Mr. BLACK (Yukon):: 1.	How many government owned dredges and other units of dredging equipment are lying idle at Victoria and Vancouver?
2.	What is the total value of such dredges and dredging units?
3.	What is the annual cost for maintenance, services of watchmen and upkeep of such dredges and dredging units?
4.	What was the cost per cubic yard for dredging and dumping material during the time the dredge Mastodon was operating in Vancouver harbour ?
5.	Did the board of harbour commissioners for the port of Vancouver, or the government, award a contract for dredging in Vancouver harbour to a private company or person?
6.	If so, is such work now being carried on by such company or person, and by whom?
7.	If such work is now being performed by a private company or person: (a) what price per cubic yard is being paid for dredging; (b) what price is being paid for dumping the materia] so dredged?
8.	Has the board of harbour commissioners of the port of Vancouver any inspector, or inspectors, employed on the w-ork? If so, how many and at what monthly wages?

9.	Did the government or the board of
harbour commissioners of the port of Vancouver secure any estimate from the dredging engineer or any other engineer of the Public Works department prior to awarding such contract?	.
10.	If so: (a) what was the estimated price per cubic yard of dredging; (b) of dumping the material so dredged?


Mr. RINFRET (for Mr. Cardin):: Department of Marine:
1 to 4. See information from Public Works department.	_ _
5.	The Vancouver harbour commissioners let a contract for the supply of 700,000 cu. yds. of gravel fill on the site of a new pier, which included the dredging of 85,680 cu. yds. of mud before the fill was deposited.
6.	Yes. By the North Western Dredging Company.
7.	(a) No unit price is being paid for dredging the material required to be removed before the filling is deposited. The price for this is included in the 24 cents per cu. yd., being paid for the 700,000 cu. yds. of filling, (b) Answered by (a).
8.	Yes, three. Regular employees of the commissioners' engineering department. One at $175 per month. One at $7 per day, and one at $6 per day; working three shifts of 8 hours each.
9.	No, answering for the harbour commissioners, they bad the advice of their own engineers and consulted no one else.
10.	The estimate of the commissioners' engineers was that securing the dredging and filling at the bid price offered by the North Western Dredging Company at 24 cents per cu. yd., was cheaper than they could accomplish the same result in any other manner.
Public Works department:
1.	Dredge No. 301-(Ajax)-Laid up at Victoria; dredge No. 306-(Mastodon)-Laid up at Vancouver; Rock breaker No. 1-Laid up at Vancouver; Rock breaker No. 2-Laid up at Vancouver; Tug Point Grey-Laid up at Vancouver; Tug Petrel-Laid up at Vancouver; Launch Knockabout-Laid up at Vancouver; Derrick scow of dredge No. 306- Laid up at Vancouver; Diving scow-Laid up at Victoria.
2.	8422,025.
3.	$15,486.40. (Fiscal year 1928-29).
4.	Cost of Mastodon's work averages 20.24 cents per cubic yard while in Vancouver.
5.	6 and 7. Contracts for dredging awarded by Public Works department in 1928; Calamity Point, First Narrows, to North Western Dredging Company, Ltd., at 18.7 cents per cubic yard, class B. work proceeding. Burnaby Shoal, to North Western Dredging Company,

Questions
Ltd., at 26.8 cents per cubic yard, class B. work discontinued. Price includes dredging and ordinary disposal of waste material.
8. Please refer to Marine department's answer.
9 and 10. Estimate of cost of work contracted for was made to Public Works department by chief engineer, Department of Public Works, prior to tenders being received at 20 cents per cubic yard for Calamity Point, First Narrows. 254 cents per cubic yard for Burnaby Shoal covering dredging and ordinary disposal of waste material.



ACCIDENTS IN PENITENTIARIES

Miss MACPHAIL:: 1.	How many fatal accidents have occurred in each penitentiary in Canada since 1925?
2.	How many serious accidents have occurred in each penitentiary since 1925?


Mr. LAPOINTE:: 1. One in Manitoba penitentiary; none in
the others.
2. Kingston penitentiary	 5
St. Vincent de Paul penitentiary. 15
Dorchester	 3
Manitoba	 2
British Columbia	 3
Saskatchewan	
Total	 28



THE HUNTINGDON GLEANER

Mr. BELL (St. Antoine):: 1.	What amount has been paid by the government to the Huntingdon Cleaner since the year 1920 to date?
2.	What amount has been paid to said paper each year from 1920 to date, and how much from each department of the government?


Louis Édouard Fernand Rinfret: Auditor General:
1 and 2.
General election of 1921..	179 79
General election of 1925.. .. 246 39 By election of 1926	 3 60
Total	$ 429 78
Department of Finance:
1.	$45.35.
2.	1922-3-$45.36 (advertising).
Department of Indian Affairs:
1. $8.10.
2. 1927, $2.70; 1928, $5.40.
Department of the Interior:
1. $23.87.		
2.1920-21			
1921-22			Nil	
1922-23	$ 1	371923-24	
1	501924-25	
1	501925-26	
6	601926-27	
9	801927-28	
1	501928-29	
1	50
National Revenue:
Customs and Excise Divisions 1. $68.73.
2. Fiscal Year	Amount
1920-21		.. ..$ 3 40
1921-22		.... 10 43
1922-23		.... 24 05
1923-24		.... 6 90
1924-25		.... 15 10
1925-26		.... 8 85
1926-27		.... Nil
1927-28		.... Nil
1928-29		.... Nil
Total		.. ..$ 68 73
Income Tax Division	
1. In March, 1929, paid	William Findlay
Company, Limited, $14 account Huntingdon	
Gleaner. 2. Answered by No. 1. Post Office Department: 1 and 2. Fiscal Year	
1920-21		
1921-22		
1922-23		.. ..$ 4 80
1923-24		.... 9 78
1924-25		.... Nil
1925-26		.... 5 88
1926-27		.... 31 36
1927-28		
1928-29		
Total		
Department of Public Works	
1.	$31.88. 2.	Fiscal Year	
1925-26		
1927-28		
1928-29	 14 03



HIGHWAY EXPENDITURE

Mr. COWAN:: 1. Has the whole of the $20,000,000 provided for by the Canada Highways Act of 1919, being chapter 54 of 9-10 George V, been expended?
Time of Meeting of Parliament

2.	Is there a record available of the amount
paid to each province?	_
3.	If so, what amount was received by each province?
i. Is there a record of the highways upon which said funds were expended?
5. If so, what mileage has been built and what is the location of such highway?


Mr. ROBB:: The information asked for
in this question is all contained in the annual report of the commissioner of highways for the year ending March 31, 1928. A marked copy was sent to the hon. member, and I understand he is prepared to have the question dropped, Mr. Speaker.


Mr. SPEAKER:: Dropped as being
answered.



BEAUHARNOIS LIGHT HEAT AND POWER COMPANY

[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. A. N. SMITH (Stormont):: I would ask the Minister of Public Works (Mr. Elliott) whether any contract has yet been signed between the Beauhamois Light, Heat and Power Company and the government; if not, will one be signed shortly ?


Hon. J. C. ELLIOTT (Minister of Public Works):: No contract has yet been signed
Negotiations are in progress.



SUPPLY-TIME OF MEETING OF PARLIAMENT

[Stage Direction]
Hon. J. A. ROBB (Minister of Finance) moved that the house go into committee of supply.
['Yes. We\nsent Porsild Brothers into Alaska and into the far northwest territory among the Eskimos along Coronation gulf and they spent a year and a half in there and reported that there is a splendid feeding ground for reindeer in that locality. We propose buying reindeer delivered in that locality.\nI move, Mr. Chairman, that the committee rise, report progress and ask leave to sit again this day.']
Mr. WILLIAM IRVINE (Wetaskiwin):: Mr. Speaker, I wish to draw the attention of the house for a very few minutes to a question of considerable importance, at least to working men. I ask the government to consider the desirability of opening the parliamentary session at a different time of the year from that which is now the practice. I do not know whether the month of February was selected to inconvenience western members as much as possible, particularly farmer members, but were that the purpose it has been very well executed. It is the custom for parliament to meet in February, or perhaps even later. As a result we are now in the summer months roasting and frying in this building, when we ought to be out in the sunshine storing up health, especially when we have to stay indoors so long during the winter months. Surely the time is come for us to consider whether February is the best time for parliament to meet.
It goes without saying that seed time is one of great importance to the farmer mem-

bers, and it also goes without saying that the members coming from the maritime provinces on the one hand and from British Columbia and the western provinces on the other have to stay here steadily throughout the session; they have no opportunity of going home over the week end or during a short adjournment; and to have to remain in Ottawa during the spring season when they ought to be at their work at home imposes on them a very serious inconvenience. I believe it would be better for all concerned were parliament to meet two or three months earlier than it usually does. I think November would be a very excellent time to open the session, have a recess for Christmas and New Year, and then come back and conclude our parliamentary work before the first of May at least.
That is the suggestion I wish to make. It may be that some members from the eastern provinces would rather continue the present practice, but I think they ought to be prepared to give a little consideration to this suggestion, since the change would involve no inconvenience to any one, whereas if we continue to meet in February western members are very seriously inconvenienced.
There is a further reason why I think eastern members ought to give favourable consideration to my plea. I think it is clear to any one who looks at the matter from the point of view of indemnities that the western members are discriminated against. No man can be here steadily for four months and attend to any kind of personal business. He has practically to give it up. That is true also of the maritime members. I do not know whether one should mention the word "indemnity" or not. Far be it from me to suggest any increase!


Some hon. MEMBERS:: Oh, oh.


William Irvine: I would not think of making such a suggestion. I know that all parties are very much afraid of this question, especially the leaders. I might go so far as to suggest that $1,000 be taken off the indemnity of the eastern members and added to that of the western members. This would not increase the taxation in any way, while it would make up some of the difference which now exists as between eastern and western members. It is clear I think that eastern members have a little advantage over those from .the west, and if $4,000 be a reasonable indemnity for a man who can be in his office every day in the year it is very unfair to a member from Vancouver or from any of the western provinces. Even if for some minor reason eastern members would rather be here

Supply- -Finance
in the spring of the year, I submit that in view of all the circumstances they ought to be prepared to assist us in our effort to impress upon the government the advisability of changing the time at which parliament meets, making it November instead of February.
In conclusion, I wish to say this. There is a great deal more in the suggestion than may appear on the surface, for the question of indemnity is one which leads us to another question of moment to the people of Canada and to the democratic system in general. I believe that it is becoming more and more the tendency that only rich men can come to this parliament; and poor men, however able they may be, may ultimately be debarred except they may possibly receive assistance from some other source to enable them to attend parliament-which is perhaps a principle equally as dangerous as the principle of having only rich men in parliament. And there is a tendency in Canada for that principle to take root. I think we can find instances, without going back very far, of outstanding men of the main parties in Canada who have been assisted or indemnified by private persons-we do not know who they are- in order that they might be in a position to give their services to the country. Now I offer no criticism of any individual; I do not know any case in which this has been done [DOT]wherein the individual concerned was not an outstanding man whose services Canada could ill afford to lose, and of which we are very glad to have had the benefit. That is not my criticism, however; my criticism is that the principle is a very bad one. At least we ought to know in every case who the men are that subscribe funds, and I would rather advocate that Canada be prepared to give, to those whose services the country accepts, a remuneration sufficient to maintain them, having full control over them, than prejudice their services by allowing private individuals to keep them in public life.
I hope that in view of all the circumstances the government will listen to our request that parliament meet in the fall instead of in the spring, and that we be careful not to allow mere wealth to supersede other qualities in this parliament. I frankly admit, of course, that I should be very glad indeed if I had sufficient political influence to be worth $200,000 to anybody outside parliament. Unfortunately, however, I am not in that happy position and so I stand for the democratic principle of having the people of Canada pay the services of their representatives. And if it were necessary I would even suggest that the personnel of parliament be reduced by 78594-228
half, paying the memtiers an adequate compensation, and applying the same principle to ministers, reducing their number to the same extent and adequately remunerating them in order to keep in public life men whose services are of value to the country.
Motion agreed to and the house went into committee of supply, Mr. Johnston in the chair.



[Stage Direction]
Finance-charges of management, $979,290.
Mr. SPENCER:: What is the reason for
the increase of $50,000 in connection with printing Dominion notes?


James Alexander Robb: This is to cover an increase
of about 15 per cent in the number of one dollar and two dollar notes in circulation, and to provide an adequate reserve of notes.


Henry Elvins Spencer: What is the cost of
printing notes of one dollar and two dollar denomination?


James Alexander Robb: These are the figures: 290,000 sheets of 25 cent notes, $62.70 per thousand sheets; 6.240,000 sheets of one dollar notes, $58.90 per thousand sheets; 2,240,000 sheets of two dollar notes, $58.90 per thousand sheets,; 15,000 sheets of five hundred dollar and one thousand dollar bearer notes, at $80.75 per thousand sheets. There was a 3 per cent excise tax on that.


Henry Elvins Spencer: Does the department
contemplate issuing notes of larger denominations than the one and two dollars for general distribution among the people?


James Alexander Robb: No.


Henry Elvins Spencer: Why? There is a general opinion on the part of the. public that the government should issue more notes for circulation among the people. Why is this not done?


James Alexander Robb: I have heard that suggestion
made occasionally in the house, but I am bound to admit that I cannot agree with my hon. friend that there is any general public demand for such issue.


Mr. GARDINER:: Will the minister explain the item, "Commission for payment of interest on public debt, purchase of sinking funds," and so forth, $105,000.


James Alexander Robb: Supply-Finance

at S10,000; commission to banks for cashing interest coupons on renewal and refunding loans at one-eighth of one per cent, estimated at $22,000.


Mr. COOTE:: Has the minister ever considered the advisability of having these notes printed by the government? We have a royal mint in Ottawa and I have often thought it would be well for the government to consider the advisability of putting in a proper printing press and producing their own notes instead of having the work done by a private firm.


James Alexander Robb: That question is before the
department. As my hon. friend knows, the contract for the printing is given by public tender, and if at any time we discover that those tendering are attempting to hold up the government we always have it in mind that we will be able to take care of the work ourselves. At present, however, it looks as though we were getting the work done more cheaply than it could be done by the government.


George Gibson Coote: Who has the contract now?


James Alexander Robb: The Canadian Bank Note
Company; they have had it for some years.


George Gibson Coote: Is it a yearly contract or is it for a number of years?


James Alexander Robb: It is a five year contract. I
believe we called for tenders only this year; I think the present contract runs out next year. I will give that information later on.


Mr. FRASER:: Alt this point I would like to ask the minister one or two questions with regard to the audit board. What are the functions of that board; who are the members; what are they paid; are they employed during the whole of the year or just for a few days during the year?


James Alexander Robb: I have not before me any
memorandum as to the audit board, but the chairman is Mr. Gordon Scott of the firm of Ross and Sons, Montreal. Whenever they are ordered by the Minister of Finance to do so they proceed to audit the accounts of any department. We make use of them frequently to audit the accounts of harbour commissions, for instance, and other organizations whose bonds or securities are guaranteed by the government.


John Anderson Fraser: Are their functions supplementary to those of the Auditor General? I thought the Auditor General was the man who did that work, and I would like to know why it is necessary to employ an audit board
TMr. Robb.]
costing the country $70,000, to supplement the work of the Auditor General.


James Alexander Robb: That is a very fair question,
and I can give a fair answer; it is because parliament ordered this to be done under the act passed some years ago. I will be glad to have this information compiled and given to my hon. friend, but I have not the details before me at present.


John Anderson Fraser: Can the minister give me
the details of the amounts paid these officials?


James Alexander Robb: No, I have not that information here, but I will get it for my hon. friend.


John Anderson Fraser: How much work did they
do last year; what accounts have they been asked to audit during the last fiscal year?


James Alexander Robb: Perhaps later on I might let
any one item stand and give that information to my hon. friend when I have secured it.


John Anderson Fraser: Just here I might ask the
minister one other question with regard to the sinking fund, as referred to in the Auditor General's report at page 21 of volume 1, as follows:
The amounts available for investment during the year on account of these sinking funds were as follows:
Annual contribution of i of one
per cent of amount of loans.. $1,272,263 60 Interest on sinking funds investments (London loans)	 1,582,054 97
Total	 $2,854,318 57
Of this amount $2,845,589.55 was invested in Dominion securities of the par value of $3,418.685.69, purchased at a net discount of $573,096.14. In the public accounts and in this report (Volume II, page F-13) the amount of $3,418,685.69 added to the sinking fund is the par value of the securities purchased, the discount being credited to the current year's revenue.
In other words, the minister purchased bonds at a discount of $573,096.14 and that amount hias been included as revenue. I want to know from the minister how much of his surplus is accounted for in this way. He buys bonds at a discount, immediately puts them into the public accounts at par and takes credit to himself for the difference in the revenue for the year. How does he explain a transaction of that kind?


James Alexander Robb: Will my hon. friend tell me
how we could explain to the country what has been done with these earnings if we did not so report them?


John Anderson Fraser: That is the point; is this earnings? Does the Minister of Finance claim this is earnings?

Supply-Finance


James Alexander Robb: I am not claiming that, but I am claiming that it belongs to the people of Canada and must be accounted for.


John Anderson Fraser: But it has no value to the people of Canada; because the government bought these bonds at a discount how can you say half a million dollars has been earned? Perhaps the bonds may go down on the market; then would you charge up to your revenue the amount you lost on the bonds?


James Alexander Robb: We certainly would.


John Anderson Fraser: I would like a little better explanation from the minister. Here is an item of over half a million dollars accounted for by the Minister of Finance as revenue which he has never collected and for which he has nothing to show; this is a part of his $70,000,000 surplus. I think we are entitled to know how he justifies an accounting of that kind.


James Alexander Robb: I am bound to say that I
think my hon. friend is a little mixed in his financing. Provision was made by order in council to purchase sinking funds not to exceed one-half of one per cent per annum, on the following loans: War loan 1915-25, order in council of December 4, 1915; war loan of 1916-31, order in council of June, 1917; war loan of 1917-37. Purchases were made until May, 1924, when they were discontinued as the three loans were then selling above par. On April 13, 1929, .the Bank of Montreal, Montreal, were instructed to purchase 5 per cent 1916-31 war loan bonds at a price not to net the department more than par. Between April 13 and April 27, 1929-


John Anderson Fraser: Will the minister permit
me to interrupt?


James Alexander Robb: My hon. friend asked for the
information; now I am going to give it to him. Between April 13 and April 27, 1929, $200,000 had been purchased, leaving a balance of $188,587.08 in our sinking fund cash account, standing to our credit in a savings account. The accounts stood, as of April 30, 1929, as follows:
Sinking fund, 1915-25	Redeemed
Sinking fund. 1916-31	$999,300 00
Sinking fund, 1917-37	$379,800 00
Sinking fund, cash balance to our
credit in savings account.. .. $188,587 08
The Bank of Montreal, Montreal, are trustees for this sinking fund.


Sir GEORGE PERLEY:: I am sorry to
say that the minister is blocking his own estimates; he is giving a lot of information which is very interesting but which has nothing to do with the question asked by the hon. mem-78594- 228J
ber for Cariboo. The hon. gentleman referred to the purchase of bonds below par and asked why the discount should be included in the current revenues of the country. The minister is reading the figures for the last few months and they have nothing to do with the question at issue.


John Anderson Fraser: That is exactly what I was going to bring up; the minister has given me the information for the last year just closed and he knows very well that I have no criticism to make of those figures. The only information I have before me is for the previous years and he expects me to be satisfied with an answer concerning last year. That is not what I expect from the minister, and I do not think it is fair when I ask a question of that kind that I should receive an evasive answer.


James Alexander Robb: I hope my hon. friends are not developing too much heat in regard to this matter. I told the hon. member that we had to account for this in some way; if we buy in these bonds and earn upon them we must report those earnings to parliament.


John Anderson Fraser: Why could not the bonds
be put in at the amount they were purchased at? Is that the regular custom of the department?


James Alexander Robb: Yes.


John Anderson Fraser: When bonds are purchased at a discount the department takes credit for that as being money earned, but as far as I can see it is not money earned. I am puzzled to know just how much of this surplus the minister has presented to the country could be accounted for in a similar fashion?


James Alexander Robb: There has been no difference in the system of accounting in the department for many years; we are following the same procedure followed by my predecessors of both parties.


John Anderson Fraser: I look upon the Minister of Finance as being a good, sound business man, but I do not know how he can justify the position which he has taken in regard to this matter. Even supposing that previous ministers of finance had accounted to the country in that way, it is poor business and the Finance minister should find a better way of accounting for these revenues to the country.


James Alexander Robb: If I go into the market and
retire Dominion bonds at a premium I must report to parliament that I have paid that much more for them, and when I buy them at a discount 1 must report the discount as well as the premium.
Supply-Finance


John Anderson Fraser: I do not know why the
bonds are not taken in at the amount paid for them.


James Alexander Robb: I do not know of any other
commercial concern which does it in that way.


John Anderson Fraser: I think all commercial concerns take them into account at the amount actually paid.


Mr. GUTHRIE:: Under what item would
. we vote the item of interest on public debt which appears on page 6 of the estimates?


James Alexander Robb: That is statutory.


Hugh Guthrie: Then we do not discuss
it at all?.


James Alexander Robb: We can discuss it.


Hugh Guthrie: If we can discuss it, it
would be just as well to discuss it under this item, 'because I have one or two remarks to make in connection with the statement made to the house by the right hon. the Prime Minister, when speaking on the budget. I want to get this matter straightened out because, in my judgment, the statement made by the Prime Minister was very misleading and not at all in accordance with the facts. I take it that the funded debt of Canada on March 31, 1922, was $2,420,000,000, in round figures, and1 according to the Canadian Gazette of April 13, I find that the funded debt of Canada on March 31, 1929, was $2,363,000,000. It will be understood that I am giving round figures. When I was speaking on the budget I gave the funded debt of Canada as of March 31 last as being $2,330,000,000, so it would appear that I was just $33,000,000 too low. I obtained those figures in the course of conversation a day or -two before with the Minister of Finance. When I stated that there had been a reduction in seven years of $90,000,000 in the funded debt of Canada, I should have stated that there had been a reduction of $57,000,000. The right hon. the Prime Minister made what to my mind is the most ridiculous financial statement which has ever been made in the House of Commons. The right hon. the Prime Minister said that I had overlooked entirely the fact that in 1922 there was a floating debt of $144,000,000, and that this government had paid that floating debt because it had disappeared. According to the statement of 1922 there were against that funded debt assets which have also disappeared from the public accounts of Canada. Schedule B of the public accounts for 1922, shows the following assets as appearing on the balance sheet of Canada and which are carried as cash:

Imperial government account.. $122,719,711 7?
Italian government	
702	52Belgian government	
6,291,125	64French government	
5,730,000	00Greek government	
7,520,473	17Roumanian government	
20,449.104	49Russian government	
55,571	82
Making a total of $162,766,689.35 which was carried on the balance sheet of Canada as of that date. The minister stated that the government had paid $144,000,000 of floating debt, but I ask him where these assets have gone. According to the statement which appears in the Canada Gazette, the assets amount to $31,049,000, while in March, 1922, they amounted to $162,766,000. What has become of those assets, cash assets which were carried on the balance sheet of the Dominion of Canada? Those assets h&ve been liquidated and the money has been used to pay the floating debt of $144,000,000. The assets are gone and the floating debt is gone, and the balance has not been affected at all.
The right hon. the Prime Minister knew that fact when he made his speech, or if he did not know he should have known. I submitted those figures to an accountant and I was told that a more ridiculous proposition had never been put up to him in all his experience. If the assets were still there then I could understand that the debt had been paid, but that debt was paid out of the cash assets. The money had been borrowed from the banks to advance to these foreign governments, and when that was paid the money was repaid to the banks and the balance of the Dominion of Canada was not affected at all. When I stated that in seven years the Minister of Finance had reduced the funded debt by $90,000,000, I was giving him credit for $33,000,000 too much; the amount should have been $57,000,000 and not $90,000,000. I cannot say who supplied this information to the Minister of Finance, but if it was a member of the Finance department, that man should be hauled over the coals and brought before the Auditor General because he does not know his business.
Mr. ROBB;- This is not the first time that the hon. member for South Wellington (Mr. Guthrie) has challenged the correctness of the financial statement put out by a minister of finance of this government. My hon. friend made even wilder statements in 1927-


Hugh Guthrie: I am making that statement, and I am not going to have my hon. friend say that I made wilder statements. That statement was made to this house by the Finance minister of Canada, and if he can explain it we would like him to do so.

Supply-Finance


James Alexander Robb: I repeat that my hon. friend made even wilder statements from the public platforms of this country in 1927 when he was seeking to injure the government and advance his own political interests. I could see that at that time there might be created by the speech of my hon. friend who occupied then a very high position, as he does now, a feeling of unrest throughout the country and it would not be a good thing for the Dominion of Canada if the idea should go abroad that the finances of the country were being in any way juggled or interfered with. So to get an independent audit that at least the Conservative party could not find any fault with, the treasury board, on my recommendation, instructed P. S. Ross and Sons of Montreal, Toronto, Winnipeg and Vancouver, a very large auditing house throughout Canada, to make an audit of the accounts of the department. I may say, by the way, that they are relatives of that very estimable gentleman who controls the Ottawa Journal, and who, I am told, is president of the Conservative Association of this city; brothers ,of a gentleman who was Conservative candidate in Montreal at one time; P. S. Ross and Sons who were selected by the government of Sir Robert Borden and the Union government to audit the accounts overseas. They were instructed to go into the accounts of the department, audit them carefully, make the most thorough examination and report to parliament as to the position. The answer will be found in the public accounts for the fiscal year, ended March 31, 1927, on page xiv. I will put the report on Hansard now so that the public will be able to see it in answer to my hon. friend. It is as follows:
P. S. Ross and Sons,
Chartered Accountants,
Montreal, Toronto and Winnipeg.
Montreal, 5th December, 1927. Honourable J. A. Robb,
Minister of Finance,
Ottawa, Ont.
Sir,-By authority of the treasury board, given 28th June, 1927, w'e have examined the balance sheets of the Dominion of Canada for the fiscal years ended 31st March, 1924, 1925, 1926 and 1927.
We certify that the published balance sheets examined by us have been compiled in a manner similar to the corresponding statements of previous years, and do not include in the net debt of the Dominion, issues of the Canadian National Railway Company and the companies included in its system which carry the guarantee of the Dominion. The details of such guarantees have been shown separately each year in the public accounts.
We further certify that the surplus of revenues over expenditures, as audited by the Auditor General of Canada and as shown by
the books of the department for the four years ended 31st March, 1927, has been as hereunder:-		
1924.. ..	, . . $73,420,808	301925.. ..	.. 28,163,127	261926.. ..	, .. 55,711,045	041927.. ..	, .. 73,024,845	86
$230,319,826 46
and that the same has been properly reflected in the respective balance sheets as follows:- Additions to capital or non-active asset accounts : -
1924	$37,427,214	441925	
27,817,537	971926	
28,004,458	871927	
31,128,116	53

Reduction in net debt:-
1924	$35,993,593	861925	
345.589	291926	
27,706,586	171927	
41,896,729	33

The net debt of Canada, as shown by the public accounts it 31st March 1927, which has aeen substantially verified by the board of audit in conjunction with us, was	$2,347,834,370 09
The net debt at 31st March,
1923, was	2,453,776,868 74
A reduction in the net debt,
during the period, of.. . .	$ 105,942,498 65
Respectfully submitted,
(Sgd.) P. S. Ross and Sons,
Chartered Accountants:
That is the answer to my hon. friend. I prefer to take the certificate of P. S. Ross and Sons to the statement of my hon. friend, much as I esteem him.


Hugh Guthrie: What has my hon. friend done? He might just as well talk about the weather or the opening of the new hotel in Toronto as read the statements he has read. I agree that the public accounts are correct, but I am just as satisfied that the statements of the Minister of Finance in the house in the last five or six years were incorrect and that the statement made in the house by the Prime Minister was also incorrect. That is my objection. The public accounts are correct; stick to them, and I am pointing out to-day that the statements in the public accounts will not bear out the statements made by the Minister of Finance as to the funded debt and the reductions in the funded debt.


Mr. MACKENZIE KING:: Did the hon. member take account of the assets ;n his statement?


Hugh Guthrie: Yes.
Supply-Finance


William Lyon Mackenzie King: That is the whole point. He left out of account the other matter to which I referred.


Hugh Guthrie: I left nothing out of account; I took the statements from the public accounts, but my right hon. friend left out the assets.


William Lyon Mackenzie King: I was drawing attention to what my hon. friend left out and which he admits he left out.


Hugh Guthrie: I took in neither the floating debt nor the assets connected with it. I took the funded debt as given by the public accounts, and the only mistake I made was to give credit to the Minister of Finance for paying off $33,000,000 more than he did. The reason was that I got the figures from the minister in conversation with him, and he said that he would not know the exact amount until the end of the year. This was a day or two before the end of the year. When the figures up to the end of the year came out, I found that I gave him credit for $33,000,000 more than he was entitled to, and instead of reducing the funded debt by $90,000,000, as I stated, he has reduced it by $57,000,000 and that only. The statement made by the Prime Minister in regard to the floating debt of Canada, according to information I get from men who are accustomed do bookkeeping, is absolute nonsense. You have wiped out the floating debt of $144,000,::000, but you have wiped all the assets too, and this does not change the account at all. My right hon. friend said that he should have credit for paying, not only the $90,000,000 matter I spoke of, but $144,000,000 more. He should also have credit for spending $144,000,000 of the assets of the country, because they are not shown to-day on the balance sheet of Canada. They have been paid and the debt incurred with the banks when those assets were created, has been wiped off. That is the transaction. The $57,000,000 is the reduction in the funded debt of Canada.


James Alexander Robb: But the people who gave the interest know what the debt is.


Hugh Guthrie: The minister may submit my statement to any of his officials and I will guarantee that my statement is substantiated by men in his department who know. I am not talking about the net debt. I am not seeking to impugn the public accounts of Canada. I am standing by the public accounts; I say they are correct. What the minister should have had audited by P. S. Ross and Sons was not the public accounts but his own statement in regard to
{Mr. Guthrie.]
them, as I pointed out last year. The minister showed from $30,000,000 to $40,000,000 too much, and he knows it.


Henry Elvins Spencer: I understand that a certain amount of printing of Dominion notes is done in the basement of the east block. Does the minister consider it cheaper to have most of the n-otes printed outside by contract than doing the printing ourselves? What would be the difference in the cost?


James Alexander Robb: No one has seriously suggested that we would save any money by printing the notes ourselves. The whole experience of business is that it is not cheaper to do the work ourselves. For instance, we have a very large printing bureau for doing general printing, but no one would say that it was a very great economy for the country.


Henry Elvins Spencer: But we do print a lot
of Dominion notes ourselves. I would like to know what percentage we do print, and if it is found cheaper to do the work ourselves than to have it done outside.


James Alexander Robb: We just print the seal and
signature. The work is done by contract.


Henry Elvins Spencer: We just do the finishing
part of it.


James Alexander Robb: The seal and the signature.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Insurance-salaries, $95,515; contingencies, $59,000.
Henry Elvins Spencer: What is the reason for
the increase?


James Alexander Robb: The number of positions required for 1929-30 is 40, an increase of two over last year. The increase of $1,635 is accounted for as follows: statutory increases, $1,305; new positions, actuarial assistant, $1,560; clerk, grade 2, $1,080; two clerks, grade 1, $720 each; less 2 positions reduced by $420 by appointment at minimum salary; two positions dropped, $2,750.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
To provide for retiring allowances to former employees of the Department of Public Printing and Stationery, $17,500.
Mr. BENNETT:: What are the particulars?


James Alexander Robb: These employees were retired
in connection with the reorganization of the printing bureau in 1920. The number of annuitants on March 31, 1929, was 28.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Canadian National Safety League, $10,000.
Richard Bedford Bennett: Who gets that money?

Supply-Finance-Tariff Board


William Lyon Mackenzie King: The National
Safety League.	,


Richard Bedford Bennett: Where is the league and what is it?


William Lyon Mackenzie King: The late Sir
John Gibson was president of it. I think its headquarters are in Hamilton.


George Gibson Coote: What purpose does this
organization serve that it should receive a government grant?


James Alexander Robb: This item is under the Department of Labour, but we called it just to clear the slate as we go along. I think a good deal of the work of the National Safety League is to prevent accidents on railways. They have an organization in all the provinces.


Richard Bedford Bennett: How much went for
salaries?


James Alexander Robb: Very little.


George Gibson Coote: It appears to me that it
would be very much better to have the Minister of Labour explain the vote. The only work of the league that I have seen is the distribution of a calendar. It seems to me hardly worth while to pay out $10,000 for this purpose.


William Lyon Mackenzie King: Let the item
stand until the Minister of Labour is in his seat.
Item stands.
Grant to the Dominion Council of the Girl Guides, $6,000.


Mr. BROWN:: I am only sorry, Mr. Chairman, that this vote cannot be made larger. The work the girl guides are doing is of first importance to Canada, and I think it worth while to place on record an incident that happened not very long ago in Winnipeg, where the girl guides were the means of saving life. Perhaps this may be of interest to the Canadian Press Association, because one of the girls was the daughter of a former member of the association. Three girls were playing on the street. Another girl hastened up to them, spoke very hurriedly, and they followed her. They found a man being suffocated in a garage. They pulled him out and sent one of their number for a doctor, and in the meantime they saved the man's life by the use of artificial respiration. The doctor was well pleased when he found what the girls had done. I believe those girls recently received public recognition of their service. I thought it well to delay the house to record such an incident, for it shows the very valuable work the girl guides and boy scouts are doing for Canada.


George Gibson Coote: Why do the girl guides get
only $6,000 as against $15,000 voted to the boy scouts?


Richard Bedford Bennett: The boy scouts are much more numerous.


George Gibson Coote: It hardly seems fair to the
girls.


James Alexander Robb: I think the girls are very well satisfied. The grant was first made in 191920 at $3,000. It was increased in 1928-29 to $6,000.


Mr. LAPOINTE:: Are they satisfied?


Miss MACPHAIL:: Is the Minister of Finance sure that the girls are satisfied with less than the boys are receiving, or is he guessing at it?


James Alexander Robb: Perhaps it is a guess.


Agnes Campbell Macphail: I think so. May 1
say a word about the girl guides? There are some features of the girl guides' training that to me smack a little too much of uniform and precision, but on the other hand I think they do very good work. Their work is largely coloured by the local leader. Last year some girl guides in the city of Toronto put on an international pageant, and for the first time the girls became interested in international life, which is now part of the life of the individual whether we wish it or not. These girl guides study nature at first band, and they are taught life-saving methods. It is a splendid training, and I think the girls need it just as much as the boys. I should like the minister next year to increase this amount, because the girls are not satisfied with less than the boys are getting.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
To provide for salaries and expenses of the Advisory Board on Tariff and Taxation. Payments may be made notwithstanding anything in the Civil Service Act or regulations thereunder, $120,000.
Richard Bedford Bennett: I desire once more to
enter a protest against this expenditure. The minister is doing nothing more after parliament meets and the budget speech is delivered than to submit to this tribunal matters that should be brought to the attention of parliament if they are of any value at all. It is a glorified commission to enable the minister to escape responsibility. I should like to know what factories the chairman visited during his term of office, referred to in the last report as being for the purpose of establishing "intimate relations." While the minister is at it, I may tell him that in Osbawa not long ago the chairman of that commission stated that he was now in communication with Australia and other countries in cer.necf.irm with

Supply-Finance-Tariff Board
negotiations for closer trade relations. I desire the minister to indicate whether or not he has delegated to that gentleman the right on behalf of the government of Canada to discuss trade relations with Australia and other countries.


James Alexander Robb: Regarding the last observation of my hon. friend, this is the first I have heard of it.


Richard Bedford Bennett: Have you not seen his
speech in that regard?


James Alexander Robb: My hon. friend has kept me
so busy here that I have not had time to read that speech. Does my hon. friend desire that I place on Hansard the information he asks for, or shall I read this statement?


Richard Bedford Bennett: I am quite content that
the minister should put it on Hansard if the house agrees.


James Alexander Robb: I will hand it to Hansard.
The statement referred to is as follows:
Visits by Tariff Board to Industries during Fiscal Years 1927-28, 1928-29
Apart from numerous visits to agricultural areas throughout Canada, and interviews with representative jobbers and distributors from coast to coast-in connection with various references affecting agricultural products-the tariff advisory board has visited, during the two years mentioned, many industrial plants and organizations, most of them by request of the management. Such firms, plants or organizations visited and inspected by the board during the incumbency of the present chairman include the following:
'Aluminum Co. of Canada, Toronto, re aluminum-ware.
Automobile Dealers Assoc., Vancouver, re sale of used car.
'Barrie Tanning Co. Ltd., Barrie, re leather.
'Barrymore Cloth Co. Ltd., Toronto, re textiles.
'Bates & Innes Ltd., Carleton Place, re textiles.
'Beach Foundry Co. Ltd., Ottawa, re iron and steel.
Bienfait Briquetting Plant, Bienfait, re coal.
Big Lump Coal Co., Estevan, re coal.
'Brantford Cordage Co., Brantford, re twine and cordage.
Br. Columbia Cement Co., Bamberton Inlet, re cement.
Br. Columbia Refractories, Vancouver, re fire clay.
Br. Columbia Sugar Refining Co., Vancouver, re sugar.
Cadomin Collieries (met management in Edmonton), re coal.
Campbell Woollen Mills, Almonte, re textiles.
Canadian Collieries Ltd., Nanaimo, re coal.
'Canadian Cottons Ltd., Montreal, re textiles.
'Canadian Cottons Ltd., Hamilton, re textiles.
Canadian Cottons Ltd., Cornwall, re textiles.
'Canadian Dyers Ltd., Coibourg, re textiles.
'Canadian Graton & Knight Ltd., Montreal, re textiles.
'Canadian Woollens Ltd., Peterborough, re textiles.

Canmore Collieries Ltd (met management in Calgary), re coal.
'Carson, Hugh Co., Ottawa, re leather.
Coast Cement Co., Vancouver, re cement.
'Consumers Cordage Co., Montreal, re twine and cordage.
'Cosmos Canadian Ltd., Hamilton, re textiles.
Courtauld's Ltd., Cornwall, re textiles.
'Cream, Robert Co., Toronto, re hats and caps. _ Crow's Nest Pass Coal Co. (met president in Vancouver), re coal.
'Demetre Sault & Ciriez, St. John's, P.Q., re textiles.
'Dominion Combing Mills, Trenton, re textiles.
'Dominion Foundries & Steel, Hamilton, re iron and steel.
'Dominion Linens Ltd., Guelph, re textiles.
Dominion Sugar Co. Ltd., Chatham, re sugar.
Dominion Sugar Co. Ltd., Wallaeeburg, re sugar.
'Dominion Textiles Ltd., Verdun, re textiles.
'Dominion Textiles Ltd., Hochelaga, re textiles.
'Dominion Textiles Ltd., St. Anne's, re textiles.
'Dupont Textiles Ltd., Toronto, re textiles.
'Fernandez V., Toronto, re cigars and cigarettes.
'Forbes, R. & Co., Hespeler, re textiles.
Fuel Commissioner of Alberta, Edmonton, re coal.
'General Motors Ltd., Oshawa, re iron and steel.
'Hamilton Cottons Ltd., Hamilton, re textiles.
'Hamilton, W. B., Toronto, re boots and shoes.
'Hatch Mfgr. Co. Ltd., Whitby, re harness hardware.
'Hawthorne Woollen Mills, Carleton Place, re textiles.
'Hinde & Dauch Paper Co. of Canada, Trenton, re paper boxes.
'Horn Bros. Woollen Mills, Lindsay, re textiles.
'Imperial Tobaeca Co., Montreal, re cigars and cigarettes.
'King Bros. Ltd., Whitby, re leather.
'Lang Tanning Co. Ltd., Kitchener, re leather.
'Leishman, W. H. & Co., Toronto, re textiles.
Lowery, Robt., Toronto, re harness hardware.
Luscar Collieries (met management in Edmonton), re coal.
MacDonald, J. A. & C. H. (met management in Vancouver), re building stone.
Marlboro Cement Co.. Edmonton, re cement.
McClary Mfgr. Co., London, re enamelware.
Moffats Ltd., Weston, re parts of stoves.
Mountain Park Collieries (met management in Edmonton), re coal.
'Nashua Paper Co. Ltd., Peterborough, re wax paper.
'Ontario Steel Products, Oshawa, re iron and steel.
'Oriental Textiles Ltd., Oshawa, re textiles.
'Pattinson, Geo. & Co., Preston, re textiles.
'Phillips, W. E. & Co., Oshawa, re glass.
'Regent Knitting Mills, St. Jerome, re textiles.
'Richardson, C. & Co., St. Mary's re dairy supplies.
'Rolph-Clark-Stone Ltd., Toronto, re lithographed and printed matter.
'Rosamond Woollen Mills, Almonte, re textiles.

Supply-Finance
Sehnauifer, F. A. & Co., Toronto, re dressed furs.
Sheet Metal Products Ltd., Toronto, re enamelware.
Smith, Howard Paper Mills Ltd., Montreal, re pulp and paper.
Sparks-Harrison Ltd., Hull, re textiles.
Souris Fuel Distributors. Winnipeg, re coal.
Thorbourn Woollen Mills, Almonte, re textiles.
Underhills. Ltd., Barrie, re boots and shoes.
Western Clock Co., Peterborough.
Wabasso Cotton Co. Ltd., Three Rivers, re textiles.
Wilson, Andrew & Co., Toronto, re cigars
and cigarettes.
Western Canadian Collieries (Brazeau Collieries) (met management in Lethbridge), re coal.
Western Fuel Co., Nanaimo, re coal.
Wayagmack Paper Co., Three Rivers, re paper.
York Knitting Mills, Toronto, re textiles.
During the past two years various officers in the employ of the board have visited the following plants:
Steel Co. of Canada, Hamilton.
Algoma Steel Corporation, Sault Ste. Marie. British Empire Steel Corporation, Sydney. Dominion Alloy Steel Corporation, Sarnia. And industries located at the following points in the United States:
Pittsburg, Middletown, Cleveland, Ashland, Malone, Syracuse, and Buffalo.
Visited by chairman-56.


Richard Bedford Bennett: Then I gather the minister is not familiar with the activities of the chairman of the 'board in regard to trade negotiations with other countries as mentioned by him in his speech?


James Alexander Robb: No.'


Richard Bedford Bennett: I am sorry "My dear
Moore" has not consulted his minister.


Hugh Guthrie: How much in addition to the vote of $120,000 is provided for this tariff board? I notice in the public accounts there is an item of some $70,000 for experts. Will the minister tell us something about the item?


Hugh Guthrie: The amount is $71,999.
It is marked "Expenses of advisers re tariff inquiry."


Richard Bedford Bennett: Experts?


Hugh Guthrie: It does not say experts.


James Alexander Robb: That is for the expenses ol
the advisory board.


Hugh Guthrie: And it has risen from
$71,000 in 1928 to $120,000 now.


James Alexander Robb: Yes.


Mr. KELLNER:: Can the minister give us a list of the changes made in the tariff on the advice of the board?


James Alexander Robb: That is rather a large order; perhaps my hon. friend will move for a return.


Hugh Guthrie: Perhaps the minister will give us a list of the changes he has made without their advice.


James Alexander Robb: That is another matter.


Mr. CANTLEY:: I put a question on the
order paper some weeks ago in regard to the advice tendered by these so-called tariff experts of the board. The minister said the question was an improper one but he promised to give me the information privately. When may I get it?


James Alexander Robb: I can give it to my hon. friend at one o'clock; part of it is in my office now.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Unforeseen expenses, expenditure thereof to be under order-in-eouncil, on recommendation of the treasury board, and a detailed statement to be laid before parliament within fifteen days of next session, $80,000.
John Anderson Fraser: How much of last year's
vote was spent?


James Alexander Robb: The particulars I have here are as follows:
Expenditures for members of the board, $16,482.80.
Permanent staff, $20,954.83.
Temporary staff, $6,734.49.
Travelling expenses. $6,740.66.
Investigators, $5,899.98.
Per diem allowance, $3,520.
This ia a per diem allowance I imagine for the investigators. The printing of the records runs up to almost $12,000.


Hugh Guthrie: There is one item here
that I am anxious to get particulars of. It is in the public accounts for 1928. "Expenses of advisers re tariff inquiry, $71,999." What is that?


James Alexander Robb: That would be the total of
the account that I have just read. What is the amount?


James Alexander Robb: This item is the usual provision for expenditures of an unforeseen character, payments made under authority of the governor general in council. Not very much was spent last year-$7,033.76. The previous year, 1927-28, the expenditure was $131,032.65. Sometimes it is more and sometimes less; there might be accidents.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Amount required to provide for grants to be made to the provinces of-
Nova Scotia, $875,000.
New Brunswick, $600,000.
Prince Edward Island, $125,000.	_
pending consideration of provincial subsidies.
Mr. QUINN:: Is consideration being given to the final adjustment of subsidies to the maritime provinces?


James Alexander Robb: Yes.
Supply-F inonce


Felix Patrick Quinn: When, may we expect the
final settlement?


James Alexander Robb: I cannot make any promise
in that regard, but the matter is under consideration.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Grant to the Montreal Association for the Blind, $5,000.
George Gibson Coote: Are there not other institues in Canada for taking care of the blind, and are they receiving government assistance?


James Alexander Robb: Yes.


George Gibson Coote: Are they all treated alike
so far as the government is concerned?


James Alexander Robb: Yes; they are fairly well
satisfied now. There are two main organizations and at one time it was alleged that one of them was not receiving all that it should, but the matter has been adjusted and I have heard no further complaint.


Thomas Cantley: We have in Halifax an
institution that cares for the blind in the three maritime provinces. What provision is made for it?


James Alexander Robb: I met the head of that institution when I was recently in Halifax and the only request he had to make was for a certain concession to sell newspapers in the post offices throughout the country; otherwise they are satisfied with the grant.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
To provide for the expenses of work in the interest of fire prevention to be carried on by the Department of Insurance, $10,000.
Henry Elvins Spencer: What is this for? .


James Alexander Robb: This is for fire prevention
services. The vote includes the salary of the fire prevention commissioner, Mr. J. Grove Smith, $4,920, and for clerical assistance. The expenses for salaries are: 1925-26, $6,120; 1928-29, $6,150. Travelling expenses in 192526 amounted to $1,155 and in 1928-29, $1,386. The total expenditure in 1925-26 was $9,683 and the total in 1928-29, $8,773.


George Halsey Perley: What does this
officer do?


James Alexander Robb: I am bound to admit I have never been quite satisfied that he was earning his salary. He has been in the service for some years, having been finally given this position. We found him in the service when we came into office. He .travels about, and my complaint is that he goes around after the fire is over and tells the people what they should do to prevent the next fire.


George Halsey Perley: Does he report?


James Alexander Robb: Yes, to the superintendent of insurance.


Henry Elvins Spencer: Does he work in conjunction with the fire insurance companies?


James Alexander Robb: No, he is in the Department of Insurance. He looks after inflammable materials, testing them out, and organizes fire prevention gatherings which meet every year.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Chief electoral officer-salaries and contingencies of office, $16,240.
Henry Elvins Spencer: This item calls for
salaries and contingencies in connection with the chief electoral officer and on page 67, under vote 307, there is an item of $6,000 for "salary, chief electoral officer." What connection is there between these two items?


Louis Édouard Fernand Rinfret: The salary of the chief
electoral officer is statutory and does not come under this item. This vote is made up as follows:	Assistant chief electoral officer,
$3,120; chief electoral officer's secretary, $1,620; clerk-stenographer grade 3, $1,500; contingencies, amount to be expended depending on number of elections, $10,000. The position of assistant chief electoral officer is now vacant, but under the new act, which will greatly enlarge the scope of the work, it will be necesary to have the office filled.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Canada's contribution to the expenses of the League of Nations for 1929, including Secretariat, International Labour Organization and Permanent Court of International Justice, $171 -781.53.
William Lyon Mackenzie King: This item was previously before the committee but was held over at the request of an hon. member for information. If the house wishes I can give it; otherwise we can .pass the item.


Mr. MANION:: Perhaps the Prime Minister would put it on Hansard.


William Lyon Mackenzie King: Yes. This is
the statement:
The covenant of the League of Nations origin-provided that the expenses of the league should be apportioned among the members on the same basis as that adopted for the expenses of the Universal Postal Union. This was found to be inequitable and an amendment to the covenant was adopted in 1924 providing that the expenses should be borne in the proportion decided by the assembly. The basis to be adopted has been considered by committees of various assemblies. The question of the weight to be given to such factors as national revenue, population, trade returns depreciation of currency, was repeatedly considered. A scale of allocation was adopted by the assembly in 1926, and the ninth assembly voted to continue on that basis until 1932, when it will be reconsidered.

Supply-Finance
Present Scale of Allocation of the Expenses of the League
Country
Abyssinia	
Albania	
Argentine	
Austria	
Belgium	
Bolivia	
Bulgaria	
Canada	
Chile	
China		..
Colombia	
(Costa Rica)	
Cuba	
Czechoslovakia	
Denmark	
Dominican Republic..
Estonia	
Finland	
France	
Germany	
Great Britain	
Greece	
Guatemala	
Haiti	
Honduras	
Hungary	
India	
Irish Free State.. ..
Units
1
8
4
35
46
(1)
29
1
10
79
7 1 1 1
8 56
Australia.. . Italy	
Japan	
Latvia.. . . Liberia.. .. Lithuania.. . Luxemburg.. Netherlands. -.	Country	Units 	
27 	
60 	
60 	
3 	
1 	
4 	
1 	
23 	
10Nicaragua.. . Norway.. .. Panama.. ..	
1 	
9 	
1 	
1
5
9
32
6
22
1Serb-Croat-Slovene State	
20 	
9
South Africa	(Union of)			 15 	 18 	 17
		
			 5
986		
Budgets of League, 1919 to 1929
Year
1921..
1922..
1923..
1924..
1925..
1926..
1927..
1929
Canada's
Total budget contributions
.$4,101,250	00	$186,237	. 4,028,671 . 4,954,987	00 00	195,140 183.668	. 4.483,007	69	168,353	29 (less refund-$11,849 37)... 4,373,020	63	163,356	38	. 4,424,542	39	165.271	06	. 4.729,738	17	less	150,777	13	270,135	60	4,459,602	57	. 4,888,244	35	less	155,241	270,134	66	4,618,109	69	. 5,214,815	96	less	171,481	53	345,501	21	
Per
cent
4-8437
3-7553
3-7353
3-3615
4,869,314 75
It will be noted that the total budget of the league has increased only from $4,101,250 in 1921 to $4,869,314 in 1929.
The budget for 1929 is divided as follows:	,, ,
Gold francs
I.	Secretariat and Special Organizations.. .
II.	International Labour Organization	
III.	Permanent Court of International Justice
IV.	Buildings at Geneva	
14,713,085
8,612,640
2,255,555
1,445,000
Total	 27,026,280
The increase in the total budget over 1928 is due mainly to opium investigation, the proposed conference on the codification of international law, and the special work of the transit organization, as well as to additional activities of the International Labour Office.
It will also be noted that the total amount paid by Canada is less than in 1921, and that her share of the total is now 3-5, as against 4-5 in 1921. The slight increase in the percentage in 1929 over 1928 (3-36) is due largely to reduction in the share borne by India, which was felt to be too large.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Supply-Finance
[Stage Direction]
Government Contracts Supervision Committee, salaries, including L. R. LaFleche, Secretary, at $6,000, and that of L. H. Beer, Salvage Officer, $5,000 telephones, telegrams, travelling expenses, stationery, etc., $21,200.
Robert Gardiner: Is this committee functioning and doing any real work at all?


James Alexander Robb: The purchases for 1928-29
amounted to $414,089.17, and the salvage to $106,468.83. In addition to that, they attend to a good deal of the distribution within the service; one department might want some new typewriters, but instead of going out and buying them the purchasing commission may find them available in another department.


Robert Gardiner: I understand the minister to say that the purchases made on behalf of the government amounted to $414,000. Can the minister give us the total purchases made by the different departments in Ottawa in addition to those made by this committee?


James Alexander Robb: No, I have not that information.


Robert Gardiner: My information is that this committee has been practically set aside and that the various departments do their own purchasing without reference to this committee.


James Alexander Robb: There is no doubt but that
the various departments have their own purchasing commissions, and always have had them. This commission was organized during the war, to attend to war purchases, but the departments have excellent purchasing commissions of their own, and perhaps we might be able to curtail some of this expenditure, although this commission has existed for many years and I think the purchasing is carried on quite economically under the tender system.


Robert Gardiner: The minister's statement is not very satisfactory. He states that each of the departments has its own purchasing commission, and it seems to me that many of the departments purchase goods similar to those purchased by various other departments, and I think that could be done much more efficiently by a central organization such as this. I merely ask the minister to take that matter into consideration and see if it would not be possible to have our purchasing dbne in some better way.


George Gibson Coote: It seems to me a little
hard to understand why we should pay $21,200 to keep this purchasing commission alive when each department has a purchasing com-

mission of its own. I do not think the minister has given a satisfactory reason why this commission should be continued, and I wish he would enlighten the committee a little more.


James Alexander Robb: If the hon. gentleman will
consider the various departments of this government which do business all over Canada, he will see that even if this purchasing were all under one department i-t could hot be done for $21,000 or anything like that amount because we would require an additional staff to look after the work. My hon. friend will understand that if we do all this work under one board we must increase that board in order to take care of the increased work, but this commission has a supervisory control of the department and they are doing an excellent work in saving money to the country by way of salvage.


George Gibson Coote: Do they supervise the work
of the purchasing commissions of the various departments?


James Alexander Robb: No, not necessarily.


George Gibson Coote: I would like to know just
what contracts the committee supervise, if each department has a contract supervising committee of its own.


Hugh Guthrie: I always understood their chief work was salvage.


George Gibson Coote: Perhaps the minister can
tell me whether they have ever supervised the purchase of any typewriters for the House of Commons?


James Alexander Robb: I think that is done through the printing bureau.


George Gibson Coote: It seems an extraordinary thing for the printing bureau to supervise the purchase of typewriters for the House of Commons; perhaps that is the reason why only two of the typewriters now in use in the stenographic service were new when they came here. I think it is very improper and almost scandalous that the typewriters in use in the stenographic servdce of the House of Commons should be all second-hand machines; apparently the departments get ail the new machines and the old ones are sent here. I think the letters of the members of the House of Commons are just as important as the letters of any of the departments, and I would suggest to the minister that perhaps he might give this government contract supervision committee the job of purchasing some new typewriters for use in

Supply-Finance
the stenographic service here. It is scandalous that the stenographers serving the members of this house should have to use these old typewriters; I think it is time we had new machines.


Agnes Campbell Macphail: I would like the minister to instruct the commission to buy some silencers for the typewriters. It gives me a headache when I dictate to the typewriter for an hour or so and I do not know how the girls stand it with about ninety machines going in one room, only two or three of which are equipped with silencers. I think the staff should be put in smaller rooms or else silencers should be put on the machines.


Thomas Cantley: One-third of the typewriters in the stenographic service are antiques and another third are practically useless.


James Alexander Robb: All I can promise is to direct the attention of the proper officers to the representations which have been made; I will ask the board if they can salvage these typewriters and sell them to someone else, but I would suggest that hon. members do not run them down too much until we dispose of them.


George Gibson Coote: I would not like to see the government of this country take advantage of anyone, and I am sure that would be done if many of those typewriters were sold. A number of those machines were salvaged at the time of the fire; I could hardly credit that statement when it appeared in answer to a question which I placed on the order paper. I think it is time the internal economy committee of this house looked carefully into this matter.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Grant to the International Council of Nurses toward defraying expenses of their meeting to be held in Canada during 1929, $5,000.
Henry Elvins Spencer: Where is this conference to be held, and when?


James Alexander Robb: This is a world wide convention, and I believe it is meeting in Montreal.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
To provide for the salary of Hon. J. C. Patterson, commissioner to investigate titles of Great Britain to lands in the Arctic seas, $2,400.
James Alexander Robb: The annuitant has died since the estimates were prepared.


Louis Édouard Fernand Rinfret: I move that the item be dropped.


[Stage Direction]
Motion agreed to.
Patent Record, $35,000.
Henry Elvins Spencer: Is there any revenue derived from this publication?


Louis Édouard Fernand Rinfret: This is the usual vote
asked for the publication of the Patent Record, which is issued under section 60 of the revised statutes. This is published every week and gives the name of the inventors and contains a description of each patent which has been issued during the week. It is sent to the libraries of Canada and distributed to members of parliament or to senators who desire to receive it. There is a subscription price of $10, and we have a certain number of subscribers, but this publication is more in the way of a public service.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Battlefields memorials, $170,000.
George Halsey Perley: When is it expected that these memorials will be completed?


William Lyon Mackenzie King: This item relates to the memorials at Quebec and elsewhere, and I imagine that the work will continue for years to come.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Expenses under the Canada Temperance Act,
Louis Édouard Fernand Rinfret: This vote is to provide
for plebiscites under the Temperance Act. A plebiscite was held in the county of Brome, province of Quebec, and we expect to hold one in the city of Thetford Mines, and in the county of Compton, Que.	We allow about
$5,000 for each plebiscite.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Expenses under the Naturalization Act, $8,-
000.
Henry Elvins Spencer: What is the revenue derived under this act?


Louis Édouard Fernand Rinfret: I would suggest that this item stand, as it comes under the estimates for the Secretary of State. As there are supplementary estimates covering the same item the matter could be discussed then.
Item stands.
To provide for payment of salaries and expenses in connection with the operation of the Canadian Farm Loan Act; any payment under this item to be by way of advance repayable to the consolidated revenue fund from the revenues of the Canadian Farm Loan Board as and when they accrue, $50,000.


Robert Gardiner: What amount was expended under this item last year?
Supply-Finance


James Alexander Robb: There was $5,010.05 expended to March 31, 1929. I am not sure that this vote is required because interest is received from the capital advanced.


John Anderson Fraser: When will loans be available under this act?


James Alexander Robb: They are available now as
soon as the requirements of the act are complied with.


John Anderson Fraser: Are they available in the
province of British Columbia?


James Alexander Robb: I think that province has
advanced farther than any other province.


Mr. FANSHER (East Lambton):: In what provinces does this board operate at the present time?


James Alexander Robb: The provinces of Ontario,
Saskatchewan and Prince Edward Island have not passed the legislation required by the act. The situation with respect to the other six provinces is as follows:
Alberta, provincial board appointed April 15. 1929.
British Columbia, provincial board appointed April 4, 1929.
Manitoba, arrangements not completed.
New Brunswick, provincial board appointed April 15, 1929, and will be ready to function about May 1, 1929.
Nova Scotia, provincial board appointed.
As soon as this comes before the board it will be passed.


Robert Gardiner: What is the salary of
*he chief commissioner, and the per diem allowance for the other commissioners?


James Alexander Robb: The chief commissioner receives 18,000 per annum. Hon. E. C. Drury was appointed in January, 1929, and receives $25 per diem, with a minimum of $1,000 per year. Mr. Beaudry Leman was appointed on the same date at $25 per diem with a minimum of $1,000 per year. A living allowance of $15 per diem was authorized by order in council of January, 1929, for the commissioner and the other members.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
National battlefields commission-to provide tor acquisition of land for the main entrance to the Quebec battlefields park, $22,500.
George Halsey Perley: Was not the
right hon. the Prime Minister mistaken in saying that item No. 29-1 had to do with the Quebec memorials?


William Lyon Mackenzie King: I am sorry,
but I was wrong.


George Halsey Perley: How long is it
expected it will take to complete the memorial at Vimy?


William Lyon Mackenzie King: Possibly His
Honour the Speaker could reply to that question.


Mr. LEMIEUX:: The right hon. gentleman will remember that I visited the battlefields and the memorial of Vimy in October last year. The work has progressed satisfactorily, but the committee has had considerable trouble in obtaining the proper quality of granite. Various quarries in France, Belgium, England and Scotland were inspected, when an old quarry, dating from the days of the Roman empire, was discovered in Jugoslavia, and granite of a very fine grain is being taken from there to Vimy. The foundation for the monument has been completed, and the two majestic pylons are now under construction. The surroundings of the monument are completed and also the inscription of the names of the soldiers. From what I gathered at the last sitting of the commission, and from what I heard at Vimy when I was there last fall, I believe it will take about a year and a half from the present date to complete the monument. I must say that the commission was very fortunate in having Brigadier-General Hughes as an engineer. He discovered right in front of the memorial the trenches which were used alternately by the Germans and the Allies. He has completely reconstituted these trenches, so much so that every Sunday from all parts of France, Belgium, England and even Germany, many congregate there to see our monument and also to see those historic trenches, where on the walls can be read the names of the occupants whether they were Germans or British. I can assure the committee that it is a most impressive eight. I was told that no less than
4,000	to 5,000 visitors went there every Sunday during the summer and fall. As regards the beauty of the monument, it is admitted to-day by the Societe des Architectes in France, that it will be the most imposing memorial on the battlefields of Europe.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Government of the Yukon Territory.
Salaries and expenses connected with the administration of the territory, including surveys, $64,700.
Grant to Local Council, $45,000.
Grant for maintenance and construction of roads, $73,000.
Grant to provide for the payment of bounty on wolves and coyotes under the provisions of an ordinance to be enacted by the commissioner-in-council, the sum to be paid not to exceed $30 each for wolves and $15 each for coyotes.

Supply-In tenor-Indians
the pelts of the animals on which bounty is paid to be surrendered to the government, the proceeds of the sale of such pelts and any unexpended balance to be placed to the credit of the consolidated fund of Canada, $35,000.- Total, $217,700.
Henry Elvins Spencer: What is this?


Mr. STEWART (Edmonton):: The only change in this is the $35,000 provided for the purchase of pelts which we are buying direct. We need this money to pay for them, and we shall be recouped when we sell the skins. We have been doing this in connection with the wolf bounty and we are applying it in the Yukon this year.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Indians-British Columbia, $527,100.
Henry Elvins Spencer: Are the Indians increasing or decreasing in population throughout Canada?


Charles A. Stewart: They are just about holding their own. According to the latest report, we have about 105,000 all told, in Canada.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Indians-general, $281,500.
Robert Gardiner: What does the general vote include?


Charles A. Stewart: It is pretty well outlined in the estimates. It includes:
Payments to Indians surrendering their lands under provisions of section 89 of the Indian Act which will afterwards be repaid from the avails of the land, $50,000.
Relief to destitute Indians in remote districts,
$100,000. [DOT]
To prevent the spread of tuberculosis, $97,000.
Printing and stationery, $8,000.
Grant to assist Indian trust fund account 310, suppression of liquor, $3,000.
Surveys. Ontario, Quebec, and Maritime provinces, $6,000.
To provide for expenses in connection with epidemics of small-pox and other diseases, $10,000.
To provide an amount to pay agents' fees in connection with registration of births, deaths and. marriages, $500.
General legal expenses, $7,000-Total, $281,500.
We are asking for an increase in the item concerning the prevention of the spread of tuberculosis, because tuberculosis is undoubtedly ravishing the Indians to a very great degree, and we are having complaints from many quarters.


George Gibson Coote: Would the administration of oil and gas rights or other minerals on Indian reserves come under this vote?


Charles A. Stewart: Yes. We have by order in council imposed on Indian lands regulations practically uniform with those prevailing on crown lands. That went into effect about a year ago. Formerly the regulations were not uniform.


George Gibson Coote: Are any leases granted on Indian reserves without reserving a royalty to the crown?


Charles A. Stewart: No; all leases issued provide for payment of royalty.


George Gibson Coote: But on Dominion government lands there is in most oases no royalty?


Charles A. Stewart: On Dominion lands we are proposing to impose a royalty after five years and on Indian lands payment of royalty begins with production.


George Gibson Coote: Are there any engineers in the Indian department to see that the regulations are enforced?


Charles A. Stewart: The same group of officials look after all the oil regulations. We make them responsible for supervision of the drilling on the reservations, the same as on crown lands.


Mr. LUCAS:: Will a royalty be imposed after five years?


Charles A. Stewart: Yes, after a lease has been in existence and the well is producing, we begin to impose a royalty.


George Gibson Coote: In the past was a royalty not imposed right from the commencement of production of oil on Indian reserves? Am I mistaken in that?


Charles A. Stewart: I think my hon. friend is mistaken, because we were paying a subsidy in Ontario for oil production; we were not getting any royalty. That subsidy has been very largely discontinued.


William Thomas Lucas: What is the amount of the
royalties proposed?


Charles A. Stewart: Speaking
from memory, on Dominion lands the royalty begins at 21 per cent and goes up to 5 per cent, but I will give that information when we are considering the Interior estimates.


George Gibson Coote: Would the minister also
look up particulars of the royalties which must be paid on oil found on Indian lands?


Charles A. Stewart: Yes.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Supply-Interior
[Stage Direction]
Indian education, including the construction of school buildings, $2,240,500.
John Anderson Fraser: What new schools are proposed to be built in British Columbia under this vote, what will be the total cost of them, and where will they be located?


Charles A. Stewart: I am sorry I have not my notes before me, but I will put that information on Hansard for my hon. friend.


Mr. MacLAREN:: Would the minister give that information for all the provinces?


Charles A. Stewart: Yes.


William Russell Fansher: I have some questions to ask in regard to this item and I would ask that it stand.
Item stands.
Scientific Institutions
Expenses conected with the Dominion observatory at Ottawa, $71,550.
Expenses connected with the Dominion astro-physical observatory at Victoria, B.C., $23,300.


Mr. GEARY:: Is anything to be done in
regard to transferring other observatories in the Dominion to Ottawa?


Charles A. Stewart: No. There are just two, one at Victoria and one at Dttawa.


George Reginald Geary: Is there not a Dominion
observatory in Toronto?


Charles A. Stewart: That is in
the meteorological service, and comes under the Marine department.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Topographical Surveys
Topographical and aerial surveys and maps for the development of hydro-electric, forested and mineralized areas and for aerial fire patrol; expenses of geographic board of Canada; classification of lands for settlement and forest reserves; traverse of northern rivers and lakes for administration of Northwest Territories; surveys for administration of Dominion parks and game reserves, miscellaneous legal surveys of Dominion lands; testing of standard measures and instrument repairs; plotting and printing of plans, etc., $430,000.
Henry Elvins Spencer: What aerial surveys are
being made in Alberta this year?


Charles A. Stewart: We intend
to complete surveying the area around Athabasca lake, and if the machines can be provided to do some surveying along the Peace river for the purpose of mapping that area with a view to opening it up for settlement.


George Gibson Coote: How many survey parties
will be engaged in this service in western Canada?


Charles A. Stewart: I am sorry
I have not that information before me but I will get it for my hon. friend.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
At one o'clock the committee took recess.
The committee resumed at three o'clock.

[Stage Direction]
Administration of Justice:
Yukon Territory-miscellaneous expenditure, including living allowance of judge, salaries, and allowances of court officers, etc., $12,000.
Mr. OAHAN:: Has the government come to any decision with regard to the increase of judges' salaries? It was discussed last session.


Ernest Lapointe: I am afraid it will have to be kept
under consideration for some little while
yet.


Hugh Guthrie: Is the government still
considering the matter or has it been dropped?


Ernest Lapointe: The government is considering it, but, as my hon. friend understands, it would be impossible to bring it before the house this session.


Hugh Guthrie: I do. But the matter
was referred by the minister himself to a special committee last session, that committee reported in favour of an increase. We are now very near the end of another session. What is the prospect for next session, for instance? Judges' salaries in this country are entirely inadequate.


Ernest Lapointe: Hear, hear.


Hugh Guthrie: Are the judges to continue any longer to suffer on aoount of the inactivity of the government?


Ernest Lapointe: My hon. friend is not
quite fair about it. When I am convinced that parliament will support such an increase my hon. friend knows that I will not delay bringing the matter before the house; but I was given so strongly to understand that a measure for this purpose could not pass through parliament that I thought it better to wait until a better opportunity occurred. I still believe that judicial salaries are too low, and that this condition of affairs is not good for the administration of justice. It is all very well to say, as many hon. gentlemen do, that we are always able to find men to

Supply-Justice
accept- judgeships, but the present salaries are not sufficient to attract to the high courts those who should be appointed. But I cannot do anything else now.


Hugh Guthrie: All I can say, Mr. Chairman, is that a Minister of Justice who entertains those views about judicial salaries is lacking in courage in not bringing forward a measure to remedy what he knows is an evil. He says he is afraid it would not pass through parliament. That was his fear last session as it is this session. This government is in office for the purpose of governing. Here is a glaring injustice, and yet the government is afraid to take the necessary steps to remedy it.


Ernest Lapointe: Let me tell my hon.
friend that I am a democratic Minister of Justice and a democratic minister of the crown. I will never try to force a measure on parliament when I know parliament is opposed to it. Unfortunately that was the position last year. I hope that by a process of education the adverse majority will come to think the other way. I think they are wrong at the present, but as far as I am concerned, I repeat, I will not try to force through a measure which is not acceptable to the majority of parliament.


Charles Hazlitt Cahan: I trust the Minister of Justice will undertake the education of those who sit behind him, because I do not think he will find very much opposition from this side of the house-


Hugh Guthrie: Hear, hear.


Charles Hazlitt Cahan: -especially if the sentiment is at all like it was when the report of the committee came in. I do think the Minister of Justice is somewhat lacking in courage when he trusts to mere rumours rather than test the intelligent decision of parliament itself.


Ernest Lapointe: They are not only
rumours.


William Irvine: We are ail in a twitter
over here, Mr. Chairman, because we heard the minister talking of increases, and we do not know of whom he is speaking.


Some hon. MEMBERS:: Oh, oh.


Mr. POULIOT:: May I ask the Minister
of Justice if it is the intention of the department to superannuate judges of the superior courts when they have attained the age of seventy-five years? When a judge has attained that age I think he is entitled to a rest, and it is not fair to impose on him the obligation of sitting in court. If this could 78594-229
not be done without amending the British North America Act, is it the intention of the government to ask the opinion of the provinces in this respect?


Ernest Lapointe: As my hon. friend knows, a resolution for that purpose was moved last session or the session before by my hon. friend from Muskoka. At the time I said that unfortunately this was governed by the British North America Act. We could deal with the federal courts such as the Supreme Court of Canada and the Exchequer Court, but the judges of the high courts in the provinces are appointed for life, and we would have to change the constitution. Several of the provincial representatives were not prepared to agree to our asking for an amendment of the British North America Act in that respect, and there the matter stands at present.


Jean-François Pouliot: I should not like to be
misunderstood in this connection, Mr. Chairman. I have a great respect for the bench, and I put my question because in court I heard a judge of over seventy-five years of age say he noticed that his memory was lacking.


Charles Hazlitt Cahan: There are some gentlemen
very much younger than seventy-five years who apparently suffer from arrested intellectual development.


Mr. CHAPLIN:: Whom has he reference
to?


Mr. CAMPBELL:: Perhaps the Minister of Justice would not find so much difficulty in getting parliament to consent to an increase of judicial salaries if there was some different method of selection. At the present time the positions are too often given as a reward for political services.


Ernest Lapointe: No.


Milton Neil Campbell: That tends to lower the standard of the judiciary, or at any rate its prestige.	It has been frequently recommended that the bar associations of the various provinces should make the nominations for judicial positions and that the government should accept them. I am not sure whether that would be much of an improvement or not on the present practice, but I do say that just so long as judicial positions are the reward for political services-


Ernest Lapointe: They are not.


Milton Neil Campbell: -it will be difficult to
secure increases in judicial salaries because it is felt that we do not get the best men.


Ernest Lapointe: My hon. friend is wrong when he assumes that. I have already stated

Supply-Justice

in this house, and I will state it again, that the best way to hurt the chances of appointment of any gentleman to the bench is to attempt to bring political pressure to bear in his favour.


Hugh Guthrie: Has the minister appointed any from this side in the province of Ontario?


Ernest Lapointe: I have been charged
with having done so.


Hugh Guthrie: Well, the charge is unfounded so far as my knowledge goes.


Ernest Lapointe: I have been told that
I have appointed gentlemen a good deal more friendly to my hon. friend than to myself.


Mr. WOODSWORTH:: What provision is
there for securing anything like uniformity in the sentences imposed for various crimes throughout the country? Is that matter left entirely to the discretion of the judges or is there, any possibility of having some uniformity established?


Ernest Lapointe: No. The only possible
course would be to amend the various sections of the criminal code, fixing certain definite sentences for certain offences, which sentences would be invariable. But that would not be desirable. Some discretion must be left to the judges inasmuch as the circumstances vary, and we certainly cannot interfere with the courts in that regard.


James Shaver Woodsworth: Is no supervision
of any kind exercised by the department over the various judges?
Mr. .LAPOINTE:	Not so far as their
judicial functions are concerned.


James Shaver Woodsworth: Perhaps I might
give an instance of what I have in mind, although I will not mention the names of any judges; it is the principle rather than the individual that concerns me. A certain justice, dismissing from the jury a man who had intimated that for conscientious reasons he could not serve in a trial involving capital punishment, remarked that a man who adopted that attitude was not a good Canadian citizen. He is reported thus:
"You have no right to live under the British flag", said His Lordship. "As long as the law provides for capital punishment it must be obeyed. There is a constitutional method of changing the law but it is not for jurymen to alter it."
It does seem to me hardly the thing for a judge to take such a position when a man on conscientious grounds declares his unwilling-

ness to serve on the jury in a particular case; this man had every right to decline to act on that jury. Is there no way by which judges may be checked in rather reckless statements of this sort?


Ernest Lapointe: My hon. friend's principle is wrong; I would not agree with him. I consider the independence of the judiciary the best safeguard of society. If we could exercise some influence on judges, I believe that everyone would suffer in Canada. The law has seen to it that our judges shall be absolutely independent of any influence whatsoever, and were a judge to take that stand again I should support him.


James Shaver Woodsworth: I too wish the
judges to be independent, but not arbitrary. Let me cite another instance which has been brought to my notice. A judge addressing a prisoner said:
The jury have found you not guilty on evidence upon which a verdict of guilty might equally have been returned. For myself, I think that you fired the shot that killed. . . . and I think some steps will have to he taken. I will make my report accordingly, for I think you are not a safe man to be at large.
I do not know all the circumstances, but it seems to me very strange for the judge in this case to have swept aside the verdict of the jury. I am not a lawyer, but I regard it as an arbitrary act on the part of the judge when he undertakes to give his own opinion in this way, virtually disregarding the verdict of the jury. I should like to know whether there is any way of criticizing judges or of exercising some supervisory power, without of course, necessarily involving impeachment.


Ernest Lapointe: In the interests of all, I do not think that such control should be exercised. Not only has parliament decided that this shall not be done, but I am not quite sure even that my hon. friend is in order in thus criticizing the judge in that particular case. The rules of the house forbid such criticism. So far as I am concerned, I will certainly not express my personal views as to whether the judge was right or wrong in that respect.


Mr. EVANS:: To emphasize the importance of the remarks of my hon. friend (Mr. Woods-worth), I cannot do better than give an instance that has come to my attention. In one case a car was stolen and afterwards left outside the city in a damaged condition for the owner to get it. The culprit, a lad of eighteen, was let out on suspended sentence, and during that suspension he committed four

Supply-Justice
other crimes. Altogether he was up for nine crimes, and during the course of his operations he secured booty to the extent of some $500, going so far as even to rob women; he did 'his looting at ladies' aid meetings and so forth. Nine offences were proved against him and still he was left at large on suspended sentence. He was also allowed to go into a neighbouring town to work, and apparently nothing could keep him in the right path. It seems to me that there is an utter discrimination in the dispensing of justice in the west to-day. I could mention cases to show that sentences have been unduly severe while in this particular instance I have cited it has been the very opposite.


William Thomas Lucas: When was the criminal code amended granting to agricultural fairs and certain religious bodies the privilege of running wheels of fortune and lotteries?


Ernest Lapointe: It was about three years ago. I remember that my hon. colleague the Minister of Agriculture (Mr. Motherwell)- and I must say I was surprised at this-was very strongly in favour of it.


James Dew Chaplin: But you did not oppose it.


Ernest Lapointe: It was not contrary to
my own principles but I thought it was contrary to those of my colleague. However, it passed the house without much opposition.


William Thomas Lucas: Has the minister had any
recommendations in this regard from other organizations this year?


Ernest Lapointe: Yes.


William Thomas Lucas: Has any action been taken with respect to these recommendations?


Ernest Lapointe: No; next year a bill
will be introduced proposing many amendments to the criminal code, but we do not desire to take action in this regard at the present time, particularly in view of the fact that the Revised Statutes of Canada, covering provisions in the criminal code, have been in force now for only a year. Under the circumstances I thought it was better not to introduce any changes in the code during the present session.


William Thomas Lucas: I have received a good many complaints against this privilege granted to agricultural fairs.


Ernest Lapointe: Are they opposed to
the privilege being granted only to the agricultural fairs or do they want it extended to themselves?


William Thomas Lucas: One or other.
78594-229$


Ernest Lapointe: That is what I thought.


William Thomas Lucas: One complaint is against the privilege being allowed to the agricultural fairs, and there is the other contention that if it be granted to those fairs then it should be extended to all.


Ernest Lapointe: What does my hon.
friend himself think?


William Thomas Lucas: I do not think it should be
allowed at agricultural fairs. I do not believe that anything should be carried on at those fairs which is not permitted to be carried on anywhere else.


Ernest Lapointe: The views of the agricultural representatives in that respect certainly will receive consideration.
Mr. SPEAIvMAN:	I should like to ask
the minister what is the custom in the case of a vacant judgeship in one of the provinces; is an appointment made as a rule without much delay, or at times is the appointment delayed because of some doubt as to the necessity of having so many judges? I have a case in mind in my own province; I have had many requests from different gentlemen as to that appointment, and I understand that the appointment is not being made at present because there is some doubt as to whether there is enough work to necessitate the full complement of judges. I should like to know if that is the case.


Ernest Lapointe: No doubt my hon.
friend is referring to the vacancy in the Stettler district. The reason why this vacancy has not been filled is because I have received communications from the Attorney General of Alberta saying that it might be better not to fill the vacancy owing to the work not being heavy enough to justify it. I have communicated further with him and he rather suggests that this district should be looked after by one of the other judges and that more good would be done by the appointment of a permanent judge in another district which has no resident judge at present; I think that is the Peace River district. However, the matter stands there, and we will have to reach a decision on this question. I am making investigations of my own and I will try to meet the wishes of the authorities of the province.


Henry Elvins Spencer: When a judgeship becomes vacant does the minister consider the wishes of the provincial government in filling that vacancy or are the provincial governments consulted at all?
Supply-Justice


Ernest Lapointe: I would not say that
the appointments are subject to the provincial governments, but when there is a question as to the desirability of appointing a judge in a particular section of a province, the wishes of the provincial government are considered. The constitution has determined that the appointments should be made by the federal government, and we make them.


Henry Elvins Spencer: But supposing the provincial government should object to a certain judge being appointed?


Ernest Lapointe: How could they know
who was to be appointed?


Henry Elvins Spencer: Supposing they did know and they objected to him and thought they had good reasons why he should not be appointed; would the Minister of Justice consider those reasons?


Ernest Lapointe: Every representation
which might be made by individual members of the provincial government certainly would be considered, as well as representations by members on both sides of the house.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Penitentiaries-
Kingston, $464,312.
St. Vincent de Paul, $424,660.
Dorchester, $302,000.
Manitoba, $230,180.
British Columbia, $205,500.
Alberta, $3,120.
Saskatchewan, $266,580.
General, $1,400..-Total, $1,897,762.
Agnes Campbell Macphail: I understand there
have been a number of prisoners taken from Kingston to Stony Mountain in recent years. I placed a question on the order paper but apparently I did not get the answer for the years in which I was interested. I should like to know how many prisoners were taken from Kingston to Stony Mountain in the years 1922, 1926 and 1929, and how long they were kept there.
Mr. L\POINTE:	I understand that in
1922 there were 75 convicts transferred to Stony Mountain; in 1926 there were 80 and this year there were 48. These transfers are made when the population of some penitentiary has increased to such an extent that they cannot accommodate them.


Agnes Campbell Macphail: I understand they
were sent out there to build an addition to the Stony Mountain penitentiary, and I wondered if there was any real reason why they should not stay at home and build an addition to Portsmouth penitentiary, from which they were transferred.
LMr. Spencer.]


Ernest Lapointe: My ho-n. friend's information is not quite correct; they were not transferred to build an addition to Stony Mountain penitentiary but to do the ordinary work which is being done there. There was a good deal of vacant space at that penitentiary while Portsmouth penitentiary was crowded, and I might just add that it would be difficult to build an addition at Kingston on the space available there.


Agnes Campbell Macphail: The minister has not
told me how long the prisoners were kept at Stony Mountain in 1922, 1926 and 1929?


Ernest Lapointe: Until the termination of their sentences.


Agnes Campbell Macphail: I think that is not
quite fair to these men, if their homes were in Ontario and they were not particularly bad types of people. They are prevented1 from seeing their relatives at all, because very few people could journey to Stony Mountain to see them; they are really exiles from their own province, and unless there is some real reason why they were sent there, either for their own protection or for reasons of discipline, I cannot understand why this was done. Why cannot an addition be built to Portsmouth penitentiary? Is there no more land available?


Ernest Lapointe: That is for the good
administration of the penitentiary.


Hugh Guthrie: I would like to inquire
of the minister with regard to a case which has been recalled to my memory by the remarks of the hon. member for Southeast Grey. A crime was committed in Ontario and the man was convicted of manslaughter and sentenced to fifteen years imprisonment. This man was sent to Stony Mountain penitentiary, where I think he has been for three or four years. This man's home was in Guelph, where I live, and he has three or four small children who have never seen their father since he was convicted. I have had a letter from a gentleman who is a member of the parliament of Italy, which I have had translated by the Italian counsul general; this gentleman deals with the case very fully and asks if there is no provision under our law by which these children may be permitted to visit their father occasionally while he is in custody. He also asks why this man was sent to a prison so far away from the place where he lived or the place where the crime was committed. Would it not be pos-

Supply-Justice
sible to have that particular prisoner transferred to Kingston? If that was done, occasionally at least his children might see him, and that is all that is asked in this case.


Ernest Lapointe: If my hon. friend will
be good enough to send me the name of that prisoner certainly' I will look into the matter and if it is possible to remedy the situation I will be pleased to do so.


Agnes Campbell Macphail: While that will look
after this one man it will not do anything for the rest of these prisoners. I do not think the minister answered my question and stated why these people were sent to Stony Mountain. We used to think that these prisoners had no rights at all, but I think that is not the general opinion to-day, and I believe there should be something done to guard these 'men against hieing exiled from their own province for a term of years. What is the. basis of selection of those who are to be sent from Portsmouth to Stony Mountain?


Ernest Lapointe: The officers of the penitentiary make the selection. They take into consideration the section of the province from which the man comes, the number of visitors he has been receiving and so forth. For instance, a man from western Ontario would not be very much farther from his home when he was in Stony Mountain than he would be at Kingston.


Agnes Campbell Macphail: In this regard the
minister relies wholly upon the judgment of the officials of the penitentiary?


Ernest Lapointe: Surely my hon. friend
would not ask me to go and make the selection myself?


Agnes Campbell Macphail: No, but if the minister relies upon the judgment of the officials of the penitentiary in this case, why does he not do it in connection with the recommendations which have been made by Brigadier General Hughes? He has made some very specific recommendations but the government will not do anything.


Ernest Lapointe: Surely, my hon. friend
does not compare a matter of policy upon which a minister can pass with the matter of selecting convicts who shall be transferred?


Agnes Campbell Macphail: I would consider this
a matter of policy, and I think there should be some very explicit reason why these men are transferred from one province to the other. If Ontario has more criminals than any other province, then we should build a bigger place.


Ernest Lapointe: Has my hon. friend
received many complaints about convicts being transferred? I understand that Stony Mountain is a very fine penitentiary, and I am not sure that I would not prefer to be there rather than in Kingston.


Robert James Manion: Or here.


Agnes Campbell Macphail: I happen to have
many friends among the convicts, and they have complained very bitterly about being transferred from Kingston to Stony Mountain. They claim that their sentence is made very much harder. Two or three of these men have become very good citizens and I am quite proud of them, but it was not an easy thing for them to be transferred. One young lad complained that he did not see any of his people for over two years; his sentence was made that much harder, and there is no reason why he should have been transferred.


Ernest Lapointe: This week we received
a demand from the wife of a convict in Toronto that her husband be sent to Stony Mountain.


Agnes Campbell Macphail: I suppose she has good sense and wants to get him as far away as possible. I would like to mention the case of a prisoner who was sent from Portsmouth to Stony Mountain some time after 1925; I do not know the exact date, but he was sent to Stony Mountain and his first duties were indoor, assisting the schoolmaster and then in the tailor shop. He was then transferred and put at work in the quarry. This man wrote a letter to his mother and father in which he said:
The warden has no use for me because I complained about my work being dangerous and threatened to notify the superintendent about it.
A short time after the parents received that letter they received news of their son's death. The letter was smuggled out by a prisoner who had served his term, but it is an authentic letter. The fact that he used the words which I have just put on Hansard, followed by his death, seems to me to be a very odd coincidence. The wife and parents of this man asked the Minister of Justice to make an investigation to see whether or not he was killed because of negligence. I have received a letter from his mother and from his wife, and the mother says:
The condition of his body was shameful. He had not been embalmed.
Supply-Justice

The wife said the same thing, and in referring to the warden she also said:
I do not believe what he said because he said that the body was embalmed and we know it was not.
I think we should have information as to whether or not this man was put at dangerous work. The fact that he thought the work was dangerous and that he was killed shortly afterwards would need a careful explanation, and I would like to hear what the minister has to say about it.


Ernest Lapointe: This was a very unfortunate accident, but no one in the penitentiary was responsible for it. The man had been working in the quarry for only three days.


Agnes Campbell Macphail: Yes, I know that.


Ernest Lapointe: The accident was not
caused through any defect in the machinery, and the coroner did not think it necessary to hold an investigation. This man, as well as the other convicts, had been warned not to push the stones with his hand when they were being raised by the derrick, and I have the statements of convicts, as well as of guards, to that effect. We were notified immediately by the warden of the penitentiary as to this accident and upon the request of the relatives in Toronto we instructed the warden to have the body embalmed and sent to Toronto. That was done, and it is certainly not according to the facts to state that the body was not properly embalmed, because not only have I the statement of the warden that it was, but we have paid the bill of the undertakers and the embalmers. We have a population in the penitentiaries of Canada of 2,809 and it is remarkable how few accidents happen. I think we can safely say that in no industrial plant anywhere do so few accidents occur as in the penitentiary. As I informed the hon. member, the authorities of the penitentiary sympathize with the family of the convict, but what took place is one of those things that cannot be avoided.


Agnes Campbell Macphail: I am not sure that proves anything in the world, because the warden certainly is not going to say that this was carelessness on his part, and I will guarantee that the guards and the prisoners dare not say so. As regards the sworn statement of the prisoner, if the warden is to blame, that statement would not be worth the trouble of writing it or the paper it was written on. These men are absolutely under his command and I am convinced, not from one source, but from many, that they would not dare say it was carelessness on his part. I am

personally much more willing to take the word of the mother, the father and the wife -that is three people-of the prisoner that the body was in a most disgraceful condition, than 1 am to believe those who said that it was embalmed. The government may have paid for the embalming and it may never have been done. From another letter which I have under my hand and which was also smuggled out, there is a very significant statement by the man to the effect that if you compared Stony Mountain with Portsmouth, Portsmouth was heaven and one lived there like a king. That is the opinion of the whdle gang of men who go from Portsmouth to Stony Mountain. But going back to this particular case, has the minister anyone else that he can quote as proving that the body was in good condition, other than the warden of Stony Mountain penitentiary whose statement does not prove anything?


Ernest Lapointe: The undertaker and em-balmer did the work and were paid for it. What else can I do?


Mr. FORKE:: I do not know anything about the particular case referred to, and I have no doubt of the sincerity of the hon. member for Southeast Grey; but I know that no other public servant in Manitoba bears a higher reputation than the warden of Stony Mountain penitentiary. I have heard again and again of the great improvements he has made since he assumed control of that penitentiary and I do not think you will hear a breath of suspicion in Manitoba against that warden.


James Shaver Woodsworth: There are two or three statements which are contained in the report of the superintendent of penitentiaries to which I should like to call attention. There is, I believe, a resident population of some 2,500 people, and the cost per capita is SI.50 per diem. I would simply point out that this involves a very heavy expenditure to the country at large, and that the actual cost of maintaining a criminal is much heavier than the cost of educating a child. It is much more expensive to keep those people in the penitentiary than to keep them from getting into it. I have been reading the record of one particular individual and the statement is made:
It might well be asked how such men as these came to be admitted to Canada.
I would refer that to the Minister of Immigration. When the superintendent of penitentiaries calls the attention of the country to the fact that we are bringing in very

Supply-Justice
undesirable immigrants, such cases ought to be carefully checked up and made the basis of very stringent regulations. Further on in the report this statement is made:
Another man about to be discharged wrote:-
"When I came to prison I did not know anything. 1 was never given a chance, never was at school, could neither read nor write. I was not fitted for anything. I am going home with a fair education, am an expert blacksmith and also a good shoemaker. I have been taught both these trades in the penitentiary."
This is undoubtedly very satisfactory from (he standpoint of the penitentiary, but I ask: Are we going to go along, year after year, spending $1.50 a day in training these people in blacksmithing and other trades when we refuse to help in anything like a scheme of technical education? I do not want to go into the question of technical education today except to point out that these matters are very closely related. If we deliberately refuse to train boys in their youth, we shall have to pay the bill later on in connection with the untrained men who go to the penitentiary. It seems to me again that these departments of our public life should be more closely correlated. Another paragraph in the report signed by General Hughes reads:
There should be some definite and properly organized endeavour, either by the Dominion or provincial governments, or both, to provide for the unfortunate dependents left behind when the wage-earner of a household is sentenced to prison. The leaving of a poor mother, frequently with several small children, without any means of support or chance of obtaining a livelihood, would seem a greater crime than very often is committed by the one who had been their provider. For long years the policy of "the innocent must suffer for the sins of the guilty" has ruled. Surely in the enlightened twentieth century this should not longer be regarded as a sufficient reason for leaving innocent mothers and children to starvation or worse.
Several years ago, after having debated this question during, I think, two distinct sessions, the house passed a resolution to the effect that payment should be made to the prisoners for work done in the penitentiary, and that in the case of married men, this amount should be turned over to their wives and children. The minister has apparently taken no action on that resolution. Again we ask:	What about
the responsibilities of the government to the house? The question was canvassed backwards and forwards very thoroughly: expert opinion was given as to what had been done and as to the beneficial results in other places. Nevertheless, year after year has passed and we have nothing done. I cannot conceive of a much more severe indictment of our present system than that from
the superintendent when he says that the crime committed against the prisoner or his dependents is often much more serious than that which the prisoner himself has committed. We cannot veiy well pass over these things year after year and have nothing done. This very significant statement is the last one made by the superintendent:
The recommendations made in former years are again suggested.
I would like to ask why we appoint a superintendent, expect him to make reports and then fail to act upon them. The superintendent does not even give the recommendations again this year. He apparentlj' feels it is hopeless to do so. They are not even put down in black and white. It would seem as if he was tired of making reports to the government, because the government passes over them. Most hon. members are not tremendously concerned over the penitentiary population. Most of us are trying to avoid this institution; we do not expect to go there. What do we care for a few criminals? The only opportunity we have in the house of discussing these matters is when we have the estimates before us, sometimes just a few hours before parliament prorogues. I would urge that the action of the bar associations and other bodies such as the Social Service Council, indicate that at least those who pay attention to this matter are heartily in sympathy with reforms along the line suggested by the superintendent of penitentiaries. It is due to the house that the Minister of Justice should tell us very definitely why he has not carried out the recommendations of the superintendent.


Ernest Lapointe: Good things cannot be done all at once. I have always stated that the first step I had in mind so far as prison reform was concerned was to segregate the young offenders in separate institutions. I was really expecting, although apparently in public life we cannot ever expect anything, to be congratulated this year by my hon. friends.


Agnes Campbell Macphail: I am going to. do it. I have not spoken yet.


Ernest Lapointe: I am glad to know that, but now I am afraid it. may be said that I was fishing. I am receiving communications from organizations interested in penitentiary matters to the effect that the greatest step forward in penal legislation in Canada has been taken this year through our providing in the estimates for the building of two institutions for young offenders. I think that is rhe one thing which was primarily needed.
Supply-Justice

It is going to cost a good deal of money, but we are going to have the institutions, and even if I have only that to my credit during my administration of thei Department of Justice I shall be proud of it.
As far as the other matter is concerned, we must first of all have productive work that will bring in some return before we can divide the profits. We must first have the profits. The work done in the penitentiaries has been increasing year by year. We have installed new machinery, and to-day instead of the convicts merely breaking stones, most of the prisoners in the penitentiraies are working at some productive work. For a large number of years, of course, organized labour was opposed to prison labour coming into competition with their own, but now they have reached the stage where, although they do not want the products of prison labour to come into competition with the products of industry in the country they are willing that the departments of the government should buy such articles as they require which can be obtained from the penitentiaries. We have already started doing that to a certain extent, but I must remind my hon. friends that 1 am not in control of all the departments, and there will be some educational process necessary before I can convince all my colleagues that the products of the penitentiaries will meet their requirements as well as the work which is being produced by the ordinary industries of tlhe country.
I wish to say that in no country in the world are the prisoners paid anything before the expenses are met. The dtate certainly has the right to be reimbursed for the very large expenditure which is made to keep the penitentiaries working to maintain the prisoners in the penitentiaries. The only place I know of where anything is paid to the dependents of the convicts is in Minnesota. In some other places the system has been tried and abandoned periodically according to the changing views of the different governments coming into office. I have myself looked'into the records of what is being paid in some of the penitentiaries, and I find that in most of them nothing is being paid. In others an amount is paid varying from li cents-the rate paid in the big penal institutions in New York State-to 25 and even 50 cents a day. But as I stated, the expenses must first be met. When a convict is guilty of some offence against the regulations of the penitentiary a fine is imposed, and it is paid out of the little amount which may be to his
TMr. Lapointe.]
credit. However, even if it is impossible to collect something which might go to the dependents, and I find many difficulties in the way, we might at least provide a little amount for the prisoner when he has finished serving his sentence and is thrown out on the world. As it is to-day, he goes out with a suit of clothes and five dollars in his pocket, and a ticket to the place where he came from when admitted to the penitentiary. I think myself that it would be a great thing if they had some little amount to start with, although I must admit that the opinions of responsible people in places where that has been tried are that in many cases within two days after they have left the penitentiary, the amount is spent.


James Shaver Woodsworth: What about the
wife and children?


Ernest Lapointe: I was speaking of giving something to the convicts when they are released. To do that it would be necessary to change our system, and that can be done only gradually. It is all right to urge that we must change the whole penitentiary system of Canada immediately. I agree with the principle. There is a word that has been assailed many times in this house, the word "chart''; this is a chart which I have before me in endeavouring to bring about that reform.
I said last year that I intended to visit all the penitentiaries in the country in the fall, but unfortunately, as my leader was sent to the League of Nations at the request of everybody in Canada, I had to stay in Ottawa at the very time when I wanted to make that visit, but I shall certainly visit the penitentiaries this year. I wish to see them all and learn at first hand what the conditions are and what can be done. Though I am willing to do anything I can in order to facilitate what I may call the reform of the convicts, rather than adhering to the old idea of punishment, and punishment alone, we must not go to the opposite extreme. I would call the attention of my hon. friends, however, to the fact that the officers in the penitentiaries have to dqal with all sorts of men. In the penitentiaries are some of the worst characters in the country. For instance, when complaints are made against the strictness of the discipline it must be borne in mind that the officers in those institutions are very often in jeopardy, and for their protection there must be strict discipline, although the convicts are to be treated kindly. I certainly admire the views of my hon.

Supply-Justice
friend from Southeast Grey, and I am willing to go as far as possible to meet them. I really believe by this new step in segregating young offenders from hardened criminals we have gone a long way in prison reform.


James Shaver Woodsworth: The minister has
not said how he is providing for the wives and families during the incarceration of the breadwinners.


Ernest Lapointe: I am not providing for
them, I admit. We must not forget that our federal system is largely responsible for some of the difficulties that confront us. AVe are in charge of the penitentiaries, but the provinces are in charge of the gaols. Men sentenced to more than two years imprisonment come to our penitentiaries. In the United States each state is in control of all prisons. If we could do so we would look after the dependents of the convicts in our penitentiaries, but these are in a minority; there are More men imprisoned in the big gaols than in the penitentiaries. But apart from this, the administration of justice is in the hands of the provincial authorities, and we are taking charge of those who have been committed to the penitentiaries by the provincial courts, but it does not necessarily follow that the federal authorities should be charged with the duty of looking after the families of those convicts.


Charles Hazlitt Cahan: There are some who would
be very glad to go to the penitentiaries if they were assured that the state would look after their families.


Ernest Lapointe: There is that danger if
we make our penitentiaries first class hotels and undertake to look after the families of the convicts. There are limitations in that regard which we should not overstep. Until the work of the convicts is remunerative to the extent of the expenses which the state must incur on their behalf, I certainly will not recommend paying anything to their dependents.


Murray MacLaren: What is the percentage
of Canadian-born convicts?


Ernest Lapointe: These are the figures:
from Canada, 1,589; from England and Wales, 197; from Scotland, 69; from Ireland, 35; from other British countries, 28-making altogether 1,918 British convicts out of a total of 2,500 in our penitentiaries. That was for last year.


Murray MacLaren: What percentage is
British?


Ernest Lapointe: The figures are 1,918
out of 2,500. Since then the population has increased to about 3,000. As far as foreign countries are concerned, there are 220 convicts from the United States, 85 from Russia, 75 from Italy, 67 from Austria-Hungary, 53 from China, 22 from Roumania, and 120 from other foreign countries.


Donald Ferdinand Kellner: Under whose charge is
prisoner George Edmund Jackson? It will be remembered that there was a controversy between the Alberta government and the Justice department with regard to this man.


Ernest Lapointe: I have discussed the matter with the hon. member and he knows the position as well as I do.


Richard Bedford Bennett: It is a matter of public
interest.


Ernest Lapointe: Yes.


Donald Ferdinand Kellner: At the time I spoke to
the minister about it he said he was going to take further steps.


Ernest Lapointe: Yes. I wired Premier
Brownlee yesterday in answer to his wire.


Donald Ferdinand Kellner: I understood the minister was going to take some steps with a view to having the Justice department look after this man.


Ernest Lapointe: No, I told my hon.
friend that owing to the telegram I had received from the Alberta authorities I was willing to reconsider the matter, and that I would wire the premier to send me the report of the medical experts which he had mentioned in his telegram to me.


Richard Bedford Bennett: Will the minister state
briefly the facts of the case?


Ernest Lapointe: Yes. Jackson was sentenced to death for murder. In the course of the trial the question of sanity was raised. Medical evidence was given, and the jury found him guilty.


Richard Bedford Bennett: And sane?


Ernest Lapointe: Well, guilty. Of course
my hon. friend is entitled to his own conclusion. An appeal was made to the governor in council for clemency. Of course, my hon. friend knows that in discussing those matters I am restricted in the information that I can give to the public. There was a report from the trial judge, Mr. Justice Tweedie, and other representations which influenced the decision that was reached, that it was better for the ends of justice that the capital sentence should be commuted to imprisonment
Supply-Justice

for life. Under the law he was now sent from the prison in Alberta to the Prince Albert penitentiary in Saskatchewan, which serves for the two provinces, and some time after he had been admitted to the penitentiary the surgeon of that institution certified that he had had this inmate under close observation since he had been admitted and found him to be insane, and he expressed the opinion that the man was insane when admitted. There is a section of the Penitentiary Act which I think I should read now that this matter is under discussion. Section 53 of that act reads:
If at any time within three months after the receipt at the penitentiary of any convict sentenced to imprisonment therein it is established to the satisfaction of the minister, either . by the written certificate of the surgeon of such penitentiary or otherwise, that the convict is insane or imbecile and was insane or imbecile at the time when he was received at the penitentiary, the minister may, after giving reasonable notice of his intention to the attorney general of the province within which such insane or imbecile convict was convicted, by warrant under his hand, direct the removal of such insane or imbecile convict from the penitentiary to the jail or other place of confinement from which such insane or imbecile convict came to the penitentiary.
Another section of the act provides that when, in the case of a prisoner who has been sentenced to death, such sentence is commuted to imprisonment for life, he shall be admitted to the penitentiary as though the order in council granting the commutation were a judgment of the court. Upon the receipt of this written certificate of the surgeon that Jackson was insane, we notified the attorney general of Alberta, under the section I have just read, on October 12, 1928, well within the three months provided for by statute, acquainting him with these facts; and we requested him to advise us as to which of the mental diseases hospitals the man might be taken to. We did not get an answer for some time and then we were told that, Jackson having been found sane by the jury at the trial, we should not have acted as we had done under the section of the statute to which I have referred. In view of this attitude on the part of the attorney general oif Alberta, I took upon myself to send an impartial medical expert from another province, Dr. MaoNeill of the mental hospital of North Battleford. Dr. MaoNeill is a well known authority, and he forwarded to us his report to the effect that the man was insane and that he could not understand how he had ever been sent to gaol. We again notified the authorities in Alberta and, upon their refusal to act, the officers of the peniten-
tiary proceeded upon the warrant which had been issued, taking the man to the prison in Alberta from which he had come.
They still claim that the man is sane, and I received' the day before yesterday a wire from Mr. Brownlee, in the absence of the attorney general, stating that they have had the man examined by four medical experts from Alberta, two from Edmonton, I believe, one from Calgary and one from some other place. These men say that the man is sane.


Henry Elvins Spencer: I believe that two were
from Ponoka, one from Calgary and one from Edmonton.


Ernest Lapointe: That may be. However, I wired Mr. Brownlee that I was quite willing to reconsider the matter, asking him to be good enough to send me the reports of these medical experts. I do not know what decision will be reached, whether we shall send some other outsiders or simply accept the reports; it will depend on the nature of those reports. I may assure my hon. friend, however, that I wish to have no conflict with the province of Alberta in this matter. On the other hand, we must not create a precedent, charging the federal government with responsibility for men who are declared to be insane when they are sent to the penitentiary. Under these circumstances, I shall act in the best way possible.


Mr. JACOBS:: Doesn't this go to show that what, we consider insanity in other parts of Canada is looked upon as sanity in Alberta -with all due respect to the leader of the opposition (Mr. Bennett).


Richard Bedford Bennett: I do not know that the hon. gentleman has thrown any illumination on this very disagreeable subject by the observation he has just made. The fact is that Jackson was left on the doorstep by the officer of the federal government, so far as I can ascertain from the public press; and the provincial authorities, regarding the man as sane, did not desire to lock him up. That is the position as indicated in the press cf the country, and I say to the minister that it is rather a reflection on the administration of justice on the part of the federal authorities charged with responsibility for maintaining institutions for the custody of those whom the courts of law have sentenced. This man was sentenced to death; that sentence was commuted, I believe, to imprisonment for life, and he was taken to the Prince Albert penitentiary. And notwithstanding the fact that the experts had not been able to satisfy the jury on the plea of insanity and that he was .

Supply-Justice
found guilty of murder, he was taken from that institution-my information is solely from the public press and it may be inaccurate -by an officer of the federal government, to Edmonton or Fort Saskatchewan, where he was left on the doorstetp. He seems to be reasonably sane and there is no place to take him. Surely that is not proper administration of justice. I do not think the minister believes so.


Ernest Lapointe: You think it would be
proper administration to lock the door so that he could not get in?


Richard Bedford Bennett: There is where the conflict arose. The minister asks a very pertinent question-was it proper administration of justice on the part of the provincial authorities to lock the door? But they said quite frankly:	"We cannot take an insane
man to gaol," and therefore they locked the door-if that is what the minister means by locking the door; that is the only locking of doors I have heard of.


Ernest Lapointe: I am advised by my
officers that the man in whose charge he was sent waited for twenty-four hours before leaving him at the door of the gaol.


Richard Bedford Bennett: Exactly, and just left
him free.


Ernest Lapointe: I will just read that
part of the statute again:
-the minister may, after giving reasonable notice of his intention to the attorney general of the province within which such insane or imbecile convict was convicted, by warrant under his hand, direct the removal of such insane or imbecile convict from the penitentiary to the gaol or other place of confinement from which such insane or imbecile convict came to the penitentiary.
That is what they did. I frankly admit that I knew all the facts only after this occurence had taken place, but under the law as it is they were justified in leaving the man at the place from which he came. The officials of the gaol knew he was there but refused to let him in.	[DOT]


Richard Bedford Bennett: Yes, but I am sure the
minister realizes the gravity of the situation. This man was convicted of murder, yet he was left on the doorstep under the warrant of the Minister of Justice.


Samuel William Jacobs: What does the hon. gentleman mean when he says he was left on the doorstep?


Richard Bedford Bennett: Under a warrant from
the Minister of Justice he was taken by an
officer of the federal government to the gaol at Fort Saskatchewan, and when they would not take him in the officer left him on the -doorstep and went away.


Samuel William Jacobs: And the man insisted upon
remaining on the doorstep?


Richard Bedford Bennett: WTe prefer to treat this
as a serious matter, but in any event he did not remain there very long. The contention , is that a murderer, who is now alleged to be insane, should not be in gaol, although the statute directs the minister, if he so desires, to send one of his officers with him by a warrant under his hand, to the gaol from which he oame, and Fort Saskatchewan was the gaol in which he had been imprisoned. He was taken to the gaol and the keeper of the gaol said, "This is not an insane man at all, and I am not going to take him in."


Ernest Lapointe: He had no right to say that.


Richard Bedford Bennett: That is the story. Thereupon, after waiting for a while, the officer left this convicted murderer upon the premises and went away. Where is Jackson now?


Ernest Lapointe: I understand he is in
custody somewhere.


Richard Bedford Bennett: Quite so, and he is
either sane or insane; if he is sane he should not be anywhere but in the penitentiary and if he is insane he should be in a mental hospital. In the meantime this terrible thing has happened, and I believe it is a sad commentary upon the administration of justice in this country. The minister has properly said if he had known the facts then as well as he did later he would not have taken this action, but as it was the federal officer travelled from Saskatchewan to Alberta and left his man at the gaol because the keeper of the gaol said he had no authority to take in a sane man who was convicted of murder.


Ernest Lapointe: He had no right to say that.


Richard Bedford Bennett: But that was what he
did say, because the difference is as to the sanity or the insanity of the man; one group says he is insane and the other says he is sane. If he is sane he should be in the penitentiary and it was only through the exercise of clemency by the minister that he was not hanged, because he was sentenced to death. Now, because someone says he is insane, he is taken to Alberta and they say they will not take him because he is not insane.
Supply-Justice


Ernest Lapointe: But the la-w gives the discretion to the Minister of Justice and it does not matter whether they think he is sane or insane.


Richard Bedford Bennett: And the Minister of
Justice decided that the man was insane, otherwise the warrant would not have been issued.


Ernest Lapointe: The Minister of Justice has acted as the .law says he should act, on. the certificate of the physician.


Richard Bedford Bennett: The law says that if the prisoner is insane or an imbecile the minister maj' do so and so, and the minister has a certificate from one to the effect that the man is insane. On the other hand the authorities, who were conscious of the whole situation when the man was tried, say that is incorrect and the man is not insane. I do suggest, in the interests of the administration of justice, that there should be a disinterested person brought in to consider the question before we render the administration subject to unfair criticism and attack. The minister acted strictly in conformity with the terms of the statute, but I suggest that it would have been better to have had an independent opinion.


Ernest Lapointe: I had the opinion of Doctor MacNeill, of North Battleford.


Richard Bedford Bennett: I heard the minister make that statement before, but I mean some opinion upon which the authorities of the province and the federal authorities would agree, so that there would be no question as to the determination of sanity because it is not a pleasant thing to think we are faced with that situation.


Ernest Lapointe: I hope this will be settled satisfactorily to all concerned.


Samuel William Jacobs: Have we not in Canada some institution in *which the criminally insane can be placed? I understood that provision was made at Portsmouth penitentiary at Kingston for the criminally insane from different parts of the country.


Ernest Lapointe: I believe that was closed in 1915.


Samuel William Jacobs: Was that because we have no criminally insane?


Ernest Lapointe: I do not know.


Samuel William Jacobs: Is there no place where these criminally insane -an be treated?
fMr. Bennett !


Ernest Lapointe: When they are found insane later than three months after they have been admitted to the penitentiary they remain under pur charge; if we have the accommodation we keep them in a separate ward, but when there is no such accommodation we arrange with the provinces, where they have hospitals which are suitable for that purpose, to look after them and we pay the provinces for keeping them in these asylums so long as they have not finished their sentences. When the sentences are served of course we deliver them back to the provinces from which they came and then they are under the care of the provinces.


Samuel William Jacobs: Then I understand that if this man had been in the penitentiary longer than three months he would have been kept in the Prince Albert penitentiary?


Ernest Lapointe: Yes, and probably we would have arranged with the province to look after him, but we would have had to pay the province.


Donald Ferdinand Kellner: I did not mention this matter with the idea of carrying on a discussion in favour of the provincial government, but I think some consideration should be given the people of Alberta in a case of this kind. The minister's statement of the case is not at all in line with my information; I am told that this man was never returned to the gaol at all and was never accepted by the gaoler but as a matter of fact was turned loose on the streets of Fort Saskatchewan.
I would like to review the case briefly. The woman who was murdered was named Nellie Pendleton; she had worked for the provincial government of Alberta for quite a number of years and later married this man Pendleton and went out on a farm north of Waskatenau, in Alberta. They had friends by the name of Jackson, and the father of the prisoner went to Pendleton and asked if he would take his boy on the farm. This was done, and the boy worked there for several months. One day Pendleton left him on the farm to do the chores and went back to his work of cutting the brush. The boy took an axe and killed this woman, stole all the money in the house and took a horse and rode it to Waskatenau, where he hired a car and drove to Edmonton. I do not believe those were the actions of an insane man. The following day Jackson was arrested as he left a moving picture theatre; after being tried he was sentenced to hang on June 6 of last year, and later the sentence was commuted to life imprisonment in the peni-

Supply-Justice
ten'tiary at Prince Albert. The minister said a moment ago that an order in council had the same authority as an order of the court, but the order in council said that this man was to be kept at Prince Albert penitentiary; there was nothing said about his being transferred to Alberta.


Ernest Lapointe: It is the same as an
order of the court.


Donald Ferdinand Kellner: Before his trial for
murder this man was sent to an asylum in Alberta where four doctors examined him and stated that he was sane. He was tried and duly convicted, and' later on a doctor at the penitentiary in Saskatchewan stated that he was insane, and the minister turns and ships him back to Alberta. The minister has the authority of four doctors who say that he was sane, and the authority of one doctor who said that he was insane.
In this connection, I would like to make a few remarks in regard to this expert witness nuisance. This matter is getting to be rather serious as I am sure that anyone reading the papers cannot help but see that when a man is accused of a really serious crime almost invariably he is defended on the ground of insanity. The prosecution seems to be able to go out and get any number of expert witnesses who will swear that the man is sane, and the defence can get an equal number of equally expert witnesses who will swear that he is insane. I think it is time that some notice was taken of this situation, as it looks to me as though each side are able to find witnesses who will say what they want them to say.


Richard Bedford Bennett: That is so, and always
has been the case.


Donald Ferdinand Kellner: The minister is setting
the statements of four doctors against the statement of one. I understand that a controversy developed a little later on between the department and the province of Alberta as to who should take care of this prisoner, whose ward he was to be. During the month of May a guard from the Prince Albert penitentiary brought the prisoner over to the gaol at Fort Saskatchewan and' told the warden at the jail that he wanted him to take the prisoner. The warden refused and said that he had no instructions to do so, and the guard took the prisoner into Edmonton. The guard returned later on and told the warden at the jail that he had the prisoner and that he was to take him. The warden tried to find out with whom the guard had been in consultation while he was in Edmonton, but the guard refused to give him that information.
The warden went out to a telephone booth to call up the provincial authorities, I presume to get their instructions as to what action he should take, and when he returned he met the guard and noticed that the prisoner was not present. He asked the guard where the prisoner was and was told that he had been left on the doorstep. The warden looked down the street and he saw the prisoner walking along by the memorial hall. I am sure that the Minister of the Interior (Mr. Stewart) will know just what distance the memorial hall is from the gaol. The prisoner was wearing a blue suit of clothes and could not be distinguished from any other young man on the street.


Ernest Lapointe: If my hon. friend has a report about the facts I would like him to send it to me. Is my hon. friend merely reciting something which he has been told?


Donald Ferdinand Kellner: That information has
been supplied to me and I am sure the minister will accept it as a report.


Ernest Lapointe: Oh no, not when I have a report from the officers as to what happened.


Donald Ferdinand Kellner: The report from the officers does not agree with my information?


Ernest Lapointe: No, it does not.


Donald Ferdinand Kellner: The information I have is that the prisoner was later arrested and put in the lock-up in Fort Saskatchewan, and as far as I know he is there yet. There should be no trouble in verifying that information, and the minister could find out whether he was delivered and accepted by the warden at the gaol, or whether he was turned loose on the street. When a controversy of this kind develops between the Dominion and the provincial governments the people of this country have a right to assume that it will be conducted in a high, honest and firm manner. If my information, which the minister questions, is correct, this action of taking a prisoner over to Fort Saskatchewan and dumping him on the doorstep was that of a bully, and not the action of someone who was trying to act fairly in a matter of this kind. If the information which I have received is not correct I will be very glad bo retract these statements, but I have every confidence that it is correct.


Ernest Lapointe: I would not like to review again the case, but I am not sure whether or not my hon. friend is suggesting that the sentence of the man should have been commuted. In matters of this kind I, unfortunately, have to play a very large part.
362S
Supply-Justice

The question of capital punishment has been discussed in the house and if I am not mistaken even my hon. friend was opposed to that. I believe in it, but I believe that every safeguard and precaution should be taken and when we had a report from the trial judge and from the medical men who gave evidence at the trial stating that the man was subnormal, I must admit that not only did I hesitate, but I would rather have resigned my position than send that man to the gallows.


Mr. LUCHKOVICH:: Whether this man
was insane or sane, the fact is that he was left on the doorstep of the gaol in Fort Saskatchewan. Not long ago we had a murderer in western Canada known as the strangler. Suppose this man had been a murderer of that type and had been left on the doorstep of this gaol and in the interval had committed half a dozen murders, what a terrible thing it would have been. Fort Saskatchewan happens to be in my constituency and I want to register my protest against the authorities, whether they be provincial or federal, causing so much consternation in the minds of my constituents. '


Agnes Campbell Macphail: Mr. Chairman, before
I make a few remarks in regard to some reforms which I would like to see carried out in the .penitentiaries, I would like to go back for a moment to the case we have spoken of, of the man who was killed last August at Stony Mountain. I would like the minister to do something further in ascertaining the facts of that man's death. If the minister desires to disregard the evidence of the wife and the parents, he can ascertain from the undertaker in Toronto the true condition of the body when it arrived. I think there should be an investigation into the cause of that man's death. Personally I would not accept the warden's story unless I could be very sure it was not- prejudiced. I do not like to say this about any warden, but this is not the first thing I have heard about the warden of Stony Mountain penitentiary, and the matter should be investigated. If the minister intends to visit all the penitentiaries this year-and I hope he may be back with us when the house meets again-he may look into the matter and he may find out more about it than he knows at the moment.


Ernest Lapointe: I suppose my hon. friend does not suggest that I am favouring that warden on account of political partisanship?


Agnes Campbell Macphail: As a matter of fact
I feel that the warden got his position because he was a brother of a certain eminent man in Canada. I do not think there is much

doubt about that. He was certainly not trained for this particular work. I suppose that is why he got the position, but that does not mean he would not be a good warden.


Richard Bedford Bennett: I think he had training
in Dorchester penitentiary before he went to Stony Mountain.


Agnes Campbell Macphail: We have not a warden at all who is trained; we have no trained official in any penitentiary in Canada except those trained by experience. The officials are not particularly fitted for the work and I do not think they are very carefully chosen, because if one inquires into their history, one has reason fo think it was not their qualifications that caused them to be appointed to their particular positions. I should like the minister, if he has not done so already, to read Crimes against Criminals by Robert Ingersoll. It is one of the finest of the small books that I have read on this subject.


Ernest Lapointe: Does my hon. friend
agree with everything that Robert Ingersoll wrote?


Agnes Campbell Macphail: I agree with a good
deal of his common sense.


Ernest Lapointe: What about the other
sense?


Samuel William Jacobs: The Minister of Justice
could not read it. It is on the expurgated list.


Ernest Lapointe: I hope the hon. member will not ask me to make my confession about it.


Agnes Campbell Macphail: I admire Robert
Ingersoll's courage. He said what he thought and that is more than many people do. As an hon. member reminds me, he shows his sympathy with humanity very clearly in his Crimes against Criminals. It is far ahead of our time and it must have been even further ahead of his.
There are only two things to think of regarding prisoners. One is the protection of society, and the other is the reclaiming of the prisoner. The idea of vengeance is being eliminated in practice, but still the old act we have is based on it. I should like to see a pretty thorough reform of our penitentiaries. To begin with I congratulate the Minister of Justice on carrying out the third recommendation of W. S. Hughes, the superintendent, in having the young, offenders segregated. The recommendations are nine in number, and before I finish, I hope to put them on Hansard. While the chart spoken

Supply-Justice
of by the Minister of Justice of giving the prisoners work and the possibility of paying for that work after they have looked after their own keep, is splendid, and apparently the Minister of Justice has looked at it at some time, because he knows it exists-it reminds me a good deal of the chart of the Liberal party, that wonderful chart of Liberalism, to which the Prime Minister so often refers. I am sure it is treasured somewhere, but it is hidden so carefully I am afraid it is not often looked at and very seldom toward. I am afraid the Minister of Justice has not done much; in fact, I cannot see that he has done anything and I would like to see that he has more work for the prisoners in the penitentiaries and is progressing towards the time when they will be paid for that work. It came up in the house the other day that the uniforms for our permanent force in Canada were made by special manufacturing establishments of their own. At the time I said, and I now repeat, that I can see no reason why the industries within the penitentiaries should not make these uniforms. I have seen suits of street clothes made by the tailor shops in the penitentiaries and they were beautiful suits. That is a matter which the minister might well look into. If all the uniforms of the permanent force were made in the penitentiaries, this would add very much to the work they are already doing. They make mail bags and, while I know that we discussed the matter, I am not sure whether they make the brooms that are used in the government service. The minister will know whether they do nor not. They make a good many articles, but I see no reason why they should not make as much as they have time to. Certainly the. cost of their own maintenance should first be met, but if the time ever comes when they produce more, the result of that should go to keep their dependents. The house passed a resolution to this effect some years ago and we should take steps to carry it out. Just thinking about it will not get us very far.
One thing more I want to suggest is that the government of such an institution is very much like an absolute monarchy. In other words, the warden is practically in control of the whole institution. There could be a more democratic form of government than that worked out.


Ernest Lapointe: What does my hon. friend
suggest?


Samuel William Jacobs: That the prisoners should
elect a warden every year amongst themselves.


Agnes Campbell Macphail: I would suggest that
the other officials should have a part of the responsibility with the warden. There should be a board of governors composed of the warden, some of the guards and the very best behaved prisoners, the prisoners being chosen from amongst themselves. I think if the inmates were treated as an isolated community and all the rules that work well in the community of the world were used there, this would produce better results than we have, because I know by my own nature, when anyone sets out to make me do things, it is a great deal harder than if they worked with me, to get the thing done, and I think everybody else is the same.


Ernest Lapointe: No; the hon. member
is good and those others are not.


Agnes Campbell Macphail: I do not even think
that; I have a better judgment than that. I think there could be a more democratic system of government. The minister still thinks I am wrong, but the matter should at least be thoroughly investigated. Along with that, some special training should be given to the wardens of the penitentiaries. They should be men who understand psychology, who know something about hunman nature'. They should be men who are missionaries in the finest sense of the word, and whose great task is to reclaim these men and send them back to society in harmony with their fellow-men. They should be students of the whole subject. We have not that type of men in the penitentiaries of Canada because we have not thought until now it was necessary to have them, but if we are going to inaugurate new policies we shall certainly have to do so tin ough the same men with new ideas or through other men with new ideas.
As regards education, I should like the Minister of Justice to tell me whether it is true that only forty minutes a day during the dinner hour are allowed to the men who are attempting to study. Is that correct?


Ernest Lapointe: No.


Agnes Campbell Macphail: How much time are
they given?


Ernest Lapointe: From six to nine o'clock
at night, apart from the forty minutes.


Agnes Campbell Macphail: Is that in their own
cells or in the schoolrooms?


Ernest Lapointe: In the cells.


Agnes Campbell Macphail: I am afraid that is
not the same thing. Shut in a cell with a book by themselves is certainly not the same thing as meeting as free men in a room with
Supply-Justice

good school teachers. The former is not what I would call education. Reading in their cells I would not call education. You may get education out of it, but it is not education by the prison authorities.


Ernest Lapointe: There were 55,000 examination sheets distributed to these men to work on at night.


Agnes Campbell Macphail: That is a bit better.


Samuel William Jacobs: May I remind the hon.
member for Southeast Grey that Pilgrim's Progress was written in a cell and it is pretty good literature yet.


Agnes Campbell Macphail: That is true, but sometimes we think that the pilgrim has not made much progress on that account. I would ask the minister if there is a waiting list or can all prisoners become students in these institutions.


Ernest Lapointe: Every one of them.


Agnes Campbell Macphail: I am very glad to hear that. I do think that every facility should be offered by the institution for these men to better their education. I suppose that examinations are necessary, but I sometimes wonder whether we are not examination mad. But at least it is an advance over a few years ago.
One other thing. I think there should be an adjustment board to look after the man or woman when he is ready for release from the penitentiary. It should be composed, I think, of an official of the government of the institution, and outside civilians. The Red Cross has been built up by people who were not paid for doing it but who loved humanity sufficiently to give to give their time in its service. I think the same idea could be carried out with an adjustment board for each penitentiary. I have been very interested in half a dozen cases. Suppose a person has been in the penitentiary for five years and then comes out; there is no one to help adjust him to life again. They have this little bit of money, $5, and a suit of clothes, which I do not suppose is a very good suit, although it may be, and a railway ticket to take them "uaiik where they came from. If any of us had been confined to this house for five years with no opportunity of getting out, and were turned out at the end of that time under such conditions, we might find a great deal of difficulty in adjusting ourselves. I think the superintendent would bear me out, if he could speak on the floor of the house, that it frequently happens that shortly after his release and before he gets to work again, reestablishes himself, and is absorbed again as

a human being into the human family, when everybody's hand is against him, the former prisoner becomes a repeater. That conditions in the world are not too good was proved by the words of the Minister of Justice today. It was a sad indictment of civilization to say that if the penitentiaries were made too comfortable and if the prisoners' dependents were looked after by the government, people would deliberately get into the penitentiaries. I cannot believe that people would deliberately give up their freedom for a period of years unless conditions were very bad outside.
I want to put on Hansard the recommendations of the superintendent of penitentiaries, W. S. Hughes, one of which is being carried out this year by the Minister of Justice. The recommendations are as follows:
1.	The providing of institutions for the segregation and classification of all inmates is again strongly recommended.
2.	The reopening of the criminal mental disease hospital.
The need for that is shown by the Jackson case.
3.	The segregation of habitual criminals.
4.	The furnishing of more work for the inmates by the government.
5.	Payment of wages to well-behaved inmates for work well performed.
6.	The securing of situations for inmates prior to discharge.
That is what I mean by an adjustment board. It is simply putting it in another way.
7.	The training of officers before being permitted to take charge of inmates.
8.	The empowering of those in charge of penitentiary administration with authority to administer and discipline on similar basis to that of the Royal Canadian Mounted Police.
I am not sure that I agree with the latter recommendation.
9.	Change in the method of purchasing supplies. This essential in order to attain success in the manufacture of goods in the penitentiaries.
There is not any use at all in the superintendent of penitentiaries recommending to us again and again what he out of his experience has learned unless we are willing to take his expert advice and try a little more rapidly than we have been doing to carry out his recommendations. I am glad that we are taking this one step, but one step in ten years is a slow walk, and I hope that we shall speed it up a bit.


Mr ADSHEAD:: I should like to supplement the remarks made by the hon. member for Southeast Grey. I was at one time organizer of the city relief department of the city of Calgary. Nothing was more distressing than to have released convicts come to

Supply-Justice
me, and I had several of them. I said to them, "Why do you come to me for work or assistance?" This was the answer I got: "Wherever I go for work, just as soon as they find that I have been a convict, I am discharged." In other words, not only do we need an adjustment board to help the convict reestablish himself as a useful citizen, but even so-called Christian society absolutely refuses to give these men a second chance.
I have had convicts apply to me to do even pick and shovel work for the city of Calgary although they were fitted for a much better class of work, just because of a slip they had made in life-and who has not made a slip? Possibly some of us might have been in gaol if the law had taken its course.


Agnes Campbell Macphail: If we were not politicians.


Mr. ADSHEAD:: I have sometimes had to send these men out of the city to places where they were not known in order to get work for them. Society itself is in need of a readjustment of its ideas with respect to these men. I do not know exactly what to suggest, but I do say that we are not giving these men a chance when they are able and willing to work and would make good citizens, so long as Christian society refuses to give them a second chance.


Mr. ROSS (Kingston):: Does the minister know why certain boots made lately in the penitentiary for the police force were rejected and sold on the market?


Ernest Lapointe: Some defects made the boots unacceptable by the officers of the police force. Only a few of them were rejected, not many.


Arthur Edward Ross: For some years I have been bringing to the attention of the minister, without much success, a matter in which I am interested. About three years ago the officials of the penitentiaries were brought under the Civil Service Act. They were allowed to become members of the civil service by paying a certain amount into the superannuation fund on account of their past service. That became a very heavy burden upon a few of them, some seven or eight, who had been working in the penitentiary for twenty-two to twenty-five years. The department and the superintendent and others may say to these men, "You have had your choice. In the first place you were not guaranteed the gratuity which has been allowed in the past for twenty-five or twenty-six years' good service. It was granted con-78594

ditionially. You were not entitled to it." Secondly, they may say, "You were granted the privilege of paying in the amount due on account of your past service." That is the attitude taken by the department, but I think those men who have served for twenty-three, twenty-four, or twenty-five years should be treated a little differently; that some part of the gratuity should be allowed them to reimburse what they have had to pay in. There are not many affected, and I thinik the government could well afford to treat those who have served that length of time by recognizing the principle that the gratuity has to a certain extent been earned. Say to these men: "We will accept you in the civil service and allow you a certain part of the gratuity." Now, I am going to bring this matter up until something is done, for I believe these men have a good case.


Ernest Lapointe: 
Arthur Edward Ross: Well, I think that is what we are here for.


Ernest Lapointe: Yes.


Arthur Edward Ross: We are called legislators, whether we are or not. When a legitimate case is brought forward it should be dealt with. You have a precedent in the case of one man who was given a gratuity of $2,500 or $2,600 and then went back into the service.


Agnes Campbell Macphail: I want to know something about shackling to the bar. Where convicts are so dealt with, are their arms above their head, by their side, or where?


Ernest Lapointe: "Shackled to the bar"
means that the convict is placed in his cell and his arms tied to the gate of the cell at the waist line. It happens that some of the convicts refuse to work, and if they are found physically fit they are forced to stand up in their cell instead of being given a chance to sleep while others are working. As soon as they express their willingness to work they are

aG32
Supply-Justice

unshackled. It is only during working hours that they are so treated. I do not think there is anything very cruel about the treatment. It is merely a way of dealing with the convicts when they refuse to work.


Agnes Campbell Macphail: If they change their
mind and want to work are they allowed to do so?


Ernest Lapointe: Oh, yes, we are pleased
to send them to work.


Agnes Campbell Macphail: That might be a good thing to apply to people outside the penitentiaries.


Ernest Lapointe: Yes, even to members of parliament.


Agnes Campbell Macphail: What is meant by
"paddling"?


Ernest Lapointe: Spanking with a small
leather strap. It is not at all a nine-tails-cat.


An Iron. MEMBER:: A cat-o'-nine-tails.


Ernest Lapointe: I put it the other way round.


Robert James Manion: You put the tails on the wrong end.


Ernest Lapointe: My hon. friend knows
what I mean. It is a small leather strap about eighteen inches long. It is applied to convicts under very extraordinary circumstances when they have been rebellious or guilty of beastly action, and it is done on the warden's orders. There is nothing cruel about it; it is rather the humiliation that hurts.


Samuel William Jacobs: My hon. friend as a former school teacher ought not to require an explanation of what spanking means.


Agnes Campbell Macphail: I never found it did
very much good. I found other ways worked very much better. I think it is degrading both to the prisoner and to the official who spanks him. It must put the guard in an awkward position with regard to the prisoner, and I should think it would make the prisoner rebellious. It does not look very good to me.


Ernest Lapointe: I agree it is not a pleasant thing for either. I do not like it myself,-


James Dew Chaplin: When did they do it to you?


Ernest Lapointe: -but the wardens are
very often placed in a very difficult situation, and really I think we ought to give them discretion in these matters.


James Dew Chaplin: Why not blindfold them both?


Ernest Lapointe: Apart from that, may I say to my hon. friend that conditions in our penitentiaries are not so bad as they are sometimes painted. Many reforms have been put into effect, and statistics show that only eight per cent of first offenders ever come back to the penitentiaries. Ladies and gentlemen from other countries, especially from the United States, have visited our penitentiaries, and I think we have reason to be proud of what they have stated as a result of their inspection. There are not many penitentiaries better managed than our own. Of course a good deal more can be done, and I assure my hon. friend that all her remarks are taken in very good spirit, and I will try, even quicker than she seems to expect, to meet at least some of her wishes-not all. I am free to admit that I do not agree with some of her recommendations, because I do not believe it would be in the interests of the administration of justice to adopt them.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Penitentiaries-to provide for the purchase of preferred class penitentiary site, and to begin erection of buildings, $150,000.
Arthur Edward Ross: Last session I proposed to the minister that in addition to getting this building and segregating these cases there should be also some examination of the boys to ascertain what started them on their criminal career. As I pointed out last year, there are some eight thousand juvenile delinquents in the Dominion of whom forty-six have now reached the penitentiary, some at the age of fifteen, others seventeen and eighteen. In my opinion there should be an investigation into the causes leading to this state of affairs; such an investigation could very well be made in the penitentiaries. The causes that have led to these forty-six boys finding themselves in the penitentiary would probably explain the delinquency of others. I hope that the minister will look into the matter. Now that this building is to be put up some steps should be taken in the direction I suggest. Last year I also pointed out the fallacy which prevails that these juvenile delinquents are for the most part foreigners; the fact is that they are Canadian born. I pointed out that delinquency had increased from 64 to 66 per cent, these delinquents having occurred amongst boj's who had not reached the higher stage of education. Surely something can be done in the way of investigating into the causes that have led to their condition.

Supply-Justice


James Dew Chaplin: Under this vote providing for the purchase of a penitentiary site, the minister might give us some information as to location and cost.


Ernest Lapointe: No decision has been
reached, but the site will be in the vicinity of the present Kingston penitentiary.


James Dew Chaplin: It seems a lot of money
to pay for a site alone-$150,000.


Ernest Lapointe: And also to begin the
erection of the building.


James Dew Chaplin: This is only to begin the erection of the building; it does not provide for anything further. How much will it cost?


Ernest Lapointe: I do not know what the site will cost. I must have the authority of parliament, and I shall need the money. My hon. friend seems to think it is a lot of money; that is what my colleagues tell me every time I try to give effect to the will of parliament. I am glad my hon. friend from Southeast Grey is present; she will realize that it is not so easy to get what we want.


James Dew Chaplin: What is the estimated
expenditure on the building?


Ernest Lapointe: We expect the site to
cost about $60,000 or $75,000, and the balance is to begin the erection of the building. To complete construction we shall have to ask parliament for a further Slim; it might cost $200,000 or $300,000.


James Dew Chaplin: Surely the minister does
not mean to tell us that he is starting out to buy a site on which to put up a building without knowing how far he is going or where the whole thing will end. There must be some plans for the building; he must know pretty well what it will cost. The minister should take the committee into his confidence and let us know, as far as he can, exactly what he has determined on as to the cost of the building and the cost of the site. He knows very well; he is not starting in the dark with this undertaking. His officers have, given him this information and he should have it.


Ernest Lapointe: The hon. member will
understand that this is not an ordinary public building for which a vote of parliament is asked; it is a building which will be erected by the inmates of the penitentiary. It is difficult to say exactly how much it will cost, for that very reason, that the work will not be carried on under ordinary circumstances. It will depend on how much work we shall be able to put on the building the first year, and so on. I really cannot tell how much it will cost, but I want the building.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Penitentiaries-to provide for the purchase of Lussier estate and other properties at St. Vincent de Paul, $450,000.
James Dew Chaplin: How much land is there
in this estate?


Ernest Lapointe: There are 327 acres, and apart from the Lussier estate there are properties just in front of the penitentiary and which have been asked for by the officers of the penitentiaries branch for years. They are absolutely needed. I cannot say exactly what amount will be involved because if necessary we shall have to expropriate and pay a reasonable price.


James Dew Chaplin: Has any agreement been
reached with respect to this 327 acres? Is there a price, or does the minister intend to expropriate, leaving the price to be determined by the court?


Ernest Lapointe: We cannot do anything before the money is voted by parliament.


Some hon. MEMBERS:: Carried.


James Dew Chaplin: It is not carried. The
minister knows whether he will expropriate the property or not.


Ernest Lapointe: I do not know how
much I dhall have to pay; it will depend upon the judgment of the court.


James Dew Chaplin: That is what I asked.
Does the minister intend to put the matter before the court? Does he intend to expropriate and allow the court to decide what the property is worth? Is that the proposition?


Ernest Lapointe: Probably, if it is impossible to come to a reasonable agreement. I shall have the superintendent and the officers of the penitentiary investigate, and if the reports were to the effect that we could secure better prices otherwise than by expropriation, I am not sure that we should not act upon such advice.


James Dew Chaplin: Has any offer been made for the property?


Ernest Lapointe: Yes.


James Dew Chaplin: A price has been named?


Ernest Lapointe: As regards the Lussier
estate, I understand that an offer was made years ago; the matter has been long pending.


James Dew Chaplin: I have a reason for asking these questions. Only yesterday or the day before we saw something similar in connection with the Department of Agriculture, and I have .been wondering whether the same thing will be repeated here.
Supply-Justice


Ernest Lapointe: When Inspector Fatt was acting warden at St. Vincent de Paul the property was offered for $100,000 but no action was taken.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Royal Canadian Mounted Police, $3,040,725.25.
Pay of force (including salaries of two constables, Ellesmere island district, at $2.25 per diem, to insure department against loss through death), $1,279,772.75.
Maintenance (including billeting, travelling expenses, forage, fuel and light, clothing, repairs and renewals, horses, ammunition, stationery, etc., medical, hospital, etc., transportation and freight, building repairs and renewals, contingencies and criminal investigations, $1,625,452.50.
To compensate members of the Royal Canadian Mounted Police for injuries received whilst in the performance of duty, $10,000.
To assist in enforcement of federal statutes, (expenditure chargeable to this vote shall be in connection with such federal police duties as may be defined by the governor in council upon recommendation of the Minister of Justice), $75,000.
To provide for special services in connection with the enforcement of the Opium and Narcotic Drug Act, $50,000.	_
To compensate Wm. Pinsky for medical attendance on his child who was fatally wounded by police dogs, at Fort Resolution, $500.-Total, $3,040,725.25.
George Gibson Coote: Would it not be possiblecertainly it would foe much better-to list each one of the items separately under this vote? It is not satisfactory to the committee to deal with this vote in its present form. When the estimates are prepared next year it would oe better, I submit, to have each item listed separately.


Ernest Lapointe: My hon. friend may be right; we have merely followed the usual practice.


George Gibson Coote: Yes, but we are following
a lot of bad practices in this house. In some cases whole pages are included under one vote and very often the chairman or somebody else says, "carried," before the committee has had an opportunity to look over the different items comprising the vote. I repeat, it would be much better if these items were listed separately; if that were done members of the committee would have a better chance of looking over the items to see whether or not they are necessary.


James Shaver Woodsworth: Some two or three veeks ago I asked a question with regard to the activities of the mounted police and the information which they were securing with regard to various bodies, especially the communist organization. The minister stated that it was not possible for him to give the information as to the activities of that body.
fMr. Chaplin.]
I would point out to the minister that this is definitely a political body; my own organization in Winnipeg has had to fight this party in municipal and also in federal elections, and as a matter of fact at present we have one communist member of the Winnipeg city council. I should like to ask the minister why the Liberals should have exclusive knowledge concerning the activities of such political bodies as these. If anyone is to have privileges of this kind I think all political parties should have the opportunity of learning what are the actual aims and activities of the communist organization.


Ernest Lapointe: My hon. friend is wrong; the Liberals have no knowledge of that kind.


James Shaver Woodsworth: Then the government.


Ernest Lapointe: No; the Minister of
Justice has that knowledge, but he does not have it as a Liberal.


Mr. WTOODS WORTH:: I presume it is
quite possible that some of the information in the possession of the Minister of Justice might seep through to the Minister of Justice as a member of the cabinet or as a member of the Liberal party. We are told that this is a revolutionary body and I understand that certain spies are maintained who become members of that party. A few years ago I knew of cases where these spies actually incited disorder. That seems to me a very questionable practice. I know that in certain labour meetings when a man advocates disorder other members of that body are against him; he is suspected to be a stool-pigeon, and probably in the employ of the government. It is an intolerable situation if the government, through its spy system in this way, lends itself to the activities of agents provocateurs. If these people are really dangerous it is only right that the minister should let the country know the extent of the danger. So far as I am concerned I think this is a case of a bogy man held in reserve, to be trotted out occasionally by the reactionary elements in the community. I do not see that we are helping the cause of good government in Canada by maintaining a secret police system which is constantly spying on certain groups.


Ernest Lapointe: As my hon. friend
knows, that is not the purpose of the mounted police; they are located at different places throughout the country to enforce the federal statutes, and if in the course of their activities, as my hon. friend calls them, while they are doing their work something happens which

Supply-Justice
they think they should report to their superintendent as concerning the peace and order of the country, I do not think there is any-think wrong if they do so. I do not think there is ground for complaint that any persons have been persecuted or troubled in this way, at least since I have been in control of the mounted police. If my hon. friend has instances to quote in which he believes that even these communists, with whom I know he does not sympathize and with whom I have no sympathy, have been unfairly treated, I should be only too glad to have him give me that information.


John Evans: There is one matter which
I think comes under this vote, which I should like to bring up now. Recently the premier of Saskatchewan stated that it was up to the federal authorities to initiate the prosecution of Harry Bronfman, that the onus was upon the federal government and not upon the provincial government at all. Again I would like to ask why this was not done, following the recommendation of the royal commission?


Ernest Lapointe: I think' I have already
explained this matter, but I have no objection to saying again that the Minister of National Revenue, as has been stated, sent to the Department of Justice the documents and the record with regard to this special case as well as those concerning many other cases. The offence charged had been committed in 1920. On the facts a prosecution might be entered, although the evidence was contradictory, with three witnesses on one side and three on the other. The offence was under the Customs Act, for having attempted to bribe officers in order to prevent them from stopping trucks which were coming from the United States to Canada, not for the purpose of smuggling goods into Canada but rather for the purpose of smuggling liquor from Canada into the United States. There is a provision in the Customs Act which compels any such trucks or motor cars to report to the Canadian customs when they enter Canada, and when that is not done the car is liable to seizure. The Customs Act provides also that any attempt to bribe a customs officer for the purpose of preventing him from doing his duty is an indictable offence subject to a penalty of fine and imprisonment. However, under another section of that act the prosecution must be instituted within three years after the commission of the offence. In this case the offence, as I have stated, was committed in 1920 and came to the notice of the Minister of National Revenue only as a result of the investigation of 1927, seven years
afterwards. Therefore the law officers came to the conclusion that this man should not be prosecuted under the provisions of the act, because of the statute of limitations. That is all.


John Evans: Then the case must have
been outlawed when that recommendation was made ?


Ernest Lapointe: I am responsible only
for the Department of Justice; I had nothing to do with that recommendation.


Samuel William Jacobs: I might tell my hon. friend that the case was outlawed three years before the investigation by the commission.


John Evans: Why was that used as an excuse for not prosecuting for over twelve months'?


Ernest Lapointe: When the files' of the Department of National Revenue were sent to the Department of Justice we gave instructions to have the man Knowles interviewed immediately in order to obtain his version of the affair. It was reported that he was ill at the time and could not see the counsel whom we had appointed for that purpose, and I suppose that is why it was stated that the delay was due to his illness. That had nothing to do with the legal side of the case; the matter was thoroughly investigated and it was decided that we could not prosecute.


Milton Neil Campbell: The Minister of National Revenue (Mr. Euler) showed me a letter from the Department of Justice in which doubt was expressed as to whether or not a conviction could be secured against Bronfman. I did not understand that letter to say that the door was closed; the letter intimated that an action could be taken for bribery under the common law.


Ernest Lapointe: The officers of the department found that a prosecution could not be instituted under the Customs Act and they tried to bring it in under the common law where the statute of limitations would not apply. Under ordinary circumstances prosecutions may ibe instituted1 either under the statutes or under the common law, but the officers of the department came to the conclusion that when the statute stated definitely ' that there was a limitation of three years then we could not prosecute, and I agreed with that finding. If the Minister of National Revenue had desired to follow the line of least resistance a charge could have been laid, but it would be almost immoral to lay a charge against a man when it was felt that he could not be convicted.
Supply-Justice


Milton Neil Campbell: I think it is unfair for the minister to say that the man could not be convicted. The letter which I saw simply expressed the legal opinion that it was extremely improbable that a conviction could be obtained.


Ernest Lapointe: The remarks which I have made are my own conclusions.


Milton Neil Campbell: I do not think the
minister has any right to make such a final decision. My complaint is that the offender was given the benefit of the doubt in this case.


Ernest Lapointe: No.


Milton Neil Campbell: I think the law should have had the benefit, of the doubt. There is a great deal of suspicion from one end to the other of this country that because this man was wealthy and was pretty close to the Liberal party he has been-


Ernest Lapointe: That is most unfair.


Milton Neil Campbell: -able to commit an offence and go free. That fact has been one of the contributing factors to the defeat of the government in Saskatchewan; the Saskatchewan government was not able to explain the non-prosecution of this man.


Ernest Lapointe: If that is the reason for the defeat.of the government my hon. friend should not boast about it.


Milton Neil Campbell: I said that it was one of the contributing factors, and I think I am doing good service to the minister and to his party by suggesting that this thing be cleared up. Many people in Saskatchewan believe that this man has been unduly protected. Very serious charges were made in the campaign-I cannot quote them as facts, but they were made by distinguished members of the bar who have been elected as representatives of the people of Saskatchewan-regarding contributions to campaign funds, and all that kind of thing. It is absurd to take the position that where there is any doubt the offender shall be given the benefit of that doubt; I think the law should have the benefit. The suspicion will always remain that because this man was wealthy and had a close association with the Liberal party he was immune to prosecution.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Royal Canadian Mounted Police-Pay of force-further amount required including an amount to provide for the pay of Inspector James Taylor from September 1st to 15th, 1928, inclusive, $2,800.83.	_
Maintenance-further amount required, in-duding an amount to provide for ration allow-mce of Inspector James Taylor from September 1st to 15th, 1928, inclusive, $60,016.80.
Richard Bedford Bennett: I think this would be a good time to ask the minister what has been done in connection with the death of Bilodeau. It has been alleged that he was murdered and his wife is claiming compensation, but so far as I know, nothing has been received up to the present time. I should like to have a public statement from the minister as to the present status of this matter.


Ernest Lapointe: A claim was made for compensation but, as my hon. friend knows, it was necessary that it be sent to the Department of External Affairs. They have communicated with Washington but the United States has refused to do anything in the matter. It is for the provincial government to decide as to the prosecution of the man, but I have been told that those who should have facilitated this prosecution have been rather inclined to take no action. Nothing new has developed in the matter.


Richard Bedford Bennett: I am advised that the government of this country paid a claim for the death of an American citizen under somewhat similar circumstances. This man was killed on the border some two or three years ago, and a claim was made through the American government, which was paid by the Canadian authorities.


Ernest Lapointe: I will inquire into the matter.


Richard Bedford Bennett: I will get the particulars during the evening recess.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.

[Stage Direction]
Department of the Interior-Scientific Institutions-International Boundaries - Expenses connected with the survey and demarcation of international boundaries, $35,000.
Robert Gardiner: Is there any more of this work to be done before it is completed?


Charles A. Stewart: It is going on continuously. It is a joint commission of the two governments and from year to year they make fresh markings and keep the lines properly marked and up to date.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Geological Survey-For explorations, surveys and investigations, wages of explorers, topographers and others, $230,000.
For publication of English and French editions of reports, maps, illustrations, etc., $55,000.
For maintenance of offices and museum, expenses of special exhibitions pertaining to natural resources, purchase of books of reference, miscellaneous assistance and contingencies, $60,000.
For museum equipment, $15,000.
For purchase of specimens, $3,000.-Total, $363,000.

Supply-Interior
Mr. SHORT:: I see that last year $205,000 was voted for explorations, surveys and investigations, and so forth. How much of that was spent?


Charles A. Stewart: Practically
all of it. It covers the payments of the various parties who are in the field on geological survey work.


John Anderson Fraser: Has the department more parties in the field this year?


Charles A. Stewart: We have
three more parties this year to go into northern Manitoba.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Indians-Indian education, including the construction of school buildings, $2,240,500.
Charles A. Stewart: I was to give some information to hon. gentlemen about the new schools to be built for Indian educational work, and where they are to be located. They are as follows:
Blue Quills, Alberta, $50,000.
St. Bruno's, Alberta, $20,000.
Wabasea, Alberta, $15,000.
Providence, Northwest territories, $15,000.
St. George's, British Columbia, $10,000.
Alert Bay, British Columbia, $70,000.
Cecilia Jeffrey, Ontario (to finish), $15,000.
Brandon, Manitoba (new school), $100,000.
Birtle, Manitoba (new school), $80,000.
Beauval, Saskatchewan. $25,000.
Old Sun. Alberta, $40,000.
George Gordons, Touchwood Hills, Saskatchewan, $90,000.
This is a school which we have to reconstruct.


William Russell Fansher: The
minister mentioned a new school at Punnichy. Was there an investigation into the cause of the fire?


Charles A. Stewart: There was an investigation, but it was very difficult to establish the cause of that fire. It was supposed to have started from a cigarette, but that has not been proven. We have not been able to ascertain the exact cause.


Murray MacLaren: How many schools are there for Indians in New Brunswick?


Charles A. Stewart: I do not think we have any boarding schools in New Brunswick.. As my hon. friend knows, we built one in Nova Scotia about a year ago. We have any number or day schools in the eastern provinces.


William Russell Fansher: Is this an enlargement of the previous school at Punnichy?


Charles A. Stewart: It will accommodate the same number of pupils, but it will be a little more modern than the old school.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Government of the Northwest Territories- Salaries and expenses connected with the administration of the territories, including the erection of buildings, investigation work, schools, hospitals, relief to destitute, maintenance of prisoners and insane patients, administration of the North West Game Act and the Wood Buffalo park, etc., $190,000.
Arctic exploration and administration of Eskimo affairs, salaries and contingencies, equipment and supplies; relief to _ destitute; schools; hospitals and medical services; erection of buildings; maintenance of prisoners and insane patients; education; travelling expenses, etc., $190,000.	_
Expenses connected with the purchase, herding and maintenance of reindeer for the N.W.T. including wages, building of corrals, etc., $50,000.
To provide for the payment for beaver pelts purchased as a relief measure, frofti certain Indians and half-bTeeds in the Mackenzie district, under authority of P.C. 2146, dated 28th November. 1928; also for the transportation of same and incidental and unforeseen expenses connected with the sale thereof, $135,000.
To provide for the revision of the North West Territories Act and ordinances, $6,000.- Total, $571,000.
William Russell Fansher: Have we passed item 222 in regard to Indians in Manitoba, Saskatchewan, Alberta and the Northwest Territories, covering implements, tools, field and garden seeds, and so forth?


Charles A. Stewart: We passed all those items this morning. I have no objection if the hon. member wants to say something about the matter.


William Russell Fansher: What
provision is being made for the settlement of outstanding Indian accounts for seed grain, tools, live stock and other supplies which have not yet been paid for? I have had this brought to my attention in the last three or four years. Promises were made by one of the Indian agents in Saskatchewan that these matters would be looked into. Orders were given to farmers, merchants, lumber dealers and others for live stock, seed grain and materials which were supposed to be paid for by the Indian agent or by the department. What provision is being made for the payment of these acoounts, some of which run into very large sums of money? As we all know, seed grain and similar commodities are sold for cash. Some of these goods, it seems to me, were obtained on false pretences if these accounts are not going to be paid.


Charles A. Stewart: During the
period of the war when greater production
Supply-Interior

was being urged on the farmers of Canada undoubtedly a great deal of grain, horses, cattle and implements were purchased for the Indians on the reserves. Unfortunately I have been selected to clean up the mess. I have been forced to this conclusion, that in every case where the creditor is able to produce an order we are in duty bound to pay the account. We have paid all that it was possible to pay out of the band funds available. I was in hopes that these accounts had been pretty nearly all cleaned up, except those still in dispute as to whether the transaction took place. One of the principles we insist upon is that we will not recognize now, and we have not for the past two years, any transaction with an Indian unless the creditor can produce an order signed by the agent. In every case where he is able to produce such an order we are prepared to settle, and in some cases where the evidence is clear that the transaction actually took place and that the creditor has given value for the claim, we will try to make an adjustment.


William Russell Fansher: Some of these orders are not in the possession of those who delivered the goods on the orders. They met the principal of that institution either at Regina or elsewhere in Saskatchewan and produced their orders and were asked to leave them with the commissioner. These orders have not been returned to them, and in many cases payment has not been made on them.


Charles A. Stewart: As my hon. friend is in one section of Saskatchewan that is particularly bad in that respect, I would ask him if he would be good enough whenever he comes across a case of that kind to forward me the particulars and we will have a special investigation and see if we cannot make an adjustment.


William Russell Fansher: I am
very pleased to have that word from the minister because I have frequently taken this up with the department and there seemed to be no way in which a settlemlenti could be made. I might also point out that a settlement has been made of some of these accounts on a percentage basis, part of the account being paid and the balance running on for some two or three or four years. Would the minister's statement apply to these cases also?


Charles A. Stewart: Certainly.
It applies to all unpaid accounts.


John Anderson Fraser: Can the minister tell us
something about this $50,000 for a herd of reindeer?
'Mr. C. A. Stewart.]


Charles A. Stewart: To make it as brief and as comprehensive as possible, the previous experiment in Canada in Baffin's land ended somewhat disastrously because the reindeer were not put on proper feeding ground. We have therefore had Porsild Brothers, who have been trained in the investigation of feeding ground for reindeer, make an investigation.


John Anderson Fraser: Have they made a report?


Charles A. Stewart: Yes.


John Anderson Fraser: Is it printed?


Charles A. Stewart: We nave it available in the department.


John Anderson Fraser: Will it be printed and distributed?


Charles A. Stewart: Yes. We
sent Porsild Brothers into Alaska and into the far northwest territory among the Eskimos along Coronation gulf and they spent a year and a half in there and reported that there is a splendid feeding ground for reindeer in that locality. We propose buying reindeer delivered in that locality.
I move, Mr. Chairman, that the committee rise, report progress and ask leave to sit again this day.


[Stage Direction]
Motion agreed to.
Progress reported.

William Lyon Mackenzie King: I gather from conversations with the leaders of hon. gentlemen opposite that hon. members would be agreeable to sitting until midnight to-night, and I would therefore move:
That this house shall not be adjourned at eleven o'clock to-day.
Mr. EVAN'S: I would ask the Prime Minister if he will set the time for adjournment for 12 o'clock.


William Lyon Mackenzie King: I indicated that we would sit until midnight.


John Evans: Is that in the motion?


William Lyon Mackenzie King: I will give my word.


John Evans: That is all right.


Milton Neil Campbell: I object to the motion,
Mr. Speaker. Many of us have been in this building since half past eight this morning and we have put in all the time that we should

Supply

Interior
be asked to do. There are many important estimates still to come up, we have complaints to register, and we must be on the job almost every moment of the time. I do not feel that it is fair to ask us to sit any longer than we have been sitting.


[Stage Direction]
Motion agreed to.
Milton Neil Campbell: Do I understand that
the motion to sit beyond eleven was carried? Is not unanimous consent and notice necessary ?


Hewitt Bostock: No notice is necessary
under standing order 45. when it concerns the time of meeting or adjournment of the house. Standing order 45 reads:
Forty eight hours' notice shall be given of a motion for leave to present a bill, resolution or address, for the appointment of any committee, or for placing a question on the order paper, but this rule shall not apply to bills after their introduction, or to private bills, or to the times of meeting or adjournment of the house.



NATURAL RESOURCES OF MANITOBA

William Lyon Mackenzie King: I beg to table the report
of the royal commission on the transfer of the natural resources of Manitoba.

The house in committee of supply, Mr. Johnston in the chair.
Progress reported.
At six o'clock the committee took recess.
After Recess
The committee resumed at eight o'clock.



DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

[Stage Direction]
Government of the northwest territories, $571,000.
Charles A. Stewart: The hon. member for Cariboo asked a question before we rose at six o'clock but the offices were closed and I was unable to get the information. The question had reference to the reindeer transaction. I shall be glad to give him the information on another item in the supplementaries.


Richard Bedford Bennett: Only one observation I have to make and that is as to the destitution of the Eskimos in remote sections of the country. I brought the matter to the attention of the government last year, and I may say that the Rev. W. G. Walton, with whom the minister has been in communication, is very anxious that it shall receive consideration by parliament. His view is that a large
number of people are suffering privation and practically starvation by reason of the lack of food, and that they might have their condition greatly improved if provision were made for reindeer. Before we rose at six o'clock the minister had not made any general statement as to the intention of the government in that regard and perhaps he will do so now, especially in view of the fact that there is some talk of establishing a beaver farm in a distant section of the country. The transportation difficulties would be considerable, hawing regard to the point of location and the distance between such a farm and the Eskimos. This reverend gentleman is of the opinion that if reindeer were introduced and looked after these people would not run the risk of starvation.


Charles A. Stewart: We have that very much in mind. The missionary is stationed on the east coast of Hudson bay and the bands in that vicinity have experienced considerable difficulty. This year we are sending an officer to an island up there-I have foigotten the name-where application has been made for a beaver farm. He will investigate the possibilities and we hope we shall be able to provide sufficient food for these people. It is expected eventuality to give the Eskimo families a certain number of reindeer to provide them with meat, clothing and milk. With regard to the introduction of reindeer into the east of the delta of the Mackenzie river I shall be glad to give information later on in connection with the supplementaries as to what we are paying. We propose to have them driven across from Alaska and landed in Canada before we pay for them.


William Thomas Lucas: What is the Eskimo population of Canada?


Charles A. Stewart: Between
seven and seven and a' half thousand.


Richard Bedford Bennett: What has been the decrease in recent years?


Charles A. Stewart: It is difficult to say; there is no authentic method of ascertaining the number. Mounted police are now stationed on the east coast and this year we are establishing a post in Coronation gulf, so that we ought to have shortly a better census of the Eskimo population.


Richard Bedford Bennett: Of this total of 8571,000, how much is for salaries? I am told that the real fact is that most of it goes that way.


Charles A. Stewart: No, it is not all for salaries.
Supply

Interior


Richard Bedford Bennett: I did not say all, but the major portion.


Charles A. Stewart: It is veTy expensive sending officers there.


Richard Bedford Bennett: I suggest to the minister that he drop the item of $8,000 providing for the revision of the Northwest Territories Act and ordinances. In view of what we know about the number of officials, especially lawyers, connected with the Department of the Interior, surely the minister has in the department a sufficient number of men to . revise the ordinances and put them into reasonable form without having $6,000 voted to provide a job for someone. I put that to him straight; that is all there is to it.


Charles A. Stewart: I am willing to drop it; there are two lawyers in the department.


John Campbell Elliott: I move that the vote be reduced by $6,000.


[Stage Direction]
Amendment agreed to.
John Anderson Fraser: In connection with the item of $135,000 to provide for the payment for beaver pelts, the minister might tell us how he fixes the price.


Charles A. Stewart: There is a closed season for beaver applicable to ail hunters and trappers in the northwest territories, but. we found that this created a great hardship on the Indian population, and we have arranged to allow the Indians to take beaver. We propose that they shall bring the pelts to the mounted police who are stationed in the territory and turn them over at a fixed sum. We sell the skins to recoup ourselves, and in this way we keep close tab on the taking of beaver in the territory so that none but Indians shall trap them.


John Anderson Fraser: How do you fix the price to the Indian?


Charles A. Stewart: It varies between $12 and $25, the latter price being paid for.large prime beaver.


John Anderson Fraser: A beaver at the present time is worth about $40.


Charles A. Stewart: Yes.


John Anderson Fraser: So that the department makes the difference between $25 and $40.


Charles A. Stewart: It will require more than that to recoup us for bringing out the skins and selling them, and that it really more than the Hudson's Bay Company, Revillon Freres and other companies are paying for them.


Richard Bedford Bennett: I should think the right thing would be to send them to the fur auction and have them sold off.


Charles A. Stewart: They are
all sold at public auction.


Mr. McRAE:: I would like to ask the minister what protection is afforded in tho case of these buffalo straying out of the park. The buffalo come to Fort Vermilion and frighten the people very much, and they want to know if it is all right to shoot the buffalo in self-defence.


Charles A. Stewart: I am afraid it is not; if they will report them to our wardens they will try to drive them back to the park.


John Evans: I should like to know if
some such arrangements as that made with regard to the beaver skins can be made with regard to the buffalo hides?


Charles A. Stewart: The buffalo are slaughtered at the Wainwright park; those slaughtered in the north will have to be killed under permit, and the government will retain the hides.


John Anderson Fraser: The purchase of beaver is
prohibited in the territory?


Charles A. Stewart: Only Indians are allowed to take beaver.


John Anderson Fraser: What do you do about
the white trappers?
Mr. (STEWART (Edmonton):	That is
prohibited.


John Anderson Fraser: You have had no experience in the bootlegging of beaver skins?


Charles A. Stewart: This is the first season the prohibition has been in effect.


John Anderson Fraser: We had prohibited season
in British Columbia at one time, and the government got into a great deal of trouble in regard to the bootlegging of beaver skins.
I think therefore that the minister is inviting quite a bit of trouble.


Charles A. Stewart: I quite appreciate that fact. There has been a closed reason in the province of Alberta and, as you know, most of the skins go up the Mackenzie river and through Edmonton. There has been a closed season in effect in Saskatchewan also, and we thought it well, in order to preserve the beaver, to establish a closed season in the territories in order to have a uniform law throughout the whole area. Unfortunately, however, we have had a very serious condition prevailing in connection with

Supply-Interior
our Indians and we were forced to allow them to take 'beaver, largely to provide food. Last year they had a bad epidemic along the Mackenzie river; we know we lost three hundred Indians through disease and they were unable to make any provision for the winter, so we were forced to lift the embargo as far as the Indians were concerned. We are trying to prevent any beaver being taken out of the territory except those coming through the hands of the mounted police, so we will know whether there is any .bootlegging.


John Anderson Fraser: What protection have you in case a white trapper takes a certain amount of beaver skins and turns them over to an Indian to dispose of?


Charles A. Stewart: The heads
of families are restricted to ten beavers, but the situation described by my hon. friend might arise and it would be very difficult to detect. However, we have that restriction and we can only do our best to see that it is enforced.


Robert Gardiner: And no other company
is permitted to buy these skins at all?


Charles A. Stewart: No.


Richard Bedford Bennett: What was the cause of
the death of these Indians?


Charles A. Stewart: There was
a very severe epidemic of influenza.


Milton Neil Campbell: Has the minister any
leason to believe that the Eskimo population is either increasing or decreasing?


Charles A. Stewart: We must
admit that we have very little authentic information as to the Eskimos, but so far as we know there are about seven thousand of them in that country all told. As we extend the mounted police posts in the Eskimo district we will get a better idea of the size of the population, but as far as we know they are not decreasing.


Milton Neil Campbell: Is anything being done by the government to educate the Eskimos?


Charles A. Stewart: Yes, the same system is in effect with regard to Eskimos as we have in force with regard to Indians; the church schools are among the Eskimos, although not to a very great extent as yet. At the mouth of the Mackenzie river, at Herschel island and at the delta there is a Roman Catholic school as well as an Anglican school, which was established many years ago, and a
school is being established to the north of Hudson bay, at Chesterfield inlet. They get a grant from the government, and the work is carried on by these two churches.


Milton Neil Campbell: I suppose the pupils are boarded at these schools?


Charles A. Stewart: Yes, and they have day schools as well, carried on in tents located where the Eskimos are fishing in the summer season; but as in the Indian work, much better results can be obtained by boarding schools.


Milton Neil Campbell: With regard to the Eskimos, I have understood from many articles I have read that there has been rather a lowering in their standard of living; as the game is killed off they have to resort to other methods in order to keep themselves alive. They have lost some of their primitive arts in connection with the making of clothing, the packing of foods and the use of the bow and arrow, and this has entailed additional hardship upon the Eskimo population. I wonder if the minister could tell us if he has any information upon that point.


Charles A. Stewart: We are told by our own officers who visit the Arctic that the arming of the Eskimo perhaps has not been altogether a good thing. Formerly when he missed a seal that seal was left alive, but now when he shoots a seal it often reaches a hole in the ice through which it gets back to the water and of course is not recoverable. The Eskimo is perhaps a little bit more clever than the ordinary northern Indian. He becomes an expert shot; he is a persistent hunter; he follows the game and builds his own home wherever night overtakes him, but in spite of that he may experience just a little more difficulty in obtaining a livelihood, and of course it is not good for him to attempt to live on the food of the white man, which usually brings illness. On the whole, the Eskimo is a very apt pupil; he learns quickly; he is of a mechanical turn of mind and will adapt himself to new conditions very rapidly, I think much more so than his Indian brother.


Milton Neil Campbell: Some of the explorers, Stefanson among them, have emphasized the importance of the musk-ox, yet we have been told that in many districts in the north the musk-ox has been killed off entirely by the Eskimos, who do not seem to realize what it means to themselves. They seem to believe that because the game comes from some far off land it will come again in the future. Has anything been done by the government in this regard?
Supply-Interior


Charles A. Stewart: That idea is quite prevalent amongst the Eskimos, because they lead a nomadic life. The game in the north, as well as in the southern and western parts of the country, seems to enjoy periods of fairly large production; then they move to other sections, their numbers are greatly diminished and they have an off season. I think that has engendered in the minds of the Eskimos the idea that perhaps these animals will come back, but there is ample evidence that the musk-ox has been much farther south than we find it now. There is a considerable herd1 of musk-ox cm Ellesmere island but it was found that large parties were coming across from Greenland and slaughtering the animals. We have established posts there to stop that kind of thing, and although we have no definite information we believe that the herds are increasing.


Milton Neil Campbell: What is being done to educate the Eskimo as to the necessity of conserving the game?


Charles A. Stewart: That has
been the main idea of introducing the reindeer. The history of Greenland under the administration of the Danish government shows that the reindeer has been the salvation of the northern peoples in that country. We propose to introduce the reindeer into our northern territories so that the Eskimo may be supplied with food and clothing as the farmer on the prairie obtains like supplies from his sheep or cattle, and we believe in that way the Eskimo will be taught the necessity of preserving game. As a rule the Eskimo and the Indian do not slaughter the game. It is the white man who is the vandal and who destroys the wild animals; he takes all the pelts he can gather without any thought as to reproduction.


Milton Neil Campbell: Is that Wood buffalo
park on the bank of the Mackenzie river?


Charles A. Stewart: No, on the Slave river.


Milton Neil Campbell: Could the minister
give us the number of buffalo in that park, and how they are getting along?


Charles A. Stewart: They must be increasing because the hon. member for North Vancouver has just asked me if we are going to provide any protection to those animals which stray out into the settled areas around Fort Vermilion. This park is not fenced, but as far as we can learn from the reports of the herders the 6,000 animals which were taken from Waimwright are doing very
TMr. Campbell.]
well. The original herd consisted of 1,500 heads, very large and1 robust animals, and the importation from Wainwright seemed to take up with them very acceptably.


Milton Neil Campbell: They are not being
domesticated at all?


Charles A. Stewart: No.


Milton Neil Campbell: They are not fenced
up?


Charles A. Stewart: No.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Dominion Lands and Parks-Salaries of the Dominion lands outside service, $680,000.
Dominion lands contingencies, etc., $205,000.
Amount required to pay the fees of the board of examiners for D.L.S. of the secretary and of the sub-examiners and for travelling expenses, stationery, printing, rent of room and furniture, etc. (The fees of Messrs. F. H. Peters, W. M. Tobey and Harry B. Parry, members of the board, and J. A. Cote, secretary, are to be paid out of this sum), $2,000.
To assist in publishing the transactions of the association of Dominion land surveyors, $125.
Protection of timber, tree culture, inspection and management of forest reserves, surveys of forest resources and research in forestry and forest products, etc., $1,574,313.
Grant to Canadian forestry association, $4,000.
For investigation of water and power resources, including the Dominion hydrometric survey ond for the administration of the Dominion Water-Power, Irrigation and Reclamation acts, $500,000.
To cover professional assistance engaged by the governor in council to assist the departmental officers who are advising re international and boundary waterway questions, $15,000.
Amount required to meet expenses of Lake of the Woods Control Board, $10,000.
To provide for the expenses connected with Canadian national parks, historic sites, care of indigents in the parks, etc., and to reimburse the provincial government for the salaries of police magistrates at Banff and at Jasper, $1,358,000.
Administration of the Migratory Birds Convention Act, $58,825.
To provide for the construction of the Golden-Revelstoke highway (revote), $150,000.
Engraving, lithographing, printing and preparation of maps, plans, reports and kindred publications of the Dominion, including salaries and necessary materials for same, etc., $271,960.
Costs of litigation and legal expenses, $20,000.
Ordnance, admiralty and railway lands:- salaries and expenses, $28,270.
Grant to Alpine Club of Canada, $1,000.
To pay Mrs. E. S. Forbes a compassionate allowance equal to one-half of the salary of her husband, payable monthly, $1,050.
Amount required to pay salaries and expenses connected with seed grain and relief collections and half of expenses of seed grain and relief adjustment board, etc., $47,460.

Supply-Interior
To provide for expenses connected with the supervisory mining engineer's office due chiefly to the recent mining activities in northern Manitoba and northern Saskatchewan, $104,565.
To provide for the expenses connected with the commission appointed, under the Inquiries Act, to report on the question of the administration and control of the natural resources of the province of Manitoba, including services of accountants, engineers, technical advisers, clerks, reporters and assistants, etc., $35,000.- Total, $5,066,568.
John Evans: Would the minister advise the committee as to the present status of the. negotiations for the return to the provinces of their natural resources? About this time last year the Prime Minister stated that the question would be dealt with after the close of the last session. Since that time a conference has been held and we understand the bases have been arrived at upon which the natural resources are to be returned.


Charles A. Stewart: A conference was held since the close of last session and, as my hon. friend knows, a commission was appointed in regard to the province of Manitoba, the report of which was laid upon the table of the house to-day by the Prime Minister. During the discussion at that conference the province of Saskatchewan made it plain that as far as they were concerned they were not prepared to acquiesce in the return of the natural resources unless they were guaranteed the full subsidy when it would be earned. The Prime Minister offered the present subsidy to the provinces of Saskatchewan and Alberta, but it was to terminate with that amount; that is, for all time to come the present subsidy would be paid without any increase. As I have said, in the case of Saskatchewan the Premier felt that they should have the full subsidy. The Premier of Alberta asked for time to consider the matter, and so far as I know he has not decided to accept this proposition, although I would not say that it has been rejected absolutely.


Murray MacLaren: Does that item of contingencies cover an amount for the Fort Howe park?


Charles A. Stewart: Yes, an
amount of $10,000 is being provided.


Robert Gardiner: Are homesteaders being permitted to go in and settle any distance from the railway in the Peace River district?


Charles A. Stewart: They are
not prohibited from settling wherever they desire; if the land is surveyed and open for homesteading, we take the application.


Robert Gardiner: Does not the minister think that that is a rather poor policy in view of the fact that we may be called upon to provide railway transportation at a future date?


Charles A. Stewart: There was a time in my life when I felt that homestead- % ing should be prohibited beyond thirty miles from a railway, but having been so intimately in contact with these matters I have come to realize that people cannot be stopped from going into such areas. If we made a reserved area they would simply go in and squat, and we would have the difficulty of adjusting the squatters' claims. A large number of people are going down the Peace river, between Keg river and Fort Vermilion, to take up land. My hon. friend* knows that they will be very many miles from a railway, but we are being asked to make further surveys in that territory.


William Thomas Lucas: Will the minister give an explanation of the increase of $50,000 in salaries?


Charles A. Stewart: We have
been forced to employ additional homestead inspectors in order to keep up with the demand. Last year was one of the heaviest years in registration of homesteads we have had since I came to the department, and it . was found necessary to employ fifty-three additional clerks.


William Thomas Lucas: Would the minister give the number of homesteads taken up last year?


Charles A. Stewart: I shall be glad to answer any other questions while that information is being looked up.


William Thomas Lucas: And also the number of
abandoned homesteads.


Charles A. Stewart: I can tell my hon. friend at once that I will not be able to give him that information.


John Anderson Fraser: Would the minister give the committee some information as to the vote of '$150,000 which is being provided for the construction of the Golden-Revelstoke highway? How much money was spent on that last year and under what arrangement with the British Columbia government is the road being constructed?


Charles A. Stewart: As my hon.
friend knows, there was a proposal to construct the highway on the grade of the Canadian Pacific through Glacier park, but after we had investigated the matter we came to
Supply-Interior

the conclusion that this would be a very dangerous highway, very difficult to maintain and costly to build. It was estimated that the cost would be in the neighbourhood of 8800,000. In all probability we would not be able to use it until the end of June or the beginning of Jdly, on account of snow, and . in the summer season there wouild be difficulty with Slides. When the matter was discussed with the British Columbia government, they informed us that they proposed to build the roaid u,p the Columbia.


John Anderson Fraser: Around the big bend.


Charles A. Stewart: Not all the way, but part of the way around to meet the requirements of settlement going in there. We came to the conclusion that although the mileage would be considerably longer, the highway in that section would be much safer, and we offered to contribute the $750,000 it would cost us to build through the park. That would be our contribution towards the construction of the road from Reve'lstoke to Golden.


John Anderson Fraser: How many miles?


Charles A. Stewart: I am speaking from memory, but I think it is over 150 miles.


John Anderson Fraser: There is no doubt about
that.


Charles A. Stewart: We were
to pay on a fifty-fifty basis until our $750,000 was exhausted, and they were to undertake to complete the road. Since the provincial government has changed, I have had a discussion with the provincial Minister of Public WTorks and some of the other members of the government including the premier himself. It was suggested that the new government were not very keen to go on with the proposition. Later on, however, they decided to continue the work and we are providing the money in order to be able to pay our share. We have paid nothing 60 far.


John Anderson Fraser: But work was done last
year.


Charles A. Stewart: Yes, but we have not paid anything to date.


Alexander Duncan McRae: Has there been any proposal from the British Columbia government to turn over their parks, particularly Garibaldi, to the federal government?


Charles A. Stewart: Mr. Cory
is in British Columbia dealing with the whole matter of the railway belt and the Peace 
River block. Some suggestions have come, I believe, from outside parties, and not directly through the British Columbia government. I am not able to state that they have officially suggested our taking over any of their parks, but I have heard this from other sources.


Alexander Duncan McRae: I am very much in favour
of that 'being done. The park administration is so satisfactory that I * think better results would ensue if that course were followed.


Mr. ESLING:: AU the agreements between the federal government and the provincial government regarding the construction of the Revelstoke highway are completed, are they not? I mean to say that the situation at present is that it is optional with the provincial government to proceed.


Charles A. Stewart: That is the fact.


William Kemble Esling: No further agreements need be consummated?


Charles A. Stewart: No. The
British Columbia government are undertaking the construction. We agree up to an amount of $750,000 to contribute fifty-fifty on the construction work as it proceeds.


William Kemble Esling: That is in lieu of what it
would cost the government to build, had they elected to do so, the road through Glacier park.


Charles A. Stewart: That is
quite right.


Robert Gardiner: When was this agreement entered into?


Charles A. Stewart: About two
years ago, or just before last season's construction work.


Robert Gardiner: Will the minister explain how it is that a special privilege is handed out to British Columbia and not to the other provinces, in view of the Prime Minister's statement in the earlier part of the session?


Charles A. Stewart: The national highway would traverse our park, Glacier park.


Robert Gardiner: I see.


Charles A. Stewart: We are
contributing only the amount of money it would have cost us to build through the park and to have a very dangerous highway. We are contributing that to the provincial government in order that the detour may be made around tie river.

Supply-Interior


Robert Gardiner: Is the minister taking
into consideration the tremendous waste of gas in the Turner valley, and are any steps being taken to conserve that gas?


Charles A. Stewart: If my hon.
friend will look at Hansard, he will find that I gave a statement in that connection in answer to my hon. friend from Red Deer.


Mr. KENNEDY:: In regard to the item:
To pay Mrs. E. S. Forbes a compassionate allowance equal to one-half of the salary of her husband.
Will the minister explain what this is for?


Charles A. Stewart: She is the wife of an ex-secretary to the Minister of the Interior. It. was claimed that her husband contracted an illness that affected him mentally and he is an inmate of a mental institution as a result of illness contracted while he was in the employ of the government. For some years Mrs. Forbes has been receiving this allowance.


Robert Gardiner: Could the minister give the committee any information as to how the compromise with regard to seed grain liens is proceeding?


Charles A. Stewart: We are getting many settlements from the committee in charge of that work. I am asking in the supplementaries, as my hon. friend knows, for $47,000 to meet our obligation in Saskatchewan.


Robert Gardiner: I merely bring to the attention of the minister complaints by many people who are trying to secure a settlement, that the negotiations are too prolonged, and that they cannot get any information from the board in regard to their claims. If the minister will at some time look into the matter and see if he cannot speed up the work, it will be much appreciated.


Charles A. Stewart: I judge from the number of settlements that are coming through that the committee is accomplishing a great deal. It is possible that they cannot overtake the work.


Donald MacBeth Kennedy: There was considerable agitation for a highway connecting Jasper park with the province of British Columbia. Is anything being done with regard to that?


Charles A. Stewart: It will not be a serious matter to connect the detour by the Columbia river with the entrance to Jasper on the west side. We intend to build down on the abandoned grade to the outskirts of the park. We will possibly do something with regard to that this summer, although our main work this year will be to connect up the eastern entrance with the Edmonton highway.


Mr. GARLAND (Bow River):: Has the minister made a statement to the committee in regard to the reorganization of the land branches of the department? I noticed in the press some days ago an announcement which, if it correct, will give me some satisfaction. It is to the effect that the department is organizing its land branches into one branch. Does the minister care to make a statement in that connection?


Charles A. Stewart: The statement given out covers the whole arrangement. They are reorganized. Unfortunately, they were a long time in reorganizing and in consequence, the staff of the Dominion Lands branch was delayed perhaps a year or eighteen months longer than it should have been ^ in receiving adjustments, but the organization has taken place just as announced.


Edward Joseph Garland: I understand the minister intends to effect economies by that reorganization. In what manner will the economies 'be effected? Will it be by reduction of staff or what?


Charles A. Stewart: There will be a reduction of staff, although not to any considerable degree, but the main economy will be effected in better supervision and in the fact that the work will be handled much more expeditiously than it was formerly. My complaint was that we had too many branches.


Edward Joseph Garland: There is no doubt about that. Of all the departments of government, the Department of the Interior, for some reason unknown to me, has always appeared to me to be somewhat top heavy with organization, all sorts of heads everywhere. I notice, for example, that the cost of the total land work done, t{ie outside work, was $440,000 in round figures, and the total cost of the inside service at headquarters was $530,000. I do not know whether it is fair- I am not going to be unfair-to draw any particular conclusions from these figures, but when they were brought to my attention they startled me. The headquarters staff cost $86,492 per year more than the outside service; in other words, the actual activities of the department cost less than the administrative end. It seemed to be a pretty heavy item, and I do sincerely hope that the reorganization of the lands branch as announced by
Supply-Interior

the minister will have the effect of cutting down the spread between those two services. That deals with the land service only.
As to the general service in the Department of the Interior, I find that the Ottawa service alone cost in 1913-14 in round figures SI,031,000, and the outside service $811,000, and in 1927-28 the Ottawa service cost $2,609,000 and the outside service $1,389,000. The striking feature about this is the enormous increase, an increase of over 100 per cent since 1913-14, since when a great deal of the activities of the department have been curtailed, at least in the lands branch.


Mr. ROSS (Moose Jaw):: They have increased'.


Edward Joseph Garland: I take it
that the land settlement or homesteading is very much less now than it was prior to 1911, 1912 and 1913. I wonder if the minister could give us a brief explanation of why there has been an increase of over 100 per cent since 1913-14.


Charles A. Stewart: I have not
the homesteading figures of 1913 before me, but I may say for the information of my hon. friend that last year was one of the heaviest years in homesteading in the history of the department, 7,233 entries being granted. That in itself means a tremendous amount of bookkeeping. In addition, all our survey parties are paid from Ottawa; they are not charged to the outside service, so one does not get a proper conception if it is assumed that because a surveyor is out in the field he is being paid from the outside service. He is a permanent officer at Ottawa. That is the chief of the party himself. The labourers, of course, who are employed for a few months out in the field are charged to the outside service. The homestead inspectors and the clerks in the land offices in the three prairie provinces are the only staff of any moment that we have in the outside service, but all the records are kept here, and when my hon. friend remembers that we keep a record of all the grazing lands, mining leaseholds, and water-powers in the three prairie provinces he will readily understand that it requires a very large staff to keep an accurate account of every transaction that passes through the Department of the Interior. I know there is a belief that all that work is done in the outside land offices, but that is not the fact. All the records are kept here and full information concerning every transaction can be obtained from the office at Ottawa. The rentals are all passed in here and the accounting is all done here, and that,

of course, necessitates a very large staff in Ottawa. Our forestry activities are also all directed from Ottawa; that work has grown tremendously in recent years, and must increase if we are to protect the forests.


Edward Joseph Garland: There is
no question that there are certain branches that have increased, mines and forests particularly. On the other hand, there has been a tremendous and sometimes unexplainable increase in the personnel, salaries and costs. When will the reorganization now being undertaken by the minister be completed?


Charles A. Stewart: It is completed.


Edward Joseph Garland: When will
it be in operation?


Charles A. Stewart: It has been in operation for some little time. I cannot give the exact date it went into effect.


Edward Joseph Garland: I do hope that it will bring the results that are expected of it. I recollect taking this matter up with the minister four years ago, and he promised at that time in response to a letter from myself that he would undertake this work at once. I am not blaming him in the least, but I think the delay in bringing about that reorganization calls for an explanation of some kind. But I do not want that now as the reorganization is under way. Does not the minister think it is, after all, somewhat belated in view of the probable transfer of the natural resources to the prairie provinces next session?


Charles A. Stewart: I cannot
speak as to its being belated. All I can say is that it does take a considerable time to get the reorganization put into effect. I frankly am unable to explain the reason for the delay. Some of these delays are very vexatious, and particularly vexatious to this staff.


Robert Gardiner: Now that the reorganization has taken place, can the minister give any idea as to its value as compared with the old organization?


Charles A. Stewart: I do not
quite understand the purport of my hon. friend's question. We certainly would not have entered on the reorganization if we had not thought it would be valuable to the staff and from the point of view of the service rendered.


Robert Gardiner: Are we getting any
better service on account of the reorganization?

Supply-Interior-Parks


Charles A. Stewart: I have not
heard any complaints of the service being delayed, and we have a department in which it is very important that speedy answers be given to requests and letters. We do a tremendous business through the mails, and of necessity replies must be made promptly.


Robert Gardiner: I take it that the minister was of the opinion that a reorganization was absolutely essential. He states now that it has been in effect for some time, and I am asking whether there is any improvement under the reorganization as compared with the old organization, and if so, in what respects.


Charles A. Stewart: The complete reorganization went into effect only on the 1st of April last. One thing I do insist upon is prompt action on the part of the staff, and I think we are getting that; at least, I am not getting any complaints about the service, and if the service were delayed I would be sure to hear of it. Moreover, I think that the reorganization has short-circuited a lot of the work. There are not so many people required to examine documents that are going out to the public. All these documents, of course, must be accurate. That is very important where so much is dependent on the treatment of the many leases, affecting large numbers of people, that pass through our hands annually.


Edward Joseph Garland: Are any of the highly paid supervisory positions being done away with as a result of the reorganization?


Charles A. Stewart: Some of
them will disappear upon the retirement of the present incumbents, and quite a number of them are just about due to take their retirement.


Edward Joseph Garland: I am very
glad to hear that statement, because in the report of the special committee on the civil service, at page 25, dealing with this particular subject that we are discussing, it is stated:
It is too early to estimate with any accuracy the probable saving which will result, but a considerable reduction can be made by the following:	,	, . ,,	.,
1.	The elimination of several highly-paid supervisory positions.
2.	The pooling of all office services, e.g., stenography, typing and filing.
3.	The retirement of as many employees as are eligible, and the abolition of the positions thus vacated.
I suppose all this has been taken into consideration.


Charles A. Stewart: Yes.


Henry Elvins Spencer: I take it that this million and a half expenditure has to do with
looking after the timber in the prairie provinces and the Peace River block?


Charles A. Stewart: Yes, by far the major portion of the expenditure has to do with the area mentioned by my hon. friend. We do spend some money in endeavouring to get a coordinated effort throughout all the provinces, but of course we have no jurisdiction in the provfnces owning their resources.


Mr. MACDONALD (Richmond):: I see $1,358,000 is to be expended on Canadian national parks, historic sites, and so forth. How is this divided between the provinces?


Charles A. Stewart: The three national parks on which we make our largest expenditure are located in the Rocky mountains. The historic sites are scattered all over the Dominion. The largest expenditure in that connection would be in eastern Canada. I may as well give my hon. friend particulars of these expenditures:	.
Rocky mountains park, $352,350.
Jasper park, $269,220.
Buffalo park. $61,300.
Yoho park, $87,345.
Glacier park, $15,720.
Waterton lakes park, $65,965.
Mount Revelstoke park, $15,750.
Elk island park, $27,935.
Kootenay park, $77,800.
Prince Albert park, $90,000.
Publicity, $65,000.
Head office, $78,210.
Historic sites, $42,000.
Fort Anne park, $4,500.
St. Lawrence islands park, $7,000.
Point Pelee park, $8,000.
Antelope reserve, $2,000.
Vidal's point park, $500.
Field engineering, $47,200.
Fort Howe, $10,000.
Beausoleil islands, $30,205.-Total, $1,358,000.
The last item is for the purchase of islands in the Georgian bay district which we intend to establish as a park.


Finlay MacDonald: How much is spent in Quebec on historic sites?


Charles A. Stewart: That is not in my department. We have spent some money for the purchase of lands at Louis-burg. We will have to make a considerable expenditure to restore that historic site.


Finlay MacDonald: What is the appropriation for Louisburg this year?


Charles A. Stewart: We have no appropriation except for engineering and the preparation of a plan. With respect to

Supply-Interior-Parks

Louisburg and some of the older historic si,tes, the government hopes either to enlarge the work of the Historic Sites and Monuments Board or to create a new board to take over that work in its entirety and give it more authority to deal with the restoration of these historic sites in eastern Canada.


Finlay MacDonald: How much money was expended last year to take over the properties in Louisburg?


Charles A. Stewart: I think in the neighbourhood of $23,000.


Finlay MacDonald: Who
took charge of the payment of this money?


Charles A. Stewart: Mr. Wardle, the chief engineer of national parks, was sent down to make a valuation of the properties and secure voluntary options. Someone was engaged by the justice department to examine the title.


Finlay MacDonald: How
much money was spent on legal expenses?


Charles A. Stewart: My hon.
friend will have to get that information from the Justice department.


Finlay MacDonald: Could
the minister say through whose hands this money went?


Charles A. Stewart: No.


John Anderson Fraser: Would it be apropos at the present time for the minister to tell us what stage the negotiations have reached in regard to the transfer of the Peace River block and the railway belt in British Columbia?


Charles A. Stewart: The proposed arrangements have not been submitted to our government, but Doctor Scott, the deputy superintendent general of Indian Affairs, has been to British Columbia, and any little differences have been smoothed out. Mr. Cory, the Deputy Minister of the Interior, is now in British Columbia discussing details of the park lands, water-powers, and matters of that kind, to see how near we can come to a settlement.


John Anderson Fraser: Have there been any negotiations in regard to the taking over of Mount Robson park in connection with the transfer of lands or anything of the kind?


Charles A. Stewart: We are asking for an addition west of Mount Assiniboine.
fMr. C. A. Stewart.]
We are now asking for the Mount Robson territory as an addition to Jasper park. We hope in these negotiations to secure those areas and make them additional to the park.


John Anderson Fraser: A moment or two ago the minister mentioned something about a highway through Jasper park to connect Edmonton with the British Columbia boundary. You are constructing that road?


Charles A. Stewart: Yes.


John Anderson Fraser: Do you propose to get to the British Columbia boundary with that road this year?


Charles A. Stewart: I doubt it. It is not very expensive construction, but we are bending all our energies to connect with the road to Edmonton. Is my hon. friend familiar with the situation?


John Anderson Fraser: Yes.


Charles A. Stewart: At present we have built up to Lucerne. It is a question of taking off the ties and spreading the gravel in spots down to Red Water junction, which is practically the boundary of the park. We have not made any surveys, but are told by people who claim to know that it will not be a difficult matter to connect up the road around the big bend with the western entrance to Jasper park.


John Anderson Fraser: That is what I wanted to know. Provided you get control of Mount Robson park, do you propose to extend your highway into British Columbia until you come to the boundary of the Mount Robson park in British Columbia?


Charles A. Stewart: Quite right.


Finlay MacDonald: Can the minister give me details of the expenditure in Louisburg, especially as regards the taking over of the land last season? Would it also be possible for him to give me the name of the legal men who were engaged in handling the transfers of land?


Charles A. Stewart: I will get that information for my hon. friend when the supplementary estimates are going through. Perhaps my hon. friend will then mention the matter.


Finlay MacDonald: The reason that I ask for the information is that I cannot understand how my political opponent was given the opportunity of doing this work. I know he did the work in this town, an old

Supply-Interior-Parks
historic site which is in my constituency; and every legal transaction that has taken place has gone through the hands of my political opponent. I want the information in regard to it.


Charles A. Stewart: My hon.
friend wants the amounts paid him for the service.


Finlay MacDonald: Not only the amounts paid him, but what was paid to each individual. I want the whole thing complete. Of course, we shall have to wait another year before it appears in the Auditor General's Report, but I should like to have it this summer.


Charles A. Stewart: I will give the information when the supplementaries are under consideration.


William Russell Fansher: There is an increase of $94,565 in the vote for expenses connected with the supervisory mining engineer's office, due chiefly to recent mining activities in northern Manitoba and northern Saskatchewan. Will the minister exiplain this?


Charles A. Stewart: We have had to increase the expenditures considerably owing to the opening up of new mining areas. This has necessitated the establishment of recording offices as well as the sending of officers into the territory to investigate disputes. This is the chief reason for the increase, together with certain additional services which will Ibe required an the oil fields both in southern Saskatchewan and in Alberta. In these provinces there has been a greatly increased mining activity which calls for additional expenditures.


William Russell Fansher: Under what item does the geological survey come? That is not included in this vote?


Charles A. Stewart: That is
charged to the Department of the Interior. The geological survey vote is merely for the purpose of sending parties out on geological work in the way of investigation.


William Thomas Lucas: There is an item of $47,460 for salaries and expenses connected with seed grain and relief collections. Was any money paid for seed grain relief last year?


Charles A. Stewart: There is no change in this vote; the vote has been standing ever since the relief was granted. There is still $6,000,000 outstanding. As regards a
portion of it, I am doubtful whether we shall be able to collect; but of necessity we must keep notifying those who have not paid and also keep the accounts up to date. The vote is the same as last year's.


William Thomas Lucas: I understood the Minister
of Finance a year ago to say that something like $2,000,000 was being provided for this item, and I know that applications came from my district asking for cancellations. There were men who had these sums charged up against them and when they moved out of the southern district up to farms in northern Alberta these charges were still against them and they were being pressed. I understood that if they had a proper case to submit to the adjustment board the charges would be cancelled.


Charles A. Stewart: That is
true, and they are going through almost every day.


William Thomas Lucas: What amounts have been cancelled?


Charles A. Stewart: Last year some $50,000 was cancelled in connection with seed grain indebtedness. This was done on the order of the board.


William Thomas Lucas: What board recommends these adjustments?


Charles A. Stewart: In Alberta the board comprises Mr. Fream, chairman, Mr. Matheson, our inspector, and another gentleman. It is representative of both governments.


William Thomas Lucas: That board recommends to the department?


Charles A. Stewart: Yes.


William Thomas Lucas: What amount was collected last year?


Charles A. Stewart: They did not do any collecting. I cannot give the amounts that have accrued but I can give the amount cancelled in the way of loans held against these properties by the federal government.


Robert Gardiner: The minister stated
that the cancellations amounted last year to $50,000. What did that service cost?


Charles A. Stewart: So far as we are concerned, our officers are under regular salary, so that there is no cost to us. I do not know what the cost to the Alberta government is, but Mr. Fream is an officer of that government. There are no outside officials employed on the work.
Supply-Interior-Parks


Milton Neil Campbell: I wish to direct the
attention of the minister to some very pointed complaints I have had in connection with the sale of section 26, township 32, range 32, west of the first meridian. This is a piece of land which only recently was used for pasture by the Keeseekoose Indians; as a matter of fact, it has been used by them for many years. Many parties in the past, year after year, have been applying to the department for an opportunity to purchase that land, but the department has always replied that the land was not for sale. In various letters I have on file it is stated that due notice would be given when the land should be put up for sale.


Charles A. Stewart: Was that Indian land?


Milton Neil Campbell: Yes.


Charles A. Stewart: Would my hon. friend mind leaving it until we come to the supplementaries for the Indian department?


Milton Neil Campbell: Those will not be up to-night?


Charles A. Stewart: No.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.

[Stage Direction]
Public printing and stationery-printing, binding, etc., the annual statutes, $12,000.
Murray MacLaren: I understand that the printing of the British North America Act comes under the department of the Secretary of State. Is that the case?


Louis Édouard Fernand Rinfret: There is another item
which covers parliamentary documents, if that is what my hon. friend has reference to. *


Murray MacLaren: Is it a fact that the
printing of the British North America Act comes under this department?


Louis Édouard Fernand Rinfret: Yes.


Murray MacLaren: Then I wish to point .out that the books containing that act contain nothing more than the British North America Act and1 its amendments; they do not include the London agreement of 1866. As the minister knows, that agreement was arrived at by the duly accredited representatives of the provinces of Ontario, Quebec, New Brunswick and Nova Scotia, who assembled in London in 1866, and the agreement was similar in many particulars to the Quebec agreement which was concluded a year or two previous. I desire to point out that the London agreement is a highly important document in connection with the formation of this Dominion, but one can only find it occasionally in print; it can

be found only in the old blue books of the time of confederation. Its value lies in the fact that it was the very basis of the British North America Act. I believe that it has not only historical value but that it is an important document in connection with the constitution of this country, and I would suggest to the minister that when the British North America Act is again published the London agreement be included in the same volume, partly for purposes of comparison and partly for purpose of reference, since the British North America Act might be looked upon as the enabling act with regard to the London agreement, which was arrived at by the representatives of the provinces.
I do not think I have ever asked the minister for anything before, and this is really not a personal request but concerns a matter which interests many people in this country I would like to ask the minister to include the London agreement in the next issue of the British North America Act. The minister has nodded his head, but that will not appear in Hansard, and it would be more satisfactory to have his verbal assent.


Louis Édouard Fernand Rinfret: I think the suggestion is
an excellent one and I will certainly consider it when the next publication is being made; in other words, my answer is yes.


Murray MacLaren: How far did the minister say he would go?


Louis Édouard Fernand Rinfret: I said I quite agreed with my hon. friend.


Murray MacLaren: I understand the minister agrees to do as I have requested?


Louis Édouard Fernand Rinfret: Yes, decidedly so.


Mr. WARD:: I might suggest that when
the minister publishes a new issue of the British North America Act it might be well to print enough extra copies to place one in the possession of each member of the house.


Louis Édouard Fernand Rinfret: That is another very
good suggestion, with which I quite agree.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Plant-new, $42,544.
Robert Gardiner: Will the minister explain what this new plant consists of?


Louis Édouard Fernand Rinfret: Although this amount is
rather larger than the vote last 3'ear, the amount placed in the estimates last year was less than the usual amount necessary for this work.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.

Supply-Secretary oj State
Expenses under the Naturalization Act,
Louis Édouard Fernand Rinfret: When this item was up
this morning an hon. member asked me as to the distribution of the fees paid by applicants. I may state that a fee of 15 is required from each applicant, which fee is paid to the clerk of the court before which the application is made. In the larger centres, such as Montreal, Toronto, Winnipeg and Vancouver, there is a special regulation under which, if the total amount collected is more than $2,000, the balance is turned over to the department. In that branch we also have a little revenue from other sources, such as certified copies of former certificates of naturalization and also certificates granted by the Secretary of State under certain sections of the act which do not call for appearance in court. The total amount thus collected by the department in the fiscal year 1928-29 was $6,966. This amount, of course, was turned over to the Receiver General and cannot be credited to this item.


James Shaver Woodsworth: There is a question I should like to ask under this item, and I might say I brought to the attention of the department a case which illustrates my point. A judge in my own city sent in a report with regard to certain applications for naturalization, in which he stated that the applicants had not a sufficient knowledge of English. It appears that the people were somewhat flustered at coming before a judge, and later on there was another hearing after which the judge declared that these people had a sufficiently good knowledge of English to enable them to become naturalized. Both reports were sent to the department but as yet the naturalization papers have not been issued. Notwithstanding the fact that it was the same authority which stated in the second place that the people had a sufficient knowledge of English, the department still takes the view that the first report must be adhered to. It seems to. me that when we invite immigrants to this country we should admit them to citizenship as soon as they can qualify. These people took the trouble to make applications, and they learned English; why have certificates been refused under these circumstances?


Louis Édouard Fernand Rinfret: I have looked into a number of cases similar to the one mentioned by the hon. member. He is not quite right when he says that although a second report was made the department is adhering to the first one. When the famous bill concerning naturalization was before the house last year, I think I explained that although an applicant may come before the court we also conduct an
inquiry through the mounted police and the other means at the disposal of the department. In certain cases the report of the court is favourable while that of our inspectors is in the other direction, and it is within the discretion of the minister either to grant or to refuse the certificate. We do not act against the report of the court, but we do not always follow that recommendation, as sometimes we are not as easily satisfied as the tribunal has been. There is no finality to our decision, as the intervention of an influential person will induce us to renew our investigation in an effort to find out whether or not we have been misinformed.


Milton Neil Campbell: I should like to draw the minister's attention to what seems to me to be somewhat of an anomaly in the Naturalization Act. I have in my hand a file covering the case of Mr. H. Stuckenberg, who is living at the present time at Kandahar, in Saskatchewan. Mr. Stuckenberg was a Danish citizen but had lived in Canada for a number of years. He enlisted in the army at the outbreak of the war and took the oath of allegiance at that time. Apparently that destroyed his Danish citizenship, because when he attempted to obtain a passport to visit his native country he found that he was not a Danish citizen, and he also discovered that he was not a Canadian citizen. Here is a man who took upon himself the supreme obligation of citizenship; he enlisted in the army and served throughout the whole war. I have discussed this case with the deputy minister and it has been pointed out to me that under the present legislation this man is not a citizen. Of course the minister can reply that he should make application for naturalization in the ordinary way, but this man thinks that that would be humiliating, and I agree with him. He does not feel that he should be forced to appear before the clerk of the court, pay about ten or fifteen dollars in lawyers' fees and other expenses, :and go through all the formality of becoming .a Canadian citizen. I suggest to the minister that seme change should be made in the act which would admit a man of that type to citizenship.


James Dew Chaplin: He was accepted as a citizen for one purpose.


Milton Neil Campbell: He was accepted as a citizen and as a soldier, and yet to-day we deny him citizenship.


Samuel William Jacobs: Has he voted in any of the elections?


Milton Neil Campbell: He is not eligible to vote; if he did he would be liable under the criminal code.
Supply-Secretary oj State


Richard Bedford Bennett: I think the bon. gentleman is under a misapprehension. Under our present act naturalization depends upon two things; (a) residence and (b) character, habits and reputation. Service under the colours does not constitute residence because a man may become a soldier and yet not be a citizen. Taking the oath of allegiance merely means that he takes it to serve in that capacity. The difficulty in meeting the suggestion of the hon. gentleman is that this is an imperial act in the sense that in granting a certificate of naturalization we do not confer Canadian citizenship; we confer British citizenship which is good the world over. If we amend our statute it must be amended in all the overseas dominions and in Great Britain as well, because we have adopted a uniformity of qualification in order to confer a uniform citizenship. I have had to deal with more than one case of a similar nature, and there seems to be a misunderstanding on the part of those who took the oath of allegiance; it is an oath to serve the country in the capacity of a soldier, and not an oath of citizenship or naturalization,^ which involves a further inquiry upon which the granting of the certificate is predicated.
Mr. CAMPBELL; I quite understand that the man is not a citizen under the present act.


Richard Bedford Bennett: He would not be eligible in any part of the world.


Milton Neil Campbell: He has been in the
country a sufficient length of time, and he could qualify.


Richard Bedford Bennett: Then he should do that.


Milton Neil Campbell: I was suggesting to the minister that it might be possible to amend the act.


Louis Édouard Fernand Rinfret: I think the hon. member will give me credit for attempting to amend the act in certain respects, but the leader of the opposition stated the case very well when he said that there were certain things which would not come within the power of this parliament. As we confer British naturalization we have to abide by certain conditions which exist throughout the empire and which are decided upon at every imperial conference.


Milton Neil Campbell: Let me remind the
minister of a phase of this matter which I have discussed many times before. There are in my constituency many people of foreign birth-and this would apply all over Canada -who find it very inconvenient to go to the judicial centres and appear before a judge to make their application for naturalization.

On many branch lines there is only a triweekly service, and it means a week away from home. Many of these settlers are very poor; the 125 to S30 it would cost them means a great deal, and many people are going without naturalization simply because they cannot afford it. I have suggested both to the minister and to his deputy that arrangements should be made so that the judges could hear these cases when they are sitting at local points. The deputy minister promised me that something would be done, and in some cases this arrangement has been made. In my own village of Pelly, where the judge sits once a year, there have been a few cases dealt with in this way, but at other times this procedure is not earned out. In most cases the judges refuse to deal with the applicants at that local point, and the people living in the local district where the judge comes once, twice or sometimes three times a year, have to go to all the trouble and expense of travelling to the judicial centre, and this means a considerable expense. The Under Secretary of State pointed out to me that this could be arranged only by cooperation with the provincial authorities. Apparently no provision is made for extra expenses of the judges when this would entail remaining over in the district for another day. I want to suggest to the minister that this matter be further discussed with the provincial authorities. There is no reason in the world why proper arrangements could not be made so that these cases could be dealt with at every local point, thus saving these people all the delay, trouble and expense of going to the judicial centre.


Louis Édouard Fernand Rinfret: My hon. friend is aware, as I reminded him a moment ago, that the best way to deal with t'he situation he has depicted would have been for both houses of parliament to adopt a bill which I introduced last year to do away altogether with appearance before a court. This house assented to the bill by a somewhat large majority, but it failed to pass the other house, and therefore the amendment which we sought and for which I fought rather energetically, did not become law. We do not have any power over the judges, as my hon. friend will appreciate. The act provides that the applicant shall go before a tribunal, and we are powerless to compel either the clerk of the court or the judge himself to deal with the cases sooner or in some other manner than that which the judge himself determines. We are doing everything in our power by negotiation and conciliation to expedite the work of the appli-

Supply-Secretary of State
eants, but I am sure my hon. friend will realize that as a department, as long as the act remains as it is, unamended, we are travelling under a handicap.


Milton Neil Campbell: It seems to me it is rather a poor excuse for the minister to attribute the present condition in this respect to the fact that these houses of parliament did not pass the amendment which he brought in last year. The fact remains that that amendment did not pass and is not law. I am asking the minister to do what he can to deal with the situation as it exists to-day. This difficulty has been going on for years and I can hardly agree with the minister's statement that he is powerless; that he has no control oveT the judges. I have discussed the matter with the Under Secretary of State and he has not given me that impression. It seems to me it is a matter that can be simply and easily arranged between the federal and the provincial governments. It is a matter, I understand, simply of slight extra amount being paid towards judge's expenses, because
i.i	some of these instances it means that the judge is compelled to remain over an extra day.


Louis Édouard Fernand Rinfret: On that point, I am sure my hon. friend is aware that we are not at liberty to allow judges any proportion of the fees. The federal law is clear that judges cannot receive any compensation beyond their salaries as judges.


Milton Neil Campbell: There is no question of fees or other remuneration involved. This is merely a matter of extra expense that the judge would incur if he were obliged to remain over an extra day or two. That should be an easy matter to arrange between the federal and provincial governments. If the minister would discuss the question with the Under Secretary of State, I am sure the latter would point out how it could be done.


Louis Édouard Fernand Rinfret: I will give the matter my very best attention.


William John Ward: I am not sure whether this
is the proper place to suggest amendments to the Naturalization Act, but I should like to suggest a modification of that law, which, as it stands at present, compels all new Canadians to have a working knowledge, so to speak, of the English or the French language before being permitted to become naturalized Canadian citizens. In this connection we should take into consideration the fact that a large number of new Canadians come to Canada in middle life with no knowledge of either English or French, but immediately
become good Canadian citizens and endeavour to educate their families. In fact I have in my constituency many families where the parents cannot speak a word of English but where some of the children have taken the highest honours in the universities. New Canadians who are endeavouring to live up to all the laws of Canadian society, who are just as good citizens as those who speak our languages, should not be debarred from becoming Canadian citizens because they cannot speak the English or the French language. A grave injustice has been done to many new Canadians by the fact that under the circumstances under which they were placed In (his country, they cannot become naturalized citizens. We all know that the policy of settlement, whether it was right or wrong, has isolated those people in the west. For instance, one district will be German, another Austrian, another something else, and they have principalities of their own with no opportunity of learning the English language. Persons who come here from other lands in middle life, therefore, and who are anxious to become good Canadians, should not be debarred from securing naturalization simply because they cannot speak the English or the French language.


James Shaver Woodsworth: My attention was
called to one particular incident that may give point to what has just been said. An elderty Icelandic woman came to this country some years ago and moved up country between lake Manitoba and lake Winnipeg. She lived a hard life under those pioneering conditions, brought up her family there, contributed as much as she possibly could to the upbuilding of this country. She was in every way an intelligent woman, but she had no opportunity, in that isolated life, of learning another language. The question of old age pensions came up. She is in every way qualified by residence, age and so forth to dc the recipient of an old age pension, but she is not naturalized, and under the existing act there seems to be no way by which she can obtain naturalization. It is altogether unfair that she should be deprived of the old age pension simply because of a condition of that character.


Mr. YOUNG (Weyburn):: The hon. member for Mackenzie has, I believe, made a very able speech in support of a little more consideration for those of foreign birth who come to this country desirous of becoming citizens and who, because of circumstances, are unable to appear before a judge and demonstrate their ability to speak English. T
Supply-Secretary of State

notice, however, in last year's Hansard that when the bill to provide this very thing was before the house, my hon. friend himself voted to give the bill the six months' hoist.


Richard Bedford Bennett: That was because of the other provisions in it.


Milton Neil Campbell: As I know the hon.
member is a little overwrought, I will excuse him for his language to-night. He has just returned from the country where he ran up against some difficulties and he is not just normal or he would not make the error he has made. I was not dealing with that question at all. I had my own reasons for opposing the change in the Naturalization Act. I believe it could be dealt with better by judges than by politicians.


Edward James Young: Now the judges are dealing with it, the hon. member does not like it.


Milton Neil Campbell: Many people in the
west who want to get naturalization papers, would prefer to have their cases dealt with by judges rather than by politicians. If they happen to oppose the political party in power they might have a good deal of difficulty in securing naturalization papers. The question I dealt with had nothing at all to do with the question raised by the hon. member for Weyburn, It is a very important question and one with which I hope the minister will deal, because if dealt with it would save these people a great deal of money and facilitate the securing of naturalization.


Edward James Young: I understand
the hon. gentleman's explanation. He says that last year these people might have wanted votes to assist the party in power but the party being now out of power in Saskatchewan, there is no longer any necessity for killing the bill, and he would like to have it passed.


Richard Bedford Bennett: They have only been
defeated; they are not yet out of power.


Michael Luchkovich: How much English
is required of the applicant for naturalization? If the judge happens to be hard-boiled he may require the applicant to speak Oxford English, and if the applicant does not know Oxford English his application may be refused.


Louis Édouard Fernand Rinfret: I do not see what answer I can make to that. So long as the act remains as it is, the applicant must go before the judge, and the judge use his own discretion.


Henry Elvins Spencer: How much revenue was
received last year from naturalization certificates?


Louis Édouard Fernand Rinfret: I gave that information
when my hon. friend was not in t'he chamber. He will find it in Hansard to-morrow.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Department of Labour - Annuities Act, $75,000.
Herbert Bealey Adshead: How many annuities
have been taken out since the act came into force?


Mr. HEENAN:: 10,264.


Henry Elvins Spencer: Are these annuities being taken up pretty well by the public?


Peter Heenan: Last year there was an
increase of over 150 per cent, and this year there has been an increase of 11.19 per cent.


James Dew Chaplin: What is the average
amount of the annuity taken out?


Peter Heenan: About $356.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Combines Investigation Act, $25,000.
Herbert Bealey Adshead: In connection with the
investigation that was held last year into the fruit industry, the minister told us that he had received a portion of the fines, $50,000. Has any more been paid?


Peter Heenan: The whole $200,000 has
been paid in this year.


Richard Bedford Bennett: Any part of it remitted?


Peter Heenan: We remitted the expenses
of the British Columbia government, which were $10,000.


James Dew Chaplin: Were any of the fines
remitted?


Peter Heenan: No. We remitted only
what the British Columbia government stated -were their expenses in connection with it. No part of the fines was remitted.


Richard Bedford Bennett: The fines went into consolidated revenue?


Peter Heenan: Yes.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Conciliation and Labour Act, $55,000.
Mr. P'OULIOT:	Is the Labour Gazette
published under this item?
Peter Heenan: Yes.


Jean-François Pouliot: 
James Shaver Woodsworth: Would the hon.
member read that latter item again? I can hardly understand it.


Jean-François Pouliot: Manual labour, less per
day, 88 cents; less per week, $5.88; less per year, $274.56. Those are the minimum wages 
paid in Quebec as compared with the average of wages in fourteen big Canadian cities. Those figures are astounding. The average earnings are lower not only in Quebec city, but even in Montreal, than in other big Canadian cities, and that although the cost of living is as high as and probably higher than, in the province of Quebec.


Michael Luchkovich: I understand that the question of minimum wages comes within the jurisdiction of the provinces. Would it not be more effective for the hon. member to read his statement to the Premier of Quebec?
Mr. POULIOT; The point is that these people are not interested in the matter because they do not even get the statistics which they are supposed to be given according to the law. I wish to put my point of view to the Minister of Labour and to disclose the situation as it is, because I want him to give some relief in this matter. I hope the house will be indulgent enough to listen to me for a few minutes longer because it is in the interests of these people that I am now speaking.
Mr. CHAPLIN; You are making a statement to Quebec now, aren't you?


Jean-François Pouliot: I am not making a statement to Quebec but about Quebec and I contend that some relief should be provided. Although these statistics are rather dull when they are read in this way, I can assure my hon. friends opposite that they will find them more interesting when they come to read them in Hansard to-morrow. What I am stating to-night affects not only one man but thousands upon thousands of families in Quebec.
First, the average earnings are lower not only in Quebec City but even in Montreal than in any other large Canadian city-and that, although the cost of living is as high as and probably higher in the province of Quebec than in other provinces on account of numerous large familes.
Secondly, the Quebec and Montreal manufacturers do not sell their products any cheaper than those of other provinces.
Thirdly, therefore, the difference between the wages in Montreal and Quebec and those in other large Canadian cities means a loss to labour and additional and illegitimate gains to capital in our province. What is the use of inviting big firms to open new plants in the province of Quebec if the artisans who will work there are underpaid.

Supply-Labour


Mr. SPEAKMAN:: May I ask the hon. gentleman a question?


Jean-François Pouliot: Surely.


Alfred Speakman: Two, as a matter of fact. Is be aware that the Premier of Quebec was in an adjoining city, not far from here, this afternoon? Does he not think that he should have Mr. Taschereau paged in order that that gentleman might have the benefit of the interesting and important address he is making?


Jean-François Pouliot: The dinner which is being given in Hull is not a joint affair; that is the first point. And in the second place I may say that I expected that the estimates of the Minister of Labour would come before the house on Monday of last week, and if they have come on to-night it is not my fault; it is an act of Providence.


Alfred Speakman: Well, why should not my hon. friend take advantage of that act of Providence and have Mr. Taschereau here? I believe that most governments are interested in the matter.


Jean-François Pouliot: Unfortunately there is no radio in this house so that my speech cannot be heard in Hull to-night. Now it is rather hard to expect a supporter of the provincial government to move a vote of censure against that government; but how could it be explained that matters of such great importance have not been brought before the Quebec legislature by any member of the provincial opposition, not even by the Conservative members of Montreal? What is this or that piece of their criticism compared to the welfare and comfort of so many large families?
Taking the official report of the Dominion-provincial conference held in 1927, I find that the Premier of Quebec is reported thus:
Premier Taschereau, of Quebec, declared at the outset that he was not asking for anything at all for his province. He was surprised that after all the conferences which had been held, and after sixty years of partnership, there should still be so much friction between the provinces and the Dominion as to their respective domains. To have a happy and prosperous Canada there must be happy and prosperous provinces, and the latter could do more for Canada than could the federal authorities. The provinces were more in contact with the people, educating them, building their roads, and looking after their health. The provinces enacted compensation laws in favour of workmen and had control of the judicial machinery.
"He was not asking for anything at all for his province!" Wliat about federal subsidies to the provinces for highways and so many
other purposes, including public works and so forth? What about his own request, on behalf of his Siamese brother, Sir Herbert Holt, for the disappearance of the income tax, against the recommendations of the labour congress? What about his own requests of millions to dredge the St. Charles river and to build Canadian National railway terminals at Quebec?
"The provinces would do more for Canada than would the federal authorities." What about the reduction of the debt of this country and the general reduction of the burden of taxation, the extension of our domestic and foreign trade, the settlement of labour troubles, the wonderful work done by federal research experts and civil servants, the policy of this government in regard to imperial matters, and so forth? I quote from the Montreal Gazette of January 10, 1928:
In introducing a large delegation of the trades and labour congress of Canada, Mr. Tom Moore, the chairman, took occasion to compliment the (federal) government upon its labour legislation. He particularly approved the government's old age pension scheme and asked that any changes which the government might see fit to introduce which would make easier the acceptance of the measure by some of the provinces would be welcomed. The government was also commended for its enactment of the Trade Mark and Designs Act, which now enables the labour organizations to register and probably protect their union labels, etc.
The congress also noted with satisfaction the treaty of the Canadian National^ Steamships giving effect to their recommendations for the carrying on of the West Indies service by a government owned line in cooperation with the Canadian National Railways; the act amending t'he Workmen's Compensation Aot respecting government employees; amendments to the income tax; the acts encouraging the use of Canadian mined coal and others.
"He was not asking anything at all for his province!" Such a proud declaration does not prevent the federal government from taking every possible means to help our province, as well as the sister provinces, against his will. But although the artisan who receives fair wages does not require so badly the help of the state as the one who is insufficiently paid, although the artisans of the province of Quebec are the least remunerated in the Dominion, and although the five sister provinces of British Columbia, Alberta, Saskatchewan, Manitoba and Ontario have already accepted the old age pension scheme, he for instance even refusees any assistance from the federal government in that connection.
I am happy to congratulate the Minister of Labour upon having gone yesterday to
Supply-Labour

Toronto by airplane to sign the old age pension contract with the representatives of the provincial government of Ontario.
In that momentous gathering of the official representatives of the federal and provincial governments, speaking on behalf of his province, he said that he was not asking for anything at all for his province. Was that declaration criticized by the provincial opposition? No; it was approved by them. I have as much personal regard for Mr. Sauve, the leader of the Quebec opposition, as for Mr. Taschereau, and I do not understand how he would have unreservedly praised the attitude of the Quebec premier at the Dominion-provincial conference. In fact, two months afterwards, he concluded his speech on the address with these words:
The Prime Minister at this conference took a part which honoured his province, his government and his race. I say this to render justice to him, even at the risk of drawing upon myself reproaches and not figuring in the least that the Prime Minister will long remember my expression of sentiment.
This is f-rom The Gazette, Montreal, January, 13, 1928.
It is to be noted that Mr. Sauve has never been censured by his followers for such a declaration.
Evidently no blame can be put on the federal authorities for the difficulties and low wages of labour in the province of Quebec. As the situation of labour is satisfactory in most of the other provinces, why is it not so in Quebec? What is the local cause of such unfair treatment? Why does capital enjoy there such excessive earnings at the expense of labour? The astonishing and appalling figures that have been given call for immediate relief and for the kind consideration of the best friend of labour amongst labour men in this country. I mean our active and competent Minister of Labour (Mr. Heenan), who himself comes from the ranks of labour.
May I quote some clippings from the press in regard to the activities of the Minister of Labour since he has been in office? The following is from the Toronto Star, as quoted by the Ottawa Citizen, June, 29, 1927:
Canada's act making an attempt at conciliation before the declaration of a strike or lockout was torpedoed by a verdict of the privy council. The damage thus done may not be serious if the Dominion always has a Minister of Labour as earnest and as persistent as Peter Heenan in seeking to maintain industrial peace.
Then in the Brockville Recorder of November 10, 1927, I find the following:
Following other triumphs in the settlement of labour troubles, he has been successful in

bringing peace in the Toronto building trades and has thus earned the gratitude and the congratulations of the mayor of that city, no small achievement for any member of any Liberal ministry.
Then, in the Sydney Record of November 25, 1927, appeared this statement:
He is useful and successful because lie knows the labour problems from the labour point of view and because, at the same time, he has an equipment of mind and character which makes him fair and reasonable in dealing with capital.
Again from the Sydney Record:
They (Premier Rhodes and his ministers) haven't brought about -a satisfactory settlement of the present coal wage dispute, and if settlement comes it will be as a result of the intervention of Hon. Peter Heenan, federal Minister of Labour, who had to come info the case because of the failure of Hon. G. S. Harrington to bring the operators and miners to terms.
Then I quote from the Halifax Citizen of December 2, 1927:
He is a labour man and appears to be a real live wire with the right idea of getting into personal touch with labour all over Canada. His splendid work for old age pensions, his services in the Toronto strike, and his visit to the industrial centres of Nova Scotia, all give promise of better service from the department in the future.
Then I quote from the Oshawa Daily Times of March 31, 1928:
In our opinion great credit is due to the Minister of Labour for coming to Oshawa in person and lending his good offices to bring about a settlement of the strike. His arrival here yesterday was, in our opinion, most opportune, and his wise counsel and fair dealing was, we believe, appreciated by both parties to the controversy. The people of Oshawa will have a higher opinion of Peter Heenan as a result of his visit here this week.


James Shaver Woodsworth: I would like to know to what clipping agency my hon. friend subscribes in order to secure all these extracts.


Jean-François Pouliot: There are many newspapers to which I personally subscribe, and I hardly think my hon. friends will object to these articles. Now I quote from The Beaver of November 1, 1928:
When the Spruce Falls Pulp Company, controlled by American capital, obtained their timber limits they contracted to employ Canadian workmen. When they had a dispute with tiheir men .a few days ago, they replaced several by American workers. Hon. Peter Heenan immediately took the matter up personally. The men are to go back to work and a representative of the Labour Department will be on the ground to ensure absolute fairness. Our national Minister of Labour is alert and efficient in guarding the interests of the Canadian worker.

Supply-Labour
Then I quote from the Saskatoon Star of May 25, 1929:
Peace In Industry
Another factor in recent years has been the skill of Hon. Peter Heenan, the Dominion Minister of Labour, in conciliating workers and employees who fall out over wages, working conditions and recognition of unions. The latest illustration of Mr. Heenan's capacity as an arbiter of such disputes is his settlement of the plumbers' and steamfitters' strike in Toronto. This strike, according to the Toronto Globe, was peculiarly difficult to handle but the minister did the trick by calling a round table conference of the parties to the dispute. Once again, the Globe remarks, he lived up to his name as "Peter the Peacemaker".
Then I quote from the Fort William Times Journal of December 9, 1927:
He has seen the labour situation from the workers' sid-e. ... As an experienced labour man, he knows that trouble is best dealt with when it is caught in the bud, instead of being left to ripen to the full fruit. Hence comes his desire to leave behind him the reputation, as Minister of Labour, of having prevented more strikes than he settled.
Now I quote from the Port Arthur Chronicle of the same date:
It is Mr. Heenan's job to take a large share in making conditions contentful for the wage earners of the Dominion. . . . No Minister of Labour has applied himself to the work of the department over which he presides more assiduously than he.
My last quotation is from the Hamilton Labour World of May 30, 1929:
As Minister of Labour for the Dominion, Hon. Peter Heenan has made a name for himself in the settling of differences between employer and employee. The old arbitration board is a thing of the past, as has been manifested in the confidence placed in the ability of this stalwart to negotiate.
Strikes received short shift when the Hon. Mr. Heenan steps in, and he has established a record in early settlements when he gets into action. When everything fails, the human dynamo tabes hold to show both sides where they are wrong. His slogan is, "Let nothing retard industry where reason should prevail."
The long years at the throttle give him an experience which could not be duplicated, for there he had courage, conviction and ability. The workers of Canada may justly be proud of their representative in the Dominion parliament, and they are.
Since by virtue of the act respecting his department the Minister of Labour "shall institute and conduct inquiries into important industrial questions, upon which adequate information may not at present be available", would it be possible for him to intervene. in this case for the relief of the artisans of the province of Quebec?
I have just one further quotation to make; it is from the Brockville Recorder of December 9, 1927:
At a luncheon at Glace Bay in December, 1927, Mr. Heenan said to the representatives of the United Mine Workers of Cape Breton, "I want you to feel that I am a public servant, and_ if you need me, just press the button and I will come."
This is my point, Mr. Chairman: The products of Quebec are not sold at a lower price than the same products are sold by Ontario manufacturers, but the employees in Quebec are paid much les3. That means a lost to labour and an undue surplus of profit to the manufacturer. This is a very bad situation, and it is the reason why I thought it proper to-night, although we are at the close of the session, to ask the Minister of Labour to investigate that situation in the interests of the workers of that province.


Robert James Manion: There is a matter which I wish to take up with the Minister of Labour; I refer to the recent appointment, I understand on the recommendation of the minister, of Mrs. Mary Ellen Smith as a delegate from Canada to the League of Nations. Before I continue my remarks I should like the minister to give us a statement of the reasons for appointing this lady to this position.


Peter Heenan: I wonder if the hon. member would not bring this up under the proper item?


Robert James Manion: There does not seem to be a proper item I have looked them all over, and perhaps the minister might consider the question now since I must catch a train to-night.


Peter Heenan: Very well. I have been asked by the National Council of Women to send a lady delegate to the League of Nations each year to represent the women of Canada. Last year we sent over Mrs. Rogers of Winnipeg.


Richard Bedford Bennett: A Liberal.


Peter Heenan: You may know; I do not.


Richard Bedford Bennett: Well, you should know, and you do know.


Peter Heenan: I think I might be as good a judge of the ladies as my hon. friend.


Richard Bedford Bennett: Get away from all that guff and get down to business; you do know.


Robert James Manion: Is that all the minister has to say?


Peter Heenan: Yes.


Richard Bedford Bennett: It is not all; we will get more later on.


Robert James Manion: I do not know the lady at all, but I know something of her political record and I know something of her activities
Supply-Labour

since her appointment to this position. Of course there is no objection to a lady who is a Liberal being appointed to the position, any more than there would be objection to a lady who was a Conservative or a lady who represented the Progressive party or any other party, but this lady has a political record which is distinctly partisan. Not only was her previous political record so distinctly partisan, but since she received this appointment it has continued to be very partisan. I think the minister is to be criticized for not stopping her political activities after this appointment was made. This lady was president of the Liberal Association at British Columbia; she then became a member of the local legislature; she became a minister without portfolio; then she lost the confidence of the people of British Columbia to such an extent that she bad to change her ridiing, and she was defeated in the new riding. She then came to Ottawa and was appointed president of the ladies' Liberal federation of Canada-I think that is the name, but I am not sure. There is nothing wrong with all that, except that she had lost the confidence of the people of British Columbia and, therefore, I doubt if she has the confidence of the ladies of Canada. After having been appointed to this position she certainly lost the confidence of half the ladies of this country, those who are Conservatives, because she passed from one end of the country to the other making political speeches; she showed the bad taste of making political speeches after she had been given this appointment by the Minister of Labour.
After all, the League of Nations is an organization which we all wish to see succeed. It is non-political in every way and is an organization which all right-minded people desire to be of the greatest use to the world. A large proportion of the people of Canada have the desire to see the League of Nations successful, because it is an organization for the purpose of spreading peace throughout the world. That being the case, how can the Minister of Labour or the government expect a lady with such partisan political leanings to represent truly the women of Canada? How can they expect the women of all political persuasions in this country to take any interest in the League of Nations when a woman is appointed who has shown so much political partisanship after her appointment? She travelled one end of the country to the other making political speeches, and although I cannot prove my statement I have no doubt that she travelled at the expense of the government. I object, not as a Conservative,

but as a Canadian, to any representative of ours travelling under the aegis of the League of Nations and making political speeches. I object to her or any other representative of the people of Canada at the League of Nations making a political football out of that organization. I would like to get, and I think the committee should get from the Minister of Labour the absolute assurance that when this lady comes back her political activities will be stopped while she is more or lees in the pay of the people of Canada, because the government of this country is not a political party; the government represents the people of the country while it is in power, and she should be instructed by the Minister of Labour or by the government to keep away from any political partisanship when she is speaking to the people on the question of the League of Nations, until her appointment expires. Let her stick to the League of Nations and keep away from politics.


Peter Heenan: Without discussing at the moment whether or not we should select a lady or any other person because of political leanings, I would say to my hon. friend that Mirs. Mary Ellen Smith has not travelled through Canada at the expense of the government making political speeches. Mrs. Smith is receiving only her expenses, the same as any other delegate to the International Labour Conference receives.


Robert James Manion: Her home is in Vancouver; she would have her expenses paid as far as Ottawa, and on her way down here she was making political speeches.


Peter Heenan: That is not right.


Richard Bedford Bennett: She made one in this
city.


Peter Heenan: She attended a meeting
here in the city.


Richard Bedford Bