Ottawa has been placing at their disposal such assistance as it had in the way of expert advice; but, so far as I know, we have never laid out any money in these localities. The municipalities concerned, with the aid of the provincial government, have the matter

Supply-A griculture
in hand. It is true that in Alberta, the situation looks pretty formidable, and there has been a very serious invasion of insect pests; but the provincial and municipal forces have got them pretty well rounded up.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Cold Storage warehouses-further amount required, $25,000.
Murray MacLaren: Is this to provide an additional cold storage warehouse at St. John?


William Richard Motherwell: This is to extend the work of cold storage. We have $25,000 in the main estimates, and this is for the purpose of further development of cold storage facilities throughout Canada. The act now applies only to municipal cold storages. We propose to extend it to others, and that is the reason the additional amount is required.


Murray MacLaren: The minister says
" throughout Canada." Can he give me the particulars as to where he proposes applying the money?


William Richard Motherwell: Wherever it is required.


Murray MacLaren: I understand it is required at St. John, N.B. Do I understand that the minister proposes to- establish a cold storage warehouse there?


William Richard Motherwell: What I have in mind is the dairy industry, but more particularly the fruit industry, especially in the Okanagan valley and the Annapolis valley. I cannot particularize. The matter depends upon where requests come from.


Murray MacLaren: Does the minister
propose to furnish cold storage facilities in the city of St. John?


William Richard Motherwell: I do not think
so; I have no knowledge of any application from there.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Livestock-further amount required, $60,000.
Simon Fraser Tolmie: Where does the minister propose to expend this money?


William Richard Motherwell: On	the main
estimates, I intimated a policy of reducing grants to fairs throughout Canada. The policy of making grants had been continued to such an extent that some small places were getting exceedingly large grants. Strong representations, however, have been made to me by hon. members on all sides of the House and by people throughout the country, so that, instead
of reducing the grants by 50 per cent, we have decided to reduce them by 25 per cent. That has necessitated another appropriation, to make up the 25 per cent.


Simon Fraser Tolmie: Is it the intention of the department to pay the fares of judges this year?


William Richard Motherwell: Yes.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Illustration farms-further amount required,
Arthur John Lewis: When the main estimates were up for consideration, I asked the minister whether new buildings were going to be placed on the new experimental farm south of Swift Current. He stated that he intended to place certain buildings there this year, but they were not provided for in the main estimates. He told me, however, to look into the matter when the Supplementary Estimates came up. I am wondering if this is the item at which he told me to look. The minister shakes his head. Am I to understand that no provision is made?


William Richard Motherwell: When my hon. friend sits down, I will get up. This is not for new"touildings; this is for the construction of cheap silos at the various illustration farms in southern Allberta, southern Saskatchewan, andi, perhaps, in southwestern Manitoba, if they are required there. There are a number of illustration farms, and we have worked out a policy of constructing cheap silos, mostly of the trench variety, for the purpose of encouraging dairying in that part of the country. That is what this $10,000 is for. In another appropriation for public buildings, which is not in here by the way, I can give an explanation to my hon. friend.


Arthur John Lewis: That is what I was considering. It is not here, andi I was wondering when it was going to be1 put in.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Health of Animals-further amount required, $75,000.
Simon Fraser Tolmie: Where is it proposed to expend this?


William Richard Motherwell: On the budget, I forecast a possible extension of the work of cleaning up tuberculosis in our
9 p.m. herds by adopting "block areas." This is for that purpose. We hope to do something in Manitoba. If the money will go further, it will 'be used wher-

Supply-Agriculture

ever there seems to be the most encouragement to use it-I do not know where-in Vancouver Island and Prince Edward Island.


Harry Leader: Is the regulation still in force, which was in force last fall, and which required that a breeder must have at least twelve pure-bred stock 'before he could participate in the accredited herd plan?


William Richard Motherwell: I think that has been reduced; but you must stop somewhere; you cannot go around the country examining one animal here and another there. I think, however, twelve is too many. I recommended a smaller number; but whether that has been carried out or not, I do not know, I will see that it is.


Harry Leader: This is a matter which the minister should be sure of. There is a discrimination against the small breeder, and the regulation is to the disadvantage of the successful working of the accredited herd plan.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Stock grazing and feeding, $41,503.65.
Edward Joseph Garland: Will the minister kindly explain this appropriation?


William Richard Motherwell: I do not know who is responsible for this classification. It does not mean anything. This money is to be devoted to paying for the carriage of seed in Alberta, Saskatchewan and Manitoba. Most of this goes to Alberta, but I forget the allocation. It is for the "free freight" policy, which has been in force for four years, under which a very considerable amount was spent last year and a smaller amount this year. The notation given does not indicate that.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Gratuity to Dr. C. E. Saunders. Dominion Cerealist, on his retirement from, the Federal Service, $2,000.
Robert Milton Johnson: Is this a straight gratuity or an annual amount in the nature of a pension?


William Richard Motherwell: No, just a single gratuity.


Robert Milton Johnson: The minister will remember that I asked him about this some time ago. I understood Dr. Saunders had been applying for a pension,
fMr. Motherwell.]
but that through some technicality he was declared not to be entitled to any. The minister promised the matter would be attended to.


William Richard Motherwell: Whatever the
difficulty, it was overcome and Mr. Saunders is now on the pension list. I think his pension comes to $900 a year.


Arthur Meighen: I wish to support the attitude taken by the hon. member for Moosejaw (Mr. Johnson). I do not like making exceptions, for I know how difficult it is for governments to do so, but it does not sound right to me that Dr. Saunders should be allowed a pension of only $900 a year-


Some hon. MEMBERS:: Hear, hear.


Arthur Meighen: - a -man who has accomplished what he has accomplished for this Dominion of so intensely practical a character and under circumstances where he well knew he could not possibly be making any fortune for himself. That man should be treated in some special way, and if the item here could be made annual it certainly would be none too much. Indeed, in my judgment even that is too little.


William Richard Motherwell: I got all I could under the Galder Act for Mr. Saunders, and maybe a little more, by manoeuvring, than the law intended-in fact I stretched it to the breaking point to secure to him the $900. If my right hon. friend will indicate how we can get Dr. Saunders anything more, I am right with him. This pension of $900 does look small.
An hon.. MEMBER: He has already indicated how it can be done.


Robert Milton Johnson: This $2,000 is taken care of for this year. We can pass this item, and possibly next year the gratuity might be taken care of in a more permanent form.


William Richard Motherwell: Surely.


George Perry Graham: It could be taken care
of by an annual vote.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Pensions.-European War-Further amount required to provide for expenditures arising out of the recommendations of the Special Parliamentary Committee on Pensions, Insurance and Re-Establishment of 1922, as contained in chapters 3 and 6 of the committee's second and final report, $256,800.
Arthur Meighen: I have no objection
at all to this vote, but I do not like the way it is worded. It is going to be too

Supply-Pensions
easy to apportion the money; the Government could do almost anything with it under this vote. Would it not be possible to outline by divisions the ends to which this money is to be devoted-how much for one purpose, how much for another?


Henri Sévérin Béland: This item has been
prepared by the officials of the department. It covers divers recommendations of the parliamentary committee which will be found at page 20 of the report. First of all, it provides for disability and attributa-bility; second, the Appeal Board-


Arthur Meighen: How much to each?


Henri Sévérin Béland: I am not able to give
the information in detail. The item refers mainly to those two and to the Medical Appeal Board; pensions payable to widow married after appearance of disability; certain pensions to fatherless children; pensions to deserted wives; allowance equivalent to that awarded a married pensioner on account of his wife to be granted in certain cases on her decease; pensions awarded as a result of tuberculosis; pensions to widowed mothers

which I think is extended somewhat; pensions to mothers of deceased soldiers who have been deserted by their husbands. This total vote has been closely calculated by the officials of the department in conjunction with the Pension Board.


Alfred Speakman: This large vote,
together with the corresponding one under the Department of Soldiers' Civil Re-estab-iiishment is a sufficient answer to any charges made throughout the country that the recommendations of our committee reduces pensions in any way.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Northwest Rebellion, 1885 and General Pensions-ifurther amount required to provide for pension to Leo Smith, based on the extent of his disability and retroactive to September 1, 1920, $2,700.
Mr. WARNER:: I have been asked by
some of the soldiers who took part in the Rebellion of 1885 whether they will be allowed pensions, and I would like to know the intention of the Government in the matter.


George Perry Graham: Individual cases are
being considered as they come up, but to re-open the subject of Northwest Rebellion pensions would be a pretty large order.


Mr. CLARK:: I understand that claims
were filed years ago by veterans of the Royal Northwest Mounted Police in connection with the Northwest Rebellion, and that certain promises were made to those men. I should like to know whether their claims have been dealt with and, if not, what the Government proposes to do with them.


George Perry Graham: Speaking for myself, no such claims have been brought before me, except possibly one letter in reference to the Northwest Rebellion of 1885. But when the House rises I will have more time to look into the matter.


Henry Herbert Stevens: I think my hon. friend from Burrard (Mr. Clark) refers to certain claims which were brought to the attention of my hon. friend's predecessor.
The minister will find filed in his department claims from the veterans of the Royal Northwest Mounted Police who served in the Rebellion, but who at its conclusion were not given the same pensions and land grants as the volunteer force received. These old veterans have been claiming for twenty-five or thirty years that they were unjustly treated, and I think they should have recognition. I must admit that the government of the late Sir Wilfrid Lau-rier rejected their claim and that the late government did not see its way clear to grant their request. Mr. Rowell, who, I think, was acting minister for a time, did promise consideration; he went into the matter with some care and I really expected that some adjustment would have been arrived at. It is rather late in the session for anything to be done now, but I suggest that the minister look into the matter. The records are in his department and if anything can be done to recognize the claims of these old veterans, certainly it will be appreciated.


Mr. KNOX:: This matter has been
brought up in the House on a number of occasions, and has. previously been referred to by the member for Centre Vancouver (Mr. Stevens). I took the matter up this year with the Minister of Justice (Sir Lomer Gouin), under whose department I understand the Mounted Police now come, and I was assured by him that the number of persons entitled to consideration is now very small-very little over one hundred, in fact, including officers, non-commissioned officers and men. The difficulty, he points out to me, is that in doing anything in the matter you open up the question of pensions. I suggested that something might be done in the way of gratuity, and he promised to look into
Supply-Pensions

the matter, but in the meantime he could not see his way clear to taking action. I would again impress on the Government the necessity of looking into the matter. Many of these old veterans are not able to make a living for themselves and they certainly are entitled to some consideration.


George Perry Graham: It is the police the hon. member is referring to?


Andrew Knox: Yes.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
*Soldiers Civil Re-establishment-unemployment relief-further amount required to provide further assistance to unemployed pensioners and vocationally trained disabled men and to their 'dependents in the amounts and under the conditions laid down by the Governor In Council In Orders in Council P.C. 71, dated 31 March, 1922, as amended by P.C. 911, dated 3 May, 1922 ; and to provide for salaries and other expenses of administering the provisions of said Orders in Council and amendments thereto, $150,000.
Mr. CAMPBELL:: I would just like to read a telegram which I have received from the Yorkton branch of the Great War Veterans' Association, as follows:
Yorkton veterans urge you voice urgent need for adequate scheme of housing credits to relieve unemployment and assist re-establishment.
There is very great need of houses in some of the smaller towns and cities of the West. The municipalities are not in a position to shoulder their responsibilities under the old housing scheme, in that their borrowing powers would be curtailed to such an extent that they could not carry on ordinary work. The veterans urge the taking of some action in the matter, which would at the same time have the effect of materially relieving unemployment. I think that something might at least be done as a sort of half-way measure: possibly the municipality might become responsible for a certain portion of the amount involved, a certain portion of any loss that might eventually occur, or something to that effect, thus avoiding the tying up of a municipality to such an extent that its borrowing powers would be seriously curtailed.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Mines and Geological Survey-additional amount required by the Lignite Utilization Board of Canada to meet expenditure in connection with the carbonizing and briquetting of lignite coals.-Advances to the governments of Manitoba and Saskatchewan, $125,000.
Oliver Robert Gould: This item provides for advances to Saskatchewan and Manitoba,
[Mr. Knox. 3
which assume one-third each of the liability involved in the carrying on of this work. Are the members of the Lignite Utilization Board paid for their services, or do they give them gratuitously?


Charles A. Stewart: All are gratuitous except in the case of the secretary.


Oliver Robert Gould: I have wondered whether it would not be a good idea to institute a system under which the members of the board would become paid servants of the Government, with a view to there being more control over their activities. If Parliament had more control over the board perhaps we would be in a better position to suggest in what manner their activities could better be carried on. I have spoken on this subject at different times in the House. Since I last referred to it I was called upon by the secretary of the board who very kindly gave me a good deal of information in connection with the work that I did not have before. I told him that I had been continually asked in my home district what was being accomplished by these experiments, and that I had not been able to give any exact information. The secretary of the Board very kindly furnished me with samples of the briquettes which they are now almost ready to manufacture in quantities. I hold these samples in my hand, and, acting upon the suggestion of the secretary, I knock them together in order that hon. members may hear the sound which results and realize that they are solid articles. It is unnecessary for me to emphasize how necessary it is to have these briquettes manufactured in order that a fuel may be made available to the people of the western prairies. We are quite as much interested in the matter of fuel in our western country as those are who live in the East; in fact, the question is a more serious one to us out there in that we have no other source of fuel. In the past I have questioned whether the board was going to be able to provide a fuel that would successfully compete with other fuels. I have with me a statement in that regard which I would like to have placed on Hansard; I do not think it is necessary to read it, but I would ask the privilege of handing it in.


Charles A. Stewart: Hand it
in.


Oliver Robert Gould: It sets forth the value of this product as compared with anthracite coal which we have been importing in large

Supply-Lignite Board
quantities into western Canada for a number lotf years. We are spending pome hundreds of thousands of dollars every year for anthracite coal imported from the United States, and I am advised by the secretary of the board that this lignite product will save approximately 45 per cent of the money now expended on imported anthracite. Last year we expended $500,000 on anthracite coal imported from the United States, and we are spending a similar amount each year. I think every hon. member will appreciate the possibilities if investigations are carried on in a scientific manner, of these huge deposits of lignite in the southern portion of Saskatchewan. Nevertheless, when we expend public money, we should have more or less control over the board or institution through which it is expended, and I would ask the minister to look into the merits of the question whether we should not have a board with a paid salary.


Hance James Logan: I do not rise to follow the example of my hon. friend from Assinboia and move that this vote be struck out, as he did with reference to a vote this afternoon. I rise to commend thiis investigation of the wonderful deposits of lignite in Saskatchewan and Alberta. I have had some experience of this work in those provinces in years gone by, and I recognize what a wonderful boon it would be if some process could be evolved for converting that very low grade coal into anthracite or at all events into a much harder coal than bituminous. But there is one thing that astounds me in! this connection. It is eight years since I last visited that little plant at Bienfait, where they were then investigating the making of briquettes. At Grand Forks, in North Dakota, investigations had been going on along the same lines for many years prior to that, and I had the opportunity of visiting the School of Mines in North Dakota and seeing this most interesting work going on. They were then briquetting, and I have in my possession some briquettes very much like what the hon. member for Assiniboia has here tonight. What I would like to know is how such a vast sum of money has been spent on this investigation. We voted a large sum in the main estimates this year for this purpose, and on that occasion I asked the minister how much had been spent, and his reply was that over $800,000 had been spent on investigations for the briquetting of coal. I am in favour of these investigations being carried on; I
believe there are wonderful possibilities; but where in the name of heaven have they spent $800,000? That is in addition to what the provinces have given, and we are now being asked to vote a further sum for this very purpose. It seems to me it is pretty nearly time we had a showdown as to what is being done with these vast sums of money that are being spent on that little bit of a plant at Bienfait. It is beyond comprehension how such a vast sum of money could have been spent simply in getting coal which you reduce to dust, and when you get some kind of a binder to press it into briquettes. It is not only the length of time these investigations have been going on, but the vast amount of money that has been paid out of the treasury on these investigations, that astounds me. Again I say I commend the work, it has wonderful possibilities; at the same time I would like to commend to the minister the fact that down in Eastern Canada we have low grade coal which in many cases is not merchantable as a fuel, but by chemical and other processes we could convert that coal into very valuable by-products. And I wish to inform the minister that before next session I propose to ask him for a vote by this Parliament to investigate the low grade coals of Canada other than lignite, and the possibility of converting these coals into the by-products which are so valuable. We know that in (Germany they long .ago mastered the briquetting of coal. They use coal of a much lower grade than ours, with much less carbon than the coal on the prairies, and they have made a tremendous success of that work. We know also that in (Germany they have (developed to a wonderful extent processes to make the byproducts of coal. The dyes of Germany made from coal are known the world over. We in Canada have fifty billion tons of coal containing the same material that in Germany is converted into dyes, benzol, and other valuable by-products, but we are not investigating the possibilities in this direction at all. When we burn coal in a grate or under a boiler, it is said, we lose about 85 per cent of the real value of the coal. Is it not about time that we should, by scientific research and proper investigation, develop this great natural product so as to make it of very much more value than it is at the present time? Therefore, while commending the briquetting of coal in Alberta and Saskatchewan and realizing its great possibilities, at the same time
Supply-Unemployment

we should make some scientific research into the possibilities of other low grade coals in Canada.


Robert Milton Johnson: What are the names of the board?


Charles A. Stewart: Speaking from memory, Mr. Ross is chairman, and Major Thompson the secretary.


Robert Milton Johnson: Is Mr. Sheppard a member of the board?


Charles A. Stewart: I could not say at the moment.


Oliver Robert Gould: I should like to have the unanimous consent of the committee to place this document on Hansard.


George Newcombe Gordon: Has the hon. member the unanimous consent of the committee to place the document on Hansard unread? Someone objects.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Labour - unemployment relief - further amount required, $1,200,000.
James Shaver Woodsworth: What is to be expended for unemployment relief?


James Murdock: This amount is required to pay for bills already incurred, during last winter for the most part, amounting to $111,700.. We estimate that we have accounts still to come in, largely from the three provinces of Ontario, Manitoba and British Columbia, aggregating $1,100,000.


James Shaver Woodsworth: Is any provision being made for the coming winter? I take it that we are likely to have a considerable volume of unemployment before the House meets again.


James Murdock: Hon. gentlemen will recall the statement I made in that regard this afternoon. I do not think I can add to it at the moment.


James Shaver Woodsworth: What I was referring to now was whether any provision was being made at this session for the coming winter.


James Murdock: My hon. friend will understand that for the year ending March 31, 1922, the previous government issued Governor General's warrants for $200,000, and the present Government have issued Governor General's warrants for the same amount. The estimate last year only provided $100,000 for unemployment relief purposes while, as the committee will notice by the present item we have incurred liabili-

ties amounting as nearly as we can estimate, approximately to $1,200,000. It must be understood that many of these bills do not come in at the time they are incurred by the municipality. They have to be checked by the province. The municipality pays its share, the province also pays its share, and then the bills come to the federal government for its share. Bills to the amount of more than $1,000,000 worth have not yet come in to us.


William Charles Good: Are we considering the vote for unemployment relief?


William Lyon Mackenzie King: Yes.


George Newcombe Gordon: The item has been declared carried. Does the hon. member wish to ask a question?


William Charles Good: I wish to speak to the item.


William Lyon Mackenzie King: All right.


William Charles Good: It seems to me we have spent thousands, and even millions of, dollars in unemployment relief and that what we ought to do is to spend a little thought on studying the problem of unemployment and 'its causes. I want to impress the committee, in the very few remarks that I am going to make, with that need. To-day I received a letter-and I presume other members have been equally favoured-from Mr. Tom Moore, President of the Trades and Labour Congress, and Mr. C. G. MacNeil, representing the Great War Veterans, in connection with this problem of unemployment. That letter says:
Considerable uneasiness exists among the organizations, represented by the undersigned, as to the intention- of Parliament with regard to the question of unemployment-
And so on. And this pointed question is asked of each member to whom this letter has gone:
Do you consider that the House of Commons should deal with the question of unemployment, during the present: session?
Through the courtesy of the Ottawa Citizen, the Canadian Congress Journal, (the official organ of The Trades and Labour Congress of Canada) and The Veteran, arrangements have been made for publication of your reply. It is confidently anticipated that your frank statement in the matter will do much to make clear what consideraion is to be given the needs of the unemployed by members of the House of Commons.
Now, I presume, Mr. Chairman, that the gentlemen who have sent this letter are acting in a representative capacity. They certainly represent very large and very important organizations in this country, and I think we ought not to, perhaps, follow the

Supply-Unemployment
custom which, I understand, is very usual in the closing days of the session, to run through every item without any consideration whatsoever. I remember that time and again in the years gone by this practice, which has become more or less common in our legislative , bodies, was very strongly condemned, and I think we ought to take whatever time is necessary to consider, at all events, the important problems that we face. Now in this connection-


William Lyon Mackenzie King: If I may interrupt my hon. friend I would like to draw his attention to the fact that the House disposed of all the main estimates a fortnight ago. There has been no endeavour whatsoever to railroad any estimates through the House. The practice of which he complains, and of which I think there is just cause to complain, is that of retaining a large part of the main estimates until within a day or two of the close of the session and then, as he says, railroading them through. This Government has taken particular care to distribute the consideration of the estimates this year over the entire session, so many items at a time, with a view to enabling hon. members to have the fullest opportunity of discussing all the questions involved, and we concluded consideration of the entire list of main estimates, as I have remarked, some ten days ago. The subject matter referred to in the item to which my hon. friend is speaking at the moment, was very fully discussed when the main estimates were taken up. This item is to make good an amount which is more considerable than was anticipated at the time but the principle, and all that is involved in it, was fully discussed on the previous occasion. I do not think it can be urged that there has been any effort on the part of the Government to hasten in any particular the passage of a single item.


William Charles Good: I think I can quite sincerely, compliment the Government on the practice which has been followed this year in comparison with that which has been followed, I understand, in previous years. My criticism was not so much directed towards the action of the Government as it was towards the disposition on the part of a good many members who are tired-and I include myself in that category-to let things go in the closing days of the session, and not give sufficient attention to the public business that we are sent here to
look after. That is all I intended to convey by my remarks in that regard. Now, I did not take the opportunity of discussing this question when the main estimates were up, but I have always felt very strongly on the matter, and I want to make one or two observations to-night-I hope it will not take more than a very few minutes. My first observation is this: I want to repeat what I said in connection with this unemployment when I was discussing the budget. I consider that our protective system is one of the greatest causes of unemployment in this country, for the simple reason that through it we subsidize industries which are not natural, not naturally profitable to the country, and we have to levy a toll upon the industries that are natural to the country in order to subsidize these other unnatural and unprofitable industries.


Henry Herbert Stevens: I suppose then that the free trade policy of England, where there has been a larger degree of unemployment than there has been in Canada, is not responsible for the unemployment there?
M. GOOD: I think I may answer my hon. friend) entirely in the affirmative, but I will come to the question of England in a moment.


Henry Herbert Stevens: My hon. friend seems to have a single track mind on that question.


William Charles Good: As I was saying, Mr. Chairman, the essence of the protective policy-


George Newcombe Gordon: I must remind the hon. member that he may not deal with the abstract question of the tariff which has already been disposed of. There is an item here for a specific amount dealing with the unemployment existing or which, as the minister says, has existed, and the hon. member must confine himself to that particular question on this item.


William Charles Good: It may be a little difficult to judge of the exact limits within which the discussion must be confined, but I certainly wish to keep within those limits. The only thing I wanted to remark in that connection was that my settled conviction is that unemployment in Canada is increased and not decreased by the fiscal policy we have been following. I think that is entirely pertinent to the question. I want to emphasize again that we are putting a heavy burden upon all our essential natural industries and * thereby putting them in a position where they can-
Supply-Unemployment

not compete in the labour market with other countries and other industries, and in that way we are forcing people out of employment. Take the agricultural situation. The fact was presented to this House not very long ago that the farmers of the West are placed in the position now where they cannot possibly hire help. We have millions of farmers in this country who would like to hire help if they could, but they are not in the position to do so. The reason why is, I think, a very pertinent question.
Some Hon. MEMBERS. Carried.


William Charles Good: I do not wish to impose on the committee. However I have some further remarks to make and perhaps some time could be set next week for the discussion of this question.


Some Hon. MEMBERS:: Oh, oh.


Jacques Bureau: Why not say next
month?


Henri Sévérin Béland: May I ask my hon.
friend, who, I know, is very well versed in political economy, a question? My hon. friend is objecting to direct relief for unemployment?


William Charles Good: No.


Henri Sévérin Béland: Does the hon. member,
approve of it?


William Charles Good: Under certain circumstances, I do.


Henri Sévérin Béland: 
William Charles Good: I may answer in this way: I think direct relief is absolutely justifiable under many conditions, but I do think it is a very unjustifiable policy on the part of this Parliament to go ahead in the blundering, pig-headed fashion, without studying the question-


Some hon. MEMBERS:: Order, order.


William Charles Good: I hope I am not reflecting on any hon. member in this House any more than on myself. Here is a great economic and social problem, and, so far as I can see, we are not giving any money, any time, or any thought to study the problem itself. We simply see the conditions that arise, and we give relief to keep people from starving. I think this

is a problem we ought to study, and I wish there were some way of studying this problem in connection with the legislation and the grants that we have to make from time to time for the unemployed. There is another aspect of this problem we ought not to forget. I am inclined to think, from the various discussions and investigations that have been made in England and in the United States, that the whole question of the control of credit, which formed the subject of one of our resolutions a little while ago, has a great deal to do with our unemployment, and I should very much like to see the Government take action by way of appointment of some committee to study this question before next session. I presume we cannot do anything under existing conditions this session, but we certainly ought not to come to this House next session and have to treat the question of unemployment as we are treating it this year. I wish to impress that point upon the House. In deference to the wishes of the House, and the desire to get through with the business, I will not add anything more. I hoped to submit certain thoughts in connection with control of credit as it applies to this problem, but I will not do so at the present time.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Grant to the Regional Bureau of the Interna tional (Catalogue of Scientific Literature, $2,000.
Henry Lumley Drayton: Is that a new item?


William Lyon Mackenzie King: Is it one of
those contributions to the work of science which appear from time to time in the estimates. This is a work of an international character; and this item appears as a contribution on the (part of Canada towards that work.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Provisional bonus allowance for the Inside and Outside Services to be paid to such persons and classes of persons, in -such amounts and at such times as the Governor in Council may determine. $5,500,000.
William Lyon Mackenzie King: On 4th May
I made a statement to the House as to the basis on which the Government proposed to distribute the bonus allowance to members of the Civil Service. It will be found in the Hansard of that date. Since that statement was made the Government has received and carefully considered many representations from and on behalf of members of the Civil Service throughout all

Civil Service Bonus
parts of Canada, and we have come to the conclusion that it would he in the public interest, as well as in the interests of the Civil Service, to take an attitude a little more generous perhaps in regard to one class of employees than at first we thought it would be possible to take. I intimated on the 4th of May that as respects civil servants drawing salaries of $1,200 and under where there were one or more dependents we would allow the bonus as given last year to be continued. The change that the Government now proposes in the original plan is to increase that amount to $1,560 so that members of the service who have one or more dependents and are receiving a salary up to $1,560 will be granted a bonus for the present fiscal year corresponding to the amount which they were granted last year.


Mr. McGIVERIN:: I am pleased that
the Prime Minister has changed the resolution to the extent of raising the rate of salary on which the bonus may he paid from $1,200 to $1,560, as Ithi's (change favourably affects a considerable number of civil servants not only in Ottawa but all over the country. But, I do not think that any change whatever should have been made in the bonus. No cut should have been made from last year. One might think from some of the talk that has been indulged in that this bonus was a gift or a
present to the Civil Service of Canada- something that had not been earned or deserved. The Toronto Globe in an excellent editorial May 11th, 1922, supporting the retention of the bonus, closed by saying:
The word "bonus" is a misnomer. The lower grades of Dominion Government servants should be given a living wage, not toy way of a bonus but as a matter of right.
Both the Ottawa Citizen and the Ottawa Journal have published editorials strongly supporting the retention of the bonus. Let me 'show hon. members how this bonus question arose. There was a salary revision in 1908, but from that time on, despite the war and the enormous increase in the cost of living, nothing was done with regard to the conditions of the Civil Service until 1918, when another salary revision was made. On account of the unsettled conditions, it was decided to base the schedule of salaries on the estimated normal increase in the cost of living between 1914 and 1918, but leaving out of the schedules the abnormal , increase. due to the war, and meeting that condition by a Cost of Living Bonus. This arrangement was accepted by Parliament. Let me first show how this salary schedule worked out. This is a statement showing the changes in salary rates for the clerical service from 1908 to 1922:
1908			1922			Increase in Maximum
						per cent
Messenger	$ 500	$ 800	Messenger Clerk	.$ 600	$ 900	12-5Clerk 3B	
500	800	Junior Clerk	. 600	900	12-5Clerk 3A	
900	1,200	Clerk	. 960	1,260	5-Clerk 2B	
800	1,600	Senior Clerk	. 1,320	1,680	5*Clerk 2A	
1,600	2,100	Principal Clerk	. 1,800	2,280	8-57Clerk IB	
2,100	2,800	Head Clerk	. 2,400	2,880	2-86Clerk 1A	
2,800	4,000	Chief Clerk	. 3,000	3,600	Decrease 10-
The increases for the mass of civil servants average only about 5 per cent to meet a normal increase of 30 per cent. That was the effect of the salary revision to meet only the normal increase in the cost of living. I have here a detailed statement showing the bonus attached to each class of clerical position and percentage of salary which such bonus represents. I do not want to weary the committee with a lot of statistics and so will only deal with the salaries and percentage of salary for the heads of households, the non-heads of households being practically fifty per cent of the bonus.
Junior Clerks, ?600-$900 or $52i per cent.
Clerks, $960-$l,260 or 32 per cent.
Senior Clerks, $1,320-$1,6S0 or 21 per cent.
Principal Clerks, $l,800-$2,280 or lli per cent.
Head Clerks, $2,400-$2,880 or 7J per cent.
*Chief Clerks, $3,000-$3,S00 or 0 per cent.
No one over $1,800, not being the head of a household, received any bonus. If you will bear in mind that the percentages referred to were to meet the cost of living, you will see that they fell far short of that. The cost of living figures, taken from the Labour Gazette of March 1922, showed that as regards rent, fuel, food and light, to say nothing of clothing, there was a tremendous increase. When the salary
Civil Service Bonus

schedule and the bonus were arranged in 1918, the increase was 111 per cent over 1910, two years after the last salary revision, and this year, 1922, there was an increase of 6 per cent over 1918. It is true that there is a decrease since last year of about 15 per cent, but the bonus was cut last year by 25 per cent, and the bonus figures were based on the cost of living in 1918. What this resolution sets out is that the class from $1,560 to $1,800 has its bonus reduced by 33i per cent, the next class, $1,800 to $2,400, by 661 per cent, and the class, $2,400 and up, by 100 per cent. What justification is there for this? In my judgment, Parliament, by adopting the salary schedule and the bonus, committed itself to the payment of the Donus until there was proof that the cost of living had decreased to the level on which the salary rates were computed or a salary revision to meet conditions: As I have shown, the salary rates do not even meet the normal increase, and the cost of living has not decreased since the bonus schedule was arranged in 1918 but actually increased 6 per cent; then it is a grave injustice to the service to cut the bonus. It may be urged1 that business and commercial salaries have decreased; but they were raised during the period of the war to a very high peak, and1 reductions are from that peak. The Civil Service never got even the normal increase, and waited years for the bonus.
Great Britain dealt with this matter in a totally different manner from ourselves. There were no restrictions as regards classes or individuals or the single man or woman. Every civil servant received a bonus to meet the cost of liv-10 p.m. ing; and as the Government figures showed an increase in the cost of living then automatically, the civil servant received an amount of bonus to meet the percentage of increase. At one time the civil servant in Great Britain was receiving a bonus of 130 per cent. That has decreased in the meantime with the cost of living.
In the United States, where conditions are very similar to our own, the cost of living at Washington being practically identical with that at Ottawa, notification was given by the leaders of the Congress of the United States that the present bonus of the civil servants would be continued without deduction until their new classification Came into force. It may be noted that the prospective classification of the

United States provides for an average salary of $1,500 as compared with the average salary of the Canadian civil servant of $994. The minimum salary for clerical employees in the United States is $1,080, as compared with $600 in Canada. The attitude of the leaders in the government of the United States was that, if the bonus were cut off at this time without any compensating increase in the basic salary, there would be serious distress amongst civil servants, and the bonus was retained.
This is a very serious matter, and I need not apologize for detaining the committee. I have lived in this city for over twenty-five years, and I have twice had the honour of representing it in this House. In that time, I have had much to do with the service in my public capacity, in my profession and in various other ways. I have no hesitation in saying that the great mass of civil servants are energetic, hard working and courteous. Intelligent criticism is a good thing, but wild and erratic statements against the service are to be condemned; they do not get us anywhere. The service is not perfect and it does not pretend to be. I maintain that there is a very high percentage of efficient public servants, as high as in any similar body anywhere. I have already spoken in this House on the question of the Civil Service Commission, and I have mentioned the need' of superannuation and the Whitley Councils. This bonus question, closely allied as it is to salary revision, is very vital to the service, and1 I would therefore press upon the Government the necessity for an investigation into all these matters.


Jacques Bureau: By Griffenhagen?


Harold Buchanan McGiverin: Not by Griffenhagen; never again!-an investigation by a subcommittee of the Cabinet. In the meantime I contend the only fair thing to do is to retain the bonus at last year's figures until a report on the revision of salaries can be brought down next session, and we can feel that we are not doing an injustice to thousands of our civil servants.


Henry Lumley Drayton: A great many of the postal employees are very keenly interested in the bonus question, being particularly dependent upon the bonus. I think a very large number of postal employees, mostly married men, are in receipt of a maximum salary of $1,560. I should like an assurance from mv right

Civil Service Bonus
hon. friend that under the amendment those receiving that maximum will be included.


Jacques Bureau: They are included.


William Lyon Mackenzie King: The circumstances to which my hon. friend alludes largely influenced the Government in reaching that decision. I will read the bases of proposed distribution of civil service bonus allowance:
I.	For members of the service having one or more dependents:
(a)	On salaries of $1,560 and under-the bonus as existing in fiscal year 1921-22 to be continued.
(b)	On salaries between $1,560 and $1,800 (inclusive)-two-thirds of the bonus as existing in fiscal year 1921-22, to be paid
(c)	On salaries between $1,800 and $2,400 (inclusive)-one-third of the bonus as existing in fiscal year 1921-22 to be paid.
II.	For members of the Service without dependents-
On all salaries of $1,200 and under-one-half of the bonus as existing in fiscal year 1921-22 to be paid.
III.	The bonus to be discontinued in other cases.


Mr. GARLAND (Carleton):: Mr. Chairman, with respect to the statement made by the Prime Minister to-night and that contained on page 1560 of unrevised Hansard for May 8, I have this to say, that if the argument was good to raise the salaries in Class (a) from $1,200 up to $1,560, then when you come down to Class (b), salaries from $1,560 to $1,800, they, too, should be raised to $2,400, and the next class raised from $2,400 up to $2,760. I think the present bonus Should remain in effect. I do not see why you can better the service in any way by taking a man at one desk, with dependents, and paying him more salary than the man at the next desk, without dependents, doing the same work. It seems to me that the salary paid should be according to the service rendered, and if any employees are not giving fair service they should he discharged. As has been said, in the United States and Great Britain the bonus has not been reduced, and certainly the cost of living has not come down here in proportion to the proposed bonus reduction. The lower grades should have a straight salary, because in some cases men with four or five children have difficulty to live on $50 a month, and among those men are returned soldiers.


Edgar-Rodolphe-Eugène Chevrier: May I be permitted to identify myself with the remarks made by
my hon. colleague for Ottawa (Mr. Mc-Givern) ? It seems to me the two questions are: Do civil servants earn their salaries? Are they entitled to the bonus? Where you have, as in the civil service, over 60,000 employees distributed over the whole Dominion, it would be preposterous to contend that some individuals will not be found who are derelict in their duty. But in contrast to the few delinquents, I know that the great majority of civil servants will be found to be hard-working and conscientious in the performance of their duties. This question should be dealt with in a broad, generous manner as it affects the whole Dominion, not merely the city of Ottawa; it should therefore be taken out of the field of parochialism. I believe it will be found that 99 per cent of the service are earning more than the salaries the Government is now paying them.
But let us get down to the facts. Is this bonus justifiable? In 1918 the government decided to grant a bonus, following out the principle laid down by the classifiers of the civil service at page 24 of their report where this passage will be found:
Those with whom the final decision as to the adoption or amendment of these proposed schedules rests, knowing the basis upon whioh they were .prepared, will he able to make intelligent adjustments if they disagree with the correctness of the principles and the wisdom of the policies.
So that when this classification was made and when salaries were set out there was no finality about it as the exact salary could not then be fixed, and the bonus was introduced in an attempt to meet the then still rising cost of living. Since its introduction the government has made certain reductions, and further reductions are now being made. With all due deference to those who have decided that the bonus should be cut this year, I contend that in the light of the figures given in the Labour Gazette there is not the slightest justification for this action. We are told that we should not make provision for one class and overlook another, and that throughout the country the wages have been reduced. That is true, but it must be borne in mind that people engaged in the various trades received increases in their wages very soon after the cost of living went up, but it was not until 1918 that the civil service bonus was granted, and it did not take effect until 1919; so that at no time did the bonus make up for the increased cost of living commencing in 1914.
I find in the Labour Gazette that the following increases in wages were granted:
Civil Service Bonus

Building trade employees, 91 per cent; metal trade employees, 90 per cent; printing trade, employees, 131 per cent; street railway employees, 116 per cent; steam railway employees, 91 per cent.
But what have civil servants received since 1918? Salaries were fixed in 1908. In 1918 the bonus was granted, and at its peak it represented but an increase of 44 per cent. The statutory increase was 5 per cent in 1908. So that, in 1918, the total increase of bonus and statutory increase was 49 per cent to meet an increased cost of living since 1900 of over 111 per cent.


Thomas George McBride: May I ask the hon. gentleman a question?
Mr. CHEVRIER; When I asked the hon. gentleman a few days ago to permit me to ask a question he told me that he had the floor; so have I on this occasion. Taking the figures given by the Labour Gazette, we find that in 1921 the cost of living owing to the abnormal war conditions jumped up to 165 per cent over the cost of living of 1904. There has been no decrease in that cost corresponding to the drastic reduction now being made in the bonus. If we compare the standard at 78 or 80 per cent to-day, as is made out in the various indexes with the decreased bonus that is now proposed, what results do we get? We find this: that since 1908 the civil servants have received an increase of 5 per cent in salary and 44 per cent in bonus, in all 49 per cent of which 44 per cent was granted in 1918. This increase of 45 per cent in 1918 was, in 1921, reduced by 25 per cent. This left a bonus increase of 35 per cent. If a further cut of 33 per cent is made this will be reduced to 24 per cent. If you add 5 per cent statutory increase you have 29 per cent as against 78 per cent or 80 per cent; if you deduct 66 per cent-as is proposed for the second category-from last year's bonus of 35 per cent this leaves 13 per cent; add to it 5 per cent statutory increase and you have 18 per cent as against 78 per cent or 80 per cent. In no industry has the cut been so radical and so drastic as it has been in this case. I submit that this cut should not be made; that the undertaking given when the classification was brought down should be carried out; and that the Government should have a subcommittee of the Cabinet to at once conduct an investigation into the conditions pertaining to the Civil Service, the rates of pay, and so on, and that that subcommittee report to this House on the opening of next session.

No one would welcome an investigation of that kind more than the civil servants themselves. I have lived in this city all my life; for ten years I have been connected with the Civil Service in professional capacities, and I know that members of the service would, as a result of any impartial investigation such as I have suggested, be vindicated in the stand which they take in this matter.
With a view to refuting a charge which is sometimes made against the Civil Service, and to furnish also a further answer to the question whether this cut is justified, I quote the following from the Citizen:
For those who, somehow, have come to the mistaken belief ffch'at the civil servants at Ottawa, as a whole, are a collection of highly-paid holders of soft jobs, it is indeed a little difficult to realize the hardship that would follow even a 25 per cent cut in the cost of living bonus. There are some whom a reduced bonus might not seriously affect-among those in regularly classified positions and in receipt of salaries of $3,000 or more a year But the men with families or dependents who are receiving the average wage, will be called upon to undergo genuine hardship if any curtailment in their incomes, though comparatively small is decided upon.
One feels sure that no member of Parliament desires to see any privation endured by a single individual in the service of the Dominion of Canada.
I may point out that neither my colleague nor myself are pleading for the rights of the civil servants in Ottawa alone; we are pleading on behalf of every civil servant in every constituency represented by hon. members of this House. The article continues:
But perhaps there are some who through lack of knowledge or the misrepresentation of those who do not know the facts, are of the opinion that a cut in bonus can be made without injury to anyone. This is not true of the clerical service.
Let me now quote from The Ottawa Journal-*
A member of Parliament has just made the statement that civil servants "are living on the fat of the land." He is a new member, and may be excused for speaking after a brief examination of the facts of the case and a necessarily superficial knowledge of the situation as a whole. Such testimony, is however, strikingly at variance with the declaration of the late Mr. J. M. Courtney that "Government is a niggardly paymaster." The difference between the two judgments is that the former was based on an observation covering a few days and the latter on nearly forty years of experience as Deputy Minister of Finance.
I repeat that I do not think this cut is justified under present conditions. Because there may be suffering in other classes is no reason why the service should be made

Civil Service Bonus
to sutler. I may point out that none were more generous than tJhe civil servants throughout Canada in their contributions to the Patriotic Fund during the war, and if they felt that the amount by which their bonus is being reduced could be distributed throughout the country for the relief of poverty and distress, they would be satisfied to let that be done. But I do not think that the reduction will in any way result in the relief of that distress of which I speak. On the contrary, it will create hardship in ia great many homes; this proposed saving will not in any way alleviate the conditions of distress which the country now faces, and will in no material manner alleviate the present financial condition.


Thomas George McBride: I may say in the first place that I have no fault whatever to find with the Civil Service. Since I have come down here they have treated me with every courtesy; no one could ask to be better treated than I have been. But I would like to put this question to my hon. friend (Mr. Chevrier) : 4f the civil servants are treated as badly as he says they are, how is it that there are so many applications to fill vacancies?


James Shaver Woodsworth: As one who has a very large number of civil servants in his constituency I feel that I ought to say something with regard to this question. I am glad that the Government has advanced from its first position on this question to the compromise now proposed, but I do feel that any reduction of the bonus figure for last year is short of what is due the civil servants. I should like to associate myself with the hon. member for Ottawa (Mr. Chevrier), who emphasized the need of a thorough revision of the salaries paid to the civil servants. I do not like this idea of a bonus; we ought not to regard the civil service in that way at all. The bonus was presumably granted on account of the cost of living, yet the figures already given show that the cost of living has not gone down, and that the amount that is being paid to civil servants is not sufficient to enable them to live as they should live. Another thing that I think ought to be considered by the committee is the position of the western men. Take the case of the railway mail clerks. In 1914 their maximum was $1,400 and there was a western provisional allowance of $180, making a total of $1,580. The maximum in 1922 is $1,560, and there is no bonus to single men; in other words, the single men
of this class receive $20 less in 1922 than they did in 1914. In the case of the postal clerks, the maximum was $1,400 in 1914, which, with the western provisional allowance of $180, made a total of $1,580; the maximum salary in 1922 is $1,500. There is no bonus to the single men; their total salary is $1,500. In. other words, in 1922 this class of employees received $80 less than they received in 1914. It seems to me that in discriminating against the single men we are introducing a new principle into the payment of persons for services. We say by the proposed arrangement that they ought to be paid in accordance with the number of dependents they have, their personal obligations, and so on. I do net know that I could object to that principle if it were universally applied. One of the old co-operative societies a good many years ago laid it down as a principle on which to proceed that we Should expect from each according to his ability and give to each according to his need. If we go on that principle throughout, then I have no objection to a man with wife and family receiving a larger amount than a single man without dependents. If we go on that principle, there are members in this House who have no dependents and are unmarried, and we might very well begin with the Prime Minister and go down, and apply this principle all along the line. I know of no reason why this should not be done, if we are going on that principle at all. The underlying thought seems to be that these people receiving the lower salaries are more or less in the position of being on the verge of pauperism, and so we have to give just enough to keep them living.
Let me give one or two statements of the cost of living. The weekly budget for a family of five, as reported a month or two ago, including twenty-nine staple articles of food, wood, coal, light and rent, works out at $92.23 per month of thirty days. These figures allow absolutely nothing for extras, clothing, savings, recreation, insurance, etc. In this connection I quote from page 233 of the Labour Gazette as follows:
For the average family of five the expenditure on these items of food, fuel, light and rent would he perhaps two-thirds or about 65 per cent of the total income.
There are many men with families greater than five in number employed in the Winnipeg office whose total remuneration is $96.25, less $3.50, or five per cent
Civil Service Bonus

of the salary which is deducted each month for retirement fund-not a pension scheme but an enforced savings scheme,-making the actual cash remuneration received for a full month's work of forty-four hours per week, $92.75, or 52 cents more per month than the actual cost of living for a family of five, estimated as being 65 per cent of the total income required according to Government statistics.
When we get down to that low rate, we can understand that a man can hardly maintain his self-respect and in some cases that he is actually tempted to resort to practices that are unjustifiable. I had a letter only a day or so ago from one of my constituents in Winnipeg, in which he says:
Since April 1 of this year not dozens, hut scores of married men in the Winnipeg post office with three, four and five children have been drawing the princely sum of $62 per *month.
Now, Mr. Chairman, and hon. members, I suggest that no man can live and maintain a family on any such amount as that. Just let me make one or two comparisons.
At the time when the minimum salary for a married man, irrespective of the number of his family, stood at $101.50 per month, unemployed relief was being paid in my own city of Winnipeg to the extent of $112.60 per month in the case of a married man with three or four children, and $104.60 per month with two children. At that time there were no less than 242 employees in the Winnipeg office in receipt of a minimum salary. That is, in the city of Winnipeg we had the peculiar situation of government employees in the post office receiving less than was being paid by the relief agencies of the city of Winnipeg. That seems to me an intolerable situation. The figure fixed by the relief agency was considered the lowest sum on which people could live at all decently, and yet the government employees charged with responsible work were receiving less than the city dole.
Secondly, let me call attention to the fact that the maximum bonus paid at any time in Canada during or after the war was $420 per annum, while in Great Britain the maximum bonus was $2,500. The civil servant in Great Britain in the lower grades received a bonus greater than his salary or wage. One other comparison: During the time the minimum salary for a married man stood at $101.50 per month, its highest point, allowances to vocational students under the Department of Soldiers'

Civil Re-establishment .were being paid according to the following schedules:
Per month
Without dependents	$ 75
Married, without children	 100
"	wife and one child . . . . 115
"	wife and two children .. 127
" wife and three children 137
Over three children add $10 per month for each child.
I am not suggesting at all that the amounts paid under the Soldiers' Civil Reestablishment were too high, but I would suggest if it were necessary to pay anything like $127 per month in the case of a returned man with a wife and three children, it is absolutely inadequate for the Government to pay only $101.50.
I should like to give, in closing, one or two actual cases which have been furnished me as to what this involves in actual family life. I have the names, but I shall not give them. They are residents of the city of Winnipeg:
(A)	Porter with two years' service ; not yet appointed to a permanent position. Has wife and seven children, last pay cheque was $35 for two weeks pay. Is buying house with monthly payments of $20, plus interest, taxes, insurance, etc.
(B)	Clerk, with wife and one child. Passed Civil Service examination in (May, 1919, and is not 3ret appointed. Last pay cheque $35. Is paying $5*5 per month on land and lumber used in building a home, also taxes of $65 per annum last year, this year will be more.
(C)	Clerk, -wife and one child. Buying house ; payments not stated but understand it runs him $300 per annum, plus interest and *taxes. Doctor's bill owing for one year and last winter's fuel not yet paid for. Two years in service, failed on general ability test at last examination.
(D)	Porter with wife and five children, youngest six weeks old. Is buying own home. Suffers with asthma and is at present off duty through sickness believed to be brought on through worry about loss of bonus and fears ultimate loss of his home.
(E)	Clerk with family of four children with addition expected within two months. Rent $30 per month with salary of $70 less 5 per cent deduction. This man is showing undoubted signs of breaking down under the load of worry and responsibility of trying to support his family and fears seizure of furniture by sheriff having been unable to pay his rent last month.
(F)	Clerk, with wife and five children. Salary $70 per month less 5 per cent. Says he is just existing with aid from outside sources and is thankful that the winter is over.
It may seem to some to be beneath the dignity of this House to listen to some of these actual cases of need, yet I take it that, after all, we who are here charged with the responsibility of trying to administer the affairs of this country in such a way that we will at least make provision for the minimum requirements of food and clothing and shel-

Civil Service Bonus
ter and health and education; yet we find that even in the case of the government employees themselves the standards are distinctly below the standards of decent living. I recognize that it is next-to impossible to do very much at this late stage of the session, but I do trust that the suggestion already made by one of the members from Ottawa that we should give this matter the most serious consideration may be followed, and that we provide for a complete revision of salaries, doing away with this bonus idea altogther, and paying such a salary as will enable all civil servants to live according to respectable standards. And there is one other thing-I think I have mentioned it before, but I should like to mention it again-it seems to me that we ought to make it a crime for any employer to pay a smaller salary to any man than will enable him to support himself in decency.


Thomas George McBride: It seems to me a rather peculiar thing that almost every member of Parliament who has spoken oh this matter seems to feel himself compelled to speak on behalf of the Civil Service. As I remarked previously I have said nothing against the Civil Service; but I am sent down here to perform a duty and I am going to perform that duty to the best of my ability. I am going to express my views candidly on this question not only here but in any other quarter where I may have occasion to speak. When I go to the country and see what the people there are up against; observe the way in which their taxes are increasing, and notice how people are flocking to the city all the time-to be employed in the Civil Service or elsewhere-I do not think it is a proper condition to continue.. During the last year or two a great deal has been said about those in the Civil Service going behind and not being able to make a living. Now, I invested in a ranch and) went 'behind last year to the extent of over $4,000. Yet my hon. friend (Mr. Woodsworth) gets up and declares, "You have got to pay certain salary."* Can I pay the salary upon which he seems to insist and still continue to run that ranch? I cannot do it. Not only are the facts as I have stated, hut this year my taxes have been increased nearly forty per cent. How are people going to remain in the country under these conditions? Canada is naturally an agricultural country, and the people who dwell in the rural districts are entitled to con-consideration just as well as the members of the Civil Service and the dwellers in cities.


Mr. LOVIE:: I would like to say, as regards the conditions in Winnipeg and the relief work that is carried' on there, that I agree with my horr. friend from Centre Winnipeg (Mr. Woodsworth), that wages may not ibe high enough probably and that those men with large families may in consequence be suffering hardship. However, in respect to that, let me say this: During the Easter vacation, when I was West, I went to the employment agency to hire a man for one month during seeding time. The employment bureau was full of ablebodied men, and the sidewalk outside was lined with them. When. I told the clerk inside of my requirement he said "Come back about five o'clock in the afternoon." This was in the forenoon. I said to him "Cannot you get me a man?" He said, "I cannot get a man at this time." I said to him, "Will they not come out for a month? Do they want to go out for the whole summer?" He replied, "They do not want to go out for the whole summer." I then inquired, "Do they not want to go for a month?" He replied, "No." Then I asked, "What do they want?"' The clerk's answer to that was, "They want relief." Now, all these men were able-bodied individuals, and that was the situation in Winnipeg at Easter of this year. I wanted a man for a month, and there were others who wanted men, and yet these men would not go. As the employment clerk said, they were looking for relief.
Now as regards, the high cost of living to which the hon. member for Centre Winnipeg has referred, the farmers are down to rock bottom. At Easter time I sold fat cattle for six cents a pound. Double that price and you get twelve cents a pound, but the butchers are selling meat at thirty cents a pound. That is profiteering. There you have the retail profiteer, and until his prices are cut down the cost of living in that respect is going to stay where it is.


William Lyon Mackenzie King: My hon.
friend from Centre Winnipeg (Mr. Woodsworth) made some remark the purport of which I did not quite grasp. Was it to the effect that it might be considered beneath the dignity of Parliament to inquire into such matters as those pertaining to low-paid salaries?
Civil Service Bonus


James Shaver Woodsworth: Yes, I said it
might be considered beneath the Government's dignity to go into this detail in regard to the actual needy family cases.


William Lyon Mackenzie King: Well, I would like to assure my hon. friend that there is no member of the Civil Service so humble that the Government would not wish to see full justice done to him and his family, and it is from that point of view that we will continue to proceed in all our relations with the Service. I would also like to say that the representations of my hon. friend andx others and in particular what has been said by the hon. members from Ottawa, deserve and will receive the most careful consideration of the Government. The Government will only too gladly continue to work on this problem, which is one of the most difficult and also most important of the problems with which the administration has to deal.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.

[Stage Direction]
Indians. British Columbia. Legal expenses; further amount required $5,000.
Mr. McQUARRIE:: The Indian agency at New Westminster has been vacant for some time; is it proposed to fill that vacancy, and if not why?


Charles A. Stewart: I cannot answer that question at the moment. There are two agencies which we are endeavouring to combine and one of them may not be filled. We hope to combine the work of the agencies and have one agent.


William Garland McQuarrie: I think it would be a mistake to close the agency at New Westminster, as it is one of the most important agencies in British Columbia. I would ask the minister before taking action to look into the matter very carefully.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Indian education ; further amount required- $211,000.
Mr. SHAW:: Some time ago when the committee were considering the main estimates I dealt with the matter of educational facilities being provided) for the Indians on the Stoney reserve at Morley in the province of Alberta. From facts in the possession of the department at that time it would appear that there are, if I remember correctly, 110 children of school age for whom no educational facility has been provided for the last two years- I think perhaps for the last three years.

I do not know of any place where there are 650 human beings without the advantage of a school at all except perhaps on this particular Indian reserve. I may say at the outset that I have a letter which was written by the ex-Chief of this particular Indian reserve, dated May 1st, 1922, directed to the Methodist missionary, and I will quote one portion of it. He says: Why is it that we can get nothing done on this reserve such as school and other things. We have asked the Indian agent to ask the department for a school and I understand the request has not been made to the government.
The request for educational facilities on this particular reserve comes from the Indians themselves. They are anxious that their children should be educated yet they have no educational facilities at all. I know that there is under construction at the city of Edmonton, a distance of 250 miles away, some sort of an Indian educational institution, and I presume, although I do not know, that it is the intention of the department to transfer these Indians to this educational institution at Edmonton. That, undoubtedly will not meet with the approval of the Indians at this centre. They have a large number of children there. They want to accommodate them, and not only that, but they want the school to serve as a community centre, not only to benefit the children both intellectually and physically, but' also because it is an advantage to the Indians themselves and a place, round which their community activities might centre. The Government of Canada is under treaty obligations with these Indians to provide them with educational facilities, and I think, unless we are prepared to treat these obligations as a mere scrap of paper, it is about time we should give heed to the demands of the Indians in this particular centre. I should like to know from the minister what educational policy has 'been determined on in connection with this Reserve?


Mr. NEILL:: I would ask the minister
if that item includes provision for the Indian school in Alberta?
Mr. .STEWART (Argenteuil) :	Yes.
I might say, in answer to the hon. gentleman from West Calgary (Mr. Shaw) that there is a vote of $75,000 for the school in the city of Edmonton, which is the Methodist school, which I presume the Indians of the Morley reserve know more favourably. The history of the Morley reserve is that they did not take kindly to day

Supply-I ndians
schools. That proposition was abandoned some time ago. There is a considerable number of children in that particular reserve, and since my hon. friend brought this matter to the attention of the Government, they have been making a study not only of this reserve at Morley but of the Blood reserve at Macleod and the reserve at Glei-shen. I expect within the next two or three weeks to visit this Reserve and to become personally acquainted with some of the difficulties which appear to exist there. As far as I can discover, Indian education from now on is going to be rather an expensive business for the people of Canada. My hon. friend points out that this is a duty that devolves upon the government of Canada. Formerly, apparently, the churches have been undertaking this responsibility to a very large degree, but they are beginning to find the load very much too heavy for them, and from time to time the Government will have to assume a larger share of the responsibility of educating the Indians, I can only say to my hon. friend that I will be prepared to give this the very greatest attention and will visit the institution. I have been across that reserve very frequently, but, of course, I was not specially interested at that time in the condition of the Indians on that particular reserve.


Mr. FORKE:: I am almost afraid to
ask my question, after what the minister has said, but, can he tell me, has anything definite been done about opening up the school at Elkhofn?


Charles A. Stewart: Yes, the Church of England has the matter under consideration with the department. I cannot promise my hon. friend that any definite conclusion has been arrived at, but in all probabilities that school will be opened.


John Millar: Has the minister >re-ceived any notice of damage done to the Round Lake Indian school at Broadview by the recent tornado?


Charles A. Stewart: Yes,
we have received information. It has sustained 'some injury from the recent storm.


Joseph Tweed Shaw: Can the minister tell me
what condition the building at Edmonton, is in, or if it is still in process of construction, and when it is proposed to open the institution?


Charles A. Stewart: I had
intended to ask for the sum of $175,000
for the construction of that building. It is now almost July, and it will be too late to complete that building this season, undoubtedly, but I have included in this item an amount of $75,000 to begin construction upon that school, and we will rush the construction as fast as we possibly can.


Joseph Tweed Shaw: Can the minister tell me
when the Indian children will be in a position to receive education in that school?


Charles A. Stewart: As with most building at this time, whether constructed by the Government or anyone else, there is no doubt a full year will elapse before the school will be opened so as to accommodate the children.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
To provide for the purchase of British Columbia House, London, England, for the purposes of the Dominion Government, $175,000.
Alan Webster Neill: Does this mean buying
the whole house, or merely the backyard? I am speaking from memory now, but my recollection is that that house cost an enormous sum of money, and if the Government are buying it for $175,000 they are getting an awful good bargain. It is a case of poor old British Columbia being trodden upon once more.


William Lyon Mackenzie King: Hon. members know, I think, that the Canadian offices in London at the present time are scattered in different parts of the city, and for obvious reasons we thought desirable, if possible, to have them brought into one building to accommodate all. The Government ascertained that there was a possibility of purchasing the British Columbia house, a building splendidly adapted for our purposes, and well located in the central part of London, and we are conducting negotiations now with the British Columbia government with a view of purchasing the building outright, making it a Canada house instead of a British Columbia house. It is probable this purchase will go through. The amount asked for at the present time will be sufficient to enable us to get under way with the negotiations. It will not be sufficient to cover the entire price of the building, and if the deal should not go through the amount would not be required.


Henry Herbert Stevens: What negotiations have been entered into with the government of British Columbia in regard to the matter, and has any figure been fixed by the government of British Columbia.

Chief Electoral Officer

Mr. MACKENZIE /KING: When the Premier of British Columbia was here the matter was discussed with him by the Minister of Public Works and myself, but he has to confer with his colleagues on his return to British Columbia. Both governments had to be supplied with particulars as to the price at which it was purchased originally by British Columbia, and this has necessarily been a matter of correspondence and the negotiations have not been completed by any means.


Mr. LADNER:: Do the negotiations involve a reservation by lease or otherwise for the use of the province?


William Lyon Mackenzie King: Yes. British Columbia would not consider the sale of the building without the reservation of a suitable accommodation for the British Columbia officials.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
To provide additional salary for the Assistant Chief Electoral Officer from April 1, 1919, to June 30; 1920; $1,750.
John Babington Macaulay Baxter: I have no intention of opposing this estimate. The Chief Electoral Officer does good work from which we receive great benefit. But I have to take the opportunity to call the attention of the House to some statements made by the hon. gentleman from Victoria and Carleton (Mr. Caldwell) because justice demands that the other side should be stated.
I regret that the hon. member from that constituency was not in his seat when the motion to go into Committee of Supply was made, and that he is not in his seat now. I do not know that I can very well postpone my remarks, as otherwise I might fail to express something that I think ought to be put upon the record. The hon. member, on the 12th of June last, said that some two weeks before the election, he was astonished to find six new polls established in his constituency; that he inquired from the returning officer if those polls had been established; that he had no notice of the appointment of enumerator or registrars; and that the returning officer said that he did not propose to appoint any. He also stated that the returning officer informed him that he was subdividing one division into four, and that he intended to revise the whole as one list, and then afterwards to make a division, allocating the voters to different districts. In fact, I think he said that the returning officer would prepare a copy of the poll for the deputy returning officers on elec-

tion day, but that no lists would be prepared for the candidates. My hon. friend stated also that he had to employ a lawyer and to threaten an injunction to stop the election in order to get those lists.
There comes a very distinct issue of veracity between the hon. member and the returning officer. I know nothing of the circumstances. I do not know anything personally of the circumstances now, except as I have heard the statement made in the House and as I have, in my possession, a statement differing very widely in practically all respects, of the returning officer. I did ask, when the hon. member made his reference, if he had complained to the Chief Electoral Officer as to the conduct of this election. There is a useful provision in the law for that purpose. I do not want to do the hon. member any injustice. He may not have been aware ot the rule; but at all events he did not make any complaint to the Chief Electoral Officer. Apart from this, which may be a petty question between two men, I think the committee might well be impressed with the importance of communicating with the Chief Electoral Officer all instances or irregularities. They could then be investigated, and recommendations could be made by the Chief Electoral Officer for amendments to the law, because in many cases, all we can do is to prevent a recurrence of a matter where very often we are unable to do justice in cases where there have been irregularities.
I do not like to take up much time just now; but I wish to call attention to the statements that are made by the returning officer himself. He has read the remarks of the hon. member, and he says that he found that by following provincial subdivisions, he had a number of large and unwieldly divisions, both geographically and from the standpoint of number of voters on the lists; that after appointing the registrars who had acted in the preceding referendum election and who were familiar with their duties, he was requested by the voters in those divisions to establish separate polling places which would be more accessible and convenient. I do not suppose all the voters asked him, but no doubt he had requests from some reasonable number. He further says that he did not at that time want to appoint new registrars who would be unit p.m. familiar with the duties, and that he proposed to allow the existing registrars to make up his list for

Chief Electoral Officer
the entire division in the usual way and then subdivide it geographically for the use of the deputy returning officers in the separate polling stations on election day. Before finally doing so, he submitted the whole matter in detail to the Chief Electoral Officer who fully approved of the suggestion, as the correspondence on file in his office will show.
As regards the conduct of this returning officer, while it is impossible for the House to decide between him and the hon. member who has made allegations against him, it will be easy, I suppose, to refer to the correspondence on file with the Chief Electoral Officer and to see whether he was justified in doing as he did. He then says that he went ahead strictly on the lines approved by the Chief Electoral Officer. He alleges that every step in regard to his acts was first submitted to and approved by the Chief Electoral Officer. He declares that he cannot understand the hon. member's statement that the hon. member only found out about the new polling stations by accident. The boundaries of the new polling stations were printed in the proclamation and distributed and furnished to the hon. member's agent in strict conformity with the election law. I cannot, of course, vouch for a single statement that I am reading. I am accepting it all as being true, because of the honourable record of the returning officer in that constituency. I think, however, it is a most remarkable thing that there should be such a wide divergence between the statement of the hon. member made in this House where the returning officer had no opportunity of being heard and no notice that charges of that kind would be levelled against him, and this answer which is made by the returning officer and which, fortunately, he has an opportunity of bringing before the House and the people just as widely as the allegations that were made against him.
He does not stop there in his statement. He goes further; he says that the hon. member's further statement that the hon. member threatened him with an injunction is quite surprising. At no time during the election did either candidate threaten him in any way, and so far as he was aware, the conduct of the election from the returning officer's standpoint was satisfactory to all parties concerned. He says that it was surprising to learn
that the hon. member had to put an injunction on the election. He declares that he-


Thomas Wakem Caldwell: I rise to a question of privilege. I never said that I had to put on an injunction; but I had to threaten to do so, and I can prove this by the attorney whom I employed.


The CHAIRMAN (Mr. Marcil, Bona-venture):: I was wondering whether this discussion was in order on the item.


Thomas Wakem Caldwell: I hope it is, and I hope you will let us thresh it out.


Charles Marcil: I am in the hands of* the committee. The item before the House is to provide an additional salary for the Assistant Chief Electoral Officer, $1,750.


John Babington Macaulay Baxter: If I may be permitted to give reasons, I may say that such a discussion is always in order on a motion to go into Committee of Supply. Had I been permitted to-day to finish my remarks which were entirely out of order, little time would have been taken up, and the incident would have passed. I am dealing with the duties which have to be performed by an officer in this department in direct contact with the particular matters which are the subject of the allegations made by the hon. member. Whether this is pertinent or not, I fancy this committee has too high a sense of justice to permit one of its members to make allegations against a man who is not at the bar of this House, who has no opportunity of being heard-without some one being permitted to make a statement in his defence.


Charles Gavan Power: I rise to a point of order. I do not think it is permissible-


John Babington Macaulay Baxter: I am discussing a point of order.


Charles Marcil: the
hon. gentleman is speaking to a point of order.


John Babington Macaulay Baxter: I am not making a political address at all. I am not attempting to apportion praise or blame to either party, but simply to give expression here on behalf of a man who has been charged with wrongdoing. If it is fair that he should be protected, then I think I am in order, and surely it is opposite to this item. If it is not fair that I should be heard now, if hon. members put the technicalities of order above human justice,
Chief Electoral Officer

then I will stand upon my rights and I shall discuss items until I shall render it absolutely necessary to move again to go into Committee of Supply. Then I shall be absolutely within my rights and impervious to the wishes of those who may not wish justice to be done.


Charles Gavan Power: My point of order is that it is not permissible for an hon. member to read evidence to cord' overt the word of another hon. membe*


Charles Marcil: That point of order does not arise at the moment. The question is whether this discussion is relevant to the item before the committee. I am in {he hands of the committee, but generally there is strict adherence to the rule as to relevancy, and I do not think this debate is relevant to the item under discussion. There are other means by which the hon. member for St. John can bring the matter up.


Thomas Wakem Caldwell: The hon. member for St. John has seen fit to attack a statement I made, and he has also misquoted me. I did not hear the beginning of his address tonight, but I did hear his remarks at the opening of the House this afternoon, and he misquoted me on that occasion.


Henry Herbert Stevens: I rise to a point of order, Mr. Chairman.


Thomas Wakem Caldwell: I think I have the floor, Mr. Chairman.


The ACTING CHAIRMAN (Mr. March) :: The hon. member for Vancouver Centre (Mr. Stevens) rises to a point of order.


Henry Herbert Stevens: My point of order is this, Mr. Chairman: that if the hon. member for Victoria and Carleton (Mr. Caldwell) is going to undertake to discuss the speech of the hon. member for St. John, then the latter at least should be allowed to complete his remarks.


Ernest Lapointe: I think everyone is out of order.


John Allmond Marsh: The discussion is out of order on this item.


Thomas Wakem Caldwell: Of course, I bow to your ruling, Mr. Chairman, but the hon. member for St. John has been allowed to contradict a statement I made-


Some hon. MEMBERS:: Order.


Thomas Wakem Caldwell: -and I think I should be allowed to reply.


John Allmond Marsh: There is another time when the hon. member may reply to the statement. The whole question is whether the discussion is relevant to this item or not. I consider it is not.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Grant to the Canadian National Institute for the Blind, $10,000.
George Gibson Coote: Where is this institution located, and is it open to our blind?


William Lyon Mackenzie King: I am sorry that the hon. Minister of Finance (Mr. Fielding) who had charge of this item is not in the House at this moment. As I recollect, careful inquiry was made regarding the scope of the Institute's work, and it appeared to be on a national scale. It is for that reason that this assistance is being given by the Government. We felt that the object was eminently deserving of support and would be sympathetically received by hon. members.


George Gibson Coote: I have no objection whatever to the grant, but a few weeks ago there was a tag day in Ottawa for the support of the blind, and it seemed to me that if Canada could not look after her blind better than that it was rather a reflection on us as a nation. That is the reason I am trying to get some information under this item. I think the majority of hon. members would like to see an appropriation made for blind soldiers. One of the women who was collecting on the occasion to which I have referred stated that the money was to go to blind soldiers. I am wondering if this institution is of any use to them.


William Lyon Mackenzie King: Yes, particularly so. That was one of the factors which influenced the Government to take such a sympathetic view of the work.


Henry Lumley Drayton: This is the institution looked after by Mr. Wood and Colonel Baker. It is a very excellent institution.


William Lyon Mackenzie King: A large part of the work is for blind soldiers.


Henry Lumley Drayton: Practically
entirely.


George Perry Graham: We have schools for
blind children, but none for blind adults. These gentlemen have undertaken the work, and the comparatively small amount the Government is giving is a mere drop in the bucket compared to the private con-

Supply-Departments
tributions which are away up in the hundreds of thousands of dollars. We countenance the work being done by giving a small subscription. I can assure my hon. friend that this institution is educating blind adults all over the Dominion, and is working in harmony with the schools for blind children as well.


George Gibson Coote: I would urge on the Government to increase the vote, in that case.


William Lyon Mackenzie King: Hear, hear.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Trade and Commerce-Advance for Canadian Wheat Board, 1922, $50,000.
Robert Milton Johnson: What is the intention of the Government in regard to the $560,000 which was turned back by the Canadian Wheat Board with certain recommendations ?


James Alexander Robb: I think I made an explanation on the main estimates. My recollection is it was recommended that the money be applied towards combatting the grasshopper plague and conducting an investigation into the prevention of rust. My hon. friend of course understands that these amounts are turned in to the Receiver General and are not specially earmarked.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Public Works-Chargeable to capital-Public buildings. Ottawa-New Departmental Huild-ings-Compensation to Architects for designs submitted, $18,0-00.
Henry Lumley Drayton: What is this vote intended to cover?


Mr. KING (Kootenay) :: In 1914 the
Government invited architects to compete in the preparation of plans for a new departmental building. The contest was Empire-wide and some sixty gentlemen competed. Under the terms of the arrangement a committee was appointed to select from among the plans submitted the six which they considered the best.


Henry Lumley Drayton: Perhaps the hon. gentleman will tell us why this eight-year old baby has been resuscitated?


John Warwick King: There is no doubt that there was an undertaking on the part of the Government to pay the sum of $3,000 to each of the six selected by the committee.


Henry Lumley Drayton: What is
there to show the undertaking?


John Warwick King: It was one of the terms of the competition advertised by the department.


Henry Lumley Drayton: It seems an extraordinary thing that this was not done before.


John Warwick King: The competition was not completed; in fact, it is not completed yet. There was a suit in the courts with regard to this matter in which one of the parties was successful, not in getting the amount asked for, but in having his claim to $3,000 established.


Henry Lumley Drayton: Was he the
successful contestant?


John Warwick King: No choice was made out of the six.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Harbours and Rivers Esquimau, 'B..C.-Dry dock, under
construction	$1,000,000
Port Arthur and Fort 'William

Harbour improvements-Further amount required	 85,000
Toronto Harbour-Improvements -Further amount required,. ..	100,000
1,185,000
George Gibson Coote: Will the minister explain the first item in this vote and state very definitely whether he does recommend the completion of that work?


John Warwick King: The late government entered into a contract in February, 1920, for the construction of a dry dock at Esquimalt. Ordinarily the item for the completion of the work would have been in the main estimates this year, but when the Government came into power there was a feeling that although further dry dock facilities were necessary on the Pacific coast, money conditions were such that it was doubtful whether the construction of two dry docks on the Pacific coast would be justifiable. The work has been held up at Esquimalt as well at Vancouver. We found on investigation, however, that some $1,200,000 had been expended at Bsquimalt; that the contractors had a large plant and equipment on the ground, and that if the Government cancelled the contract it would be liable for the payment of claims arising out of the cancellation. After careful investigation, in view of the fact that further dry dock accomodation there was needed; that large expenditure had already been made, and that further large expenditure would be involved if the contracts were cancelled and the works
Esquimalt Dry Dock

closed down, it was considered better business to go on and complete the work. So we are asking for $1,000,000 for the continuation of the work at Esquimalt.


John Arthur Clark: When the main estimates were before the committee the Minister of Public Works suggested to me that when the supplementary estimates were being considered1 I would have an opportunity to refer to the conditions with respect to a dry dock in Vancouver. The need for a dry dock there was recognized by three successive governments, that of the late Sir Wilfrid Laurier, that of Sir Robert Borden, and later that of the right hon. gentleman who at present leads the Opposition (Mr. Meighen). In February, 1920, a contract between the Coughlin Shipbuilding Company and the government was authorized under the Dry Dock Subsidies Act, and in October, 1920, a contract was entered into under which, on consideration of the company expending $2,500,000 in the construction of a dry dock, the Dominion would subsidize the company to the extent of $112,000 per annum over a period of thirty-five years in accordance with the provisions of the Dry Dock Subsidies Act. Unfortunately, the contract called for a graving dock. After careful-investigation the Coughlin Company Came to the conclusion that a graving dock was not a proper dock to construct; so they joined with the Wallace Shipbuilding Company and agreed upon the construction of a floating dock.


Charles Marcil: I have no objection to the hon. member making reference to Vancouver, but the question before committee at present relates to the dry dock at Esquimalt, not at Vancouver.


John Warwick King: I would like the hon. member to have an opportunity of proceeding, because when the main estimates were being considered there was a suggestion that he would later have an opportunity to make some reference to this matter.


George Newcombe Gordon: 1 am in the hands of the committee.


John Arthur Clark: I shall not be long, Mr. Chairman, but I would like to place certain facts before the committee. As I have said, these two companies consolidated their interests; the old contract was surrendered, a new contract with the Government of Canada entered into, and these two com-

panies were given the subsidies which had previously been given to the Coughlin Shipbuilding Company:	These companies have
now at their disposal a plant practically completed for this enterprise. The only thing that remains to be done is the construction of a floating dock. The Minister of Public works (Mr. King) advises me that this contract is in order; that the only reason why any question has been raised by the Government has to do with finances.
The minister has suggested that the Dominion might not be justified in constructing two dry docks on the Pacific coast. I want to point out that the Dominion is not constructing a dry dock at Vancouver; it is a matter of private enterprise, But I think there are certain facts that members of the House, particularly those who live in the prairie provinces and in eastern Canada, did not quite appreciate.
The facts are these: The total tonnage passing in and out of the two ports of Vancouver and Victoria for the year 1921 was almost equal to the total tonnage passing through the ports of Montreal, Quebec, Halifax and St. John. It has often been pointed out in this House that Vancouver is a port open the year round, whereas Montreal is closed five months of the year. The total tonnage passing through the port of Vancouver is greater than that of Montreal. Halifax and St. John are the ports through which the business of Montreal is done in the winter, and the two Pacific ports of Vancouver and Victoria do an almost equal volume of business with the four eastern ports. That is a fact which I think this committee should consider. If I may be permitted to suggest it, I think that if this House came to the conclusion that during one session of each Parliament the members should take a trip to all parts of Canada and see what is doing in their own country, it would eliminate a great deal of the talk that goes on here and we should do more business because we would know what we were discussing. I think it is a truism that to have seen a thing once is better than to have heard of it a hundred times.
May I point out in this connection that we have a serious unemployment problem on the Pacific coast. Had this project been proceeded with last year after the contract was concluded it would have resulted in the employment of one thousand men in that enterprise who are and have been unemployed.

Esquimalt Dry Dock
May I also point out that the port of Halifax and the port of St. John each have dry docks; Quebec has two dry docks, Montreal, two; Kingston, Toronto, Collingwood, Port Arthur, Prince Rupert, each has a dry dock; but the two great ports of Victoria and Vancouver have no dry dock except the one in Victoria, which is not capable of handling any of the business that is required to be handled at the present time. This dry dock which the Government proposes to proceed with and for which the estimate is proposed, will take at least five years to construct. The dry dock in [DOT]Vancouver which would be constructed by private enterprise if this contract was honoured could be completed within one year, and its existence would be more than justified within one year, because if it only repairs five or six ships, it will mean a tremendous sum of money for the port.
The situation is this: All the ships now coming into the port of Vancouver are forced to go for repairs to the port of Seattle, which, by the way, has five dry docks. It is true they only make minor repairs there, 'because the vessels wait until the return trip and have any major repairs done at Hong Kong. I have been assured by such men as Mr. Melville Dollar, of the Robert Dollar Company, one of the biggest shipping companies in the world, that vessels can now have their repairs done in Vancouver, such as can be done without a dry dock, as cheaply and as efficiently as they can be done on the Clyde, and just as cheaply and more efficiently than they can be done in Hong Kong. Surely under these circumstances this Parliament is not going to shirk its responsibility under a solemn contract which is admitted to be in perfect order.
May I point out also, and I am sure the Minister of Public Works will agree with me, that if this contract is proceeded with, the total cost for the first year cannot exceed the sum of $40,000. I am just as strong for economy as any member of this House, but where in the name of common sense does economy come in when an expenditure of $40,000 will mean the expenditure of millions of dollars by shipping companies outside of Canada within our own ports. Furthermore, these two great shipbuilding companies, the Coughlin and Wallace companies in which millions of dollars of our own Canadian money is invested, are slowly being Strangled, for it is out of the uestion for them to get contracts for new ships. We all recognize
that shipbuilding in Canada cannot be a thriving industry for five years to come anyway. It may be a thriving industry eventually, and we hope it will be, but these two shipbuilding companies could carry on with the repairs thait would be available from the great volume of shipping that is now passing through that port, and they could save to the people the millions of dollars of capital invested by carrying on a repair business for the next few years, if they are given the chance.
I have seen a newspaper report that the Minister of Public Works proposes to go to British Columbia and investigate this matter, but I can assure him and every member of this committee that there is no need for further investigation. Investigations have been carried on over a period of many years.
Just before I conclude, I should like to refer the Government, and particularly the Minister of Finance, with whom I thoroughly sympathize in his effort to economize, to the conclusions arrived at not only by every citizen of Vancouver, but by the leading Liberal newspaper in the province of British Columbia, the Vancouver Daily World. The editorial I refer to appears on the front page of its issue of May 29. I could refer to various other editorials in the same paper on the same subject, but I think this covers it pretty well. I shall just read a few sentences:
In view of these facts repudiation is impossible and unthinkable. Every consideration of national policy, of national honour and of national necessity-as well as every commercial necessity of the port of Vancouver-requires the carrying out of the contract and the keeping of public faith. On the issue of public honour, there is no room for evasion, repudiation or compromise. On the fact of commercial necessity there is no room for argument- the need of docking and repair facility is a recognized need of every active port. There is no answer to the justice of this claim and right.
I sincerely hope that there will be no delay in making the investigation which the Minister of Public Works stated last December he proposed to make. I think there has been plenty of opportunity and plenty of time to make the investigation already, and I hope that the very moment the session is concluded he will give this matter his first consideration and see that justice is done. I can quite appreciate the fact that he is not as closely in touch with this situation as we from the city of Vancouver, and possibly from other coastal ports, are.
Esquimalt Dry Dock


William Lyon Mackenzie King: With reference to this contract which my hon. friend says is being repudiated-


John Arthur Clark: I did not say it had been repudiated.


William Lyon Mackenzie King: -will he tell us the date at which the contract was entered into, and by whom?


John Arthur Clark: Yes. The first contract was entered into in October, 1920. That contract was with Coughlin. It was afterwards surrendered in consideration of a contract for the same subsidy. The Wallace Company being added to the consolidation. It was a contract under which two shipbuilding companies joined together, but a change was made in the kind of dock. It had been intended to build a graving dock but I think they came to the conclusion that that was impraticable because of the cost. The subsidy was for a second class dock and would not have enabled them to float their bonds and so on, and then the project would be financially impossible. These two companies were negotiating for a period of some six or eight months and finally consolidated their interests and surrendered the contract in consideration of the execution of a new contract. I canot give you the exact date. I think the contract was signed very shortly before the election, but the consolidation was completed and the surrender of the old contract was given only on the distinct understanding that the new contract would issue in consideration thereof.


William Lyon Mackenzie King: My hon.
friend says the contract was signed very shortly before the general election. Is it not a fact it was signed about six days before the election?


John Arthur Clark: I do not think it matters at all. I said "very shortly" but I cannot give you the exact date. It does not matter whether it was before or after the election; it is a necessity-that is my point.


George Gibson Coote: Does the hon. member think this Parliament would be justified in authorizing the building of two dry docks as close together as Esquimalt and Vancouver?


John Arthur Clark: In the first place this Government is not building the dry dock. This is a matter of private enterprise, subsidized under a public statute. Any person can come along, make odt a case, and get the subsidy. A case has been made out

repeatedly, as I say, for over a period of ten years and now we have got private enterprise to complete the undertaking. These two ports are eighty miles apart, and a dry dock in Victoria will never be of any use to the shipping industry of Vancouver. For this reason: Vancouver is a terminal point. The ships will come into Vancouver and unload, and if they have to turn round and go eighty miles to have very extensive repairs made, unless such repairs are an absolute necessity. They will reload and go back to Hong Kong and have them made there or else go down to Seattle.


George Gibson Coote: In other words a dry dock at Esquimalt is in the wrong place.


John Arthur Clark: I do not admit that at all. I say that the shipping in and out of Victoria is absolutely sufficient and more than sufficient to justify a dry dock there. As I pointed out before, the ports of Montreal and Quebec have four dry docks between them. These two ports have none and yet the shipping tonnage through them is much greater than through the ports of Montreal and Quebec.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Public Buildings-Ontario, $132,580.
Alan Webster Neill: I just wish to suggest to the Government that under the item of Dominion Public Buildings some amount of money might be spent, and some attention paid, to the matter of the acoustics of this Chamber. The conditions that prevail here are a travesty on common sense. The man who erected this building and left it as it is should be crucified. Can you conceive of a church in any of our big cities, or a theatre, with accommodation for nearly 250 people as to which one-third of those who attend might almost just as well be outside the building. It is of no use to say that an improvement cannot be made, because there can be an improvement. If you send a plumber to do the work he will not be able to do it; but if you send an expert-and there are experts in the business-the needed work can readily be done. Members from British Columbia will recall the former legislative chamber, only this is worse than that because in the provincial chamber there were only forty-two members. However, they could not hear in that chamber and they did some peculiar stunt in connection with the roof. I forget whether they tore out the former ceiling and put in a new one-* but it does not matter, they did something

Supply-Public Works
to the chamber and made it practically all right. A little care and a little study by an expert would surely convert this Chamber into something approximating the purpose for which it was intended.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Public Buildings-Alberta, $27,000.
Andrew Knox: Do I understand that the vote for public buildings in Saskatchewan has been carried?


Charles Marcil: Yes.


Andrew Knox: I did not think the item was read. Is it so small for Saskatchewan that it is not worth paying any attention to?


An hon. MEMBER:: There are others.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Harbours and Rivers, Nova Scotia, $258,740.
Henry Lumley Drayton: These look more like main estimates than supplement-aries.


George Newcombe Gordon: Is it the pleasure of the committee that I read the different items embodied in this vote?


Some hon. MEMBERS:: Carried.


George Gibson Coote: I think they had better be read, you might overlook some.


William Lyon Mackenzie King: These items are all for necessary repairs and perhaps they had better be taken together. It is not likely that hon. members will take exception to any, so they might go through as they are. If any hon. gentleman desires to take exception to any item it is open to him to do so.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Harbours and Rivers, Quebec-$236,785.
Henry Lumley Drayton: Just one question. I take it from what my right hon. friend has said that these are for essential repairs. You are not going on with new works?


William Lyon Mackenzie King: There may be one or two very small exceptions, but the votes would be for work that has been long standing and should really have been undertaken before this.


Henry Lumley Drayton: There are
some extensions here-$32,000.


John Warwick King: Not extensions, but necessary additions. It is not new work.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Manitoba-Delta-Completion of protection work, $1,500; Winnipegosis wharf, $3,100.
Mr. KELLNER:: In regard to this
wharf at Winnipegosis, the deputy minister asked me to present a statement. He was very careful, and very wisely asked me not to over-estimate what I thought it would cost to build this wharf. I personally visited the ground and ascertained the cost of securing the land on which it was to be built, and the cost of building it, and the least possible I considered it could be built for, was $4,000. I would ask why it has been reduced to $3,100.


John Warwick King: This is the estimate made up by the district engineer as to cost.


Harry Leader: I wish to say a few
words in connection with the recent floods in Manitoba. If the Government had acted upon my suggestion when I brought the matter up some weeks ago, it would not have been necessary to have said anything to-night. At that time I suggested that the Government should bring down, in the supplementary estimates, an item to take care of the damage. I see they have not made any provision for that. Therefore, it is up to me to say a few words on it to-night.


George Newcombe Gordon: The hon. gentleman would not be in order under this item. This is for temporary wharf accommodation. He would have to take some other opportunity.


Harry Leader: I was given the assurance this afternoon that I would be allowed to bring it up.


George Newcombe Gordon: I am in the hands of the committee.


Some hon. MEMBERS:: Go ahead.


Harry Leader: A statement was made by the Minister of the Interior that no claims had been made with regard to this flood in Manitoba. It is only natural that I, as representing that constituency, should receive any claims that were made. I will not weary the House by quoting them all. Here is a letter from J. A. Hirtle, of Headingly, and I have a letter from Mr. G. H. Kelly. These gentlemen claim, on behalf of others in the district, that they should be compensated for any work they did in connection with the recent floods.


Jacques Bureau: What is the matter
with the province of Manitoba compensating them?
Supply-Public Works


Harry Leader: I beg leave to present a resolution passed by the councillors of Cartier and St. Francois-Xavier, which reads as follows:
Whereas the settlers along the Assiniboine river east of Portage la Prairie since the earliest times have suffered great loss and damage through high water;
And whereas the water of said river have overflowed its bank in greater or less volume every year;
And whereas the high water of 1902, 1904 and 1916 have caused great damage in our municipalities and have driven many settlers out of the district;
And whereas the residents of said municipalities have worked, day and night, to dyke a large portion of 6aid river and thus prevent thousands of acres from being flooded;
And whereas the flood 1922 wdll bankrupt many farmers if financial help is not forthcoming ;
Be it therefore resolved, that the federal Government at Ottawa immediately investigate the damages caused by the flood of 1922', compensate those who suffered losses, indemnify the settlers for the work done and take adequate measures to prevent the recurrence of these floods in future, and further,
Be it also resolved, that a copy of the above resolution be mailed to the Honourable Prime Minister of Canada, the leader of the Opposition, Mr. T. A. Crerar and our member, Mr. Harry Leader.
It has been stated that it has driven many settlers off the land. We have spent millions to bring settlers into this country, and here is one place where, with a little financial help, we could retain the settlers already on the land. It has been stated in this House that a satisfied settler is the best immigration agent the country can have:


William Lyon Mackenzie King: Perhaps the hon. member would permit the Committee on Railway Rates to present their report. This committee could rise and ask leave to sit again, so that the chairman of that special committee dealing with transportation costs could present their report.
Progress reported.



COMMITTEE ON TRANSPORTATION COSTS

[Stage Direction]
Hon. A. K. MACLEAN (Halifax) presented the third report of the Select Special Committee appointed to consider transportation costs, together with the minutes of proceedings and the evidence.
Henry Herbert Stevens: Will that report be
printed immediately, so that members can have copies?


William Lyon Mackenzie King: I will endeavour to have them sent down to-night.


Mr. MACLEAN (Halifax):: I give
notice that on Monday I will move concurrence on the motion.


Henry Lumley Drayton: Is there
another report, or is this the final report?


Alexander Kenneth Maclean: (Halifax) : It is not likely that there will be another report.


Jacques Bureau: Call it the third and final report.



PUBLIC WORKS

[Stage Direction]
The House again in Committe of Supply, Mr. Marcil (Bonaventure) in the Chair.
Harry Leader: I have another resolution to present to the House from the local branch at Reaburn. The resolution reads:
Whereas the floods from the Assiniboine river have caused serious loss to several farmers in this district in the loss of their crops ;
Be it resolved that we request our federal member, Mr. Harry Leader, to urge upon the Government that every possible assistance be given to those farmers who have lost their crops, and also that a dyke be constructed this summer to prevent any such serious situation arising in the future, and that the destitute farmers be given an opportunity of constructing this dyke.
I am not very well versed in the situation, but I believe this Government cannot escape the responsibility of, at least, paying for the damage done to the bank of the Assiniboine river. To support my contention, I have a letter from a gentleman out there. I do not know that I should give his name. He states that the dyke was built by the Hon. Robert Rogers in 1914. Previous to this contract the Government had done some work up there. Therefore, I think they are fairly convicted, and must assume responsibility for the damage to the banks of the Assiniboine river. I have only done my duty in bringing the matter before the Government, it is now up to the Government to do their part. The Minister of the Interior (Mr. Stewart) to-day informed the House that he had, I think, instructed the hon. member for Brandon (Mr. Forke) to communicate with his constituents and to have them notify the provincial government that this Government were willing to cooperate with them in a survey of the damage done there, and to see if they could arrive at some agreement as regards the damage done. I am pleased that the Government have gone that far, and I hope they will be able to go a little further and to do something for the settlers.


Robert Forke: I have to put myself right along this line too, because the last time

Supply-Public Works
the hon. member for Portage la Prairie (Mr. Leader) brought this matter up, I got quite a calling down from the people of Brandon for neglecting my duty by not bringing it up. I am glad the hon. member for Portage la Prairie has brought the subject forward. He is just a little mistaken in the last statement. The Minister of the Interior took it into consideration that they might make a survey of the river through Manitoba and find if something could be done to prevent flooding in the years that are to come. The promise was made that if the provincial government would make this request, it would most likely be acceded to. Some time ago I took the matter, as regards the damage done by the flood, up with the Minister of Public Works (Mr. King) and the Minister of the Interior. There is a question just how far the Dominion government are responsible. If they are responsible in any way, no doubt a great deal of suffering has been occasioned by the flood. I can readily see that the provincial government would in some way be responsible, perhaps to a greater extent than the Dominion government; but I think some little help might come from the Dominion government in this case, as the people have lost property and have suffered a great deal on this account.


Ernest Lapointe: It was an act of
Providence.


Robert Forke: No doubt, and the Assiniboine river. I have brought this matter to the attention of the Government, and I hope they will take it into consideration anyway.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Saskatchewan and Alberta-waterways-temporary wharfage accommodation, $1,000.
Andrew Knox: This sum is not very large, seeing that the item covers two provinces. Where is this money being spent?


John Warwick King: This is to provide temporary warfage accommodation at waterways, Alberta, at an approximate cost of $600. There is just the one item.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Harbours and rivers-British Columbia, $174,455 :
Thomas George McBride: I brought this matter
about Shuswap lake to the attention of the minister when the main estimates were under discussion. I know the coast of British
Columbia and I know the Fraser river I have steam boats working there at the present time, and I will say no place in British Columbia to-day, to my knowledge, needs a wharf and some work done as much as does Shuswap lake. I have spoken to the minister as regards getting a dredge there, and if something is not done to get a dredge built this year, it will mean that no work can be done next year. If the dredge is not put into repair or a new dredge built this year, and if we have to wait until the estimates come down next year, it will be the fall of next year before the dredge is completed, and it will be two years from now before the work can be done. I would ask the minister, at least, to have a dredge built this year if there is any possibility of that being done.


Henry Herbert Stevens: Can the minister not
take this out of the general dredging appropriation?


John Warwick King: The matter will receive consideration. I do not know that we can do this.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Progress reported.

[Stage Direction]
The House proceeded to consider certain resolutions reported from Committee of Supply.
Resolutions concurred in.

[Stage Direction]
On motion of Right Hon. W. L. Mackenzie King (Prime Minister), Bill No. 203, for carrying into effect the Treaties of Peace between His Majesty and Hungary and Turkey, was read the second time, and the House went into Committee thereon.-Mr. Marcil, Bonaventure, in the Chair.
On section 1.
Henry Lumley Drayton: Is this in the same form as the acts adopted for the purpose of carrying out previous treaties?


William Lyon Mackenzie King: Yes.


[Stage Direction]
Section agreed to.
Bill reported, read the third time and passed.
On motion of Mr. MacKenzie King, the House adjourned at 12 o'clock midnight.
Transportation Costs
[Stage Direction]
Monday, June 26th, 1922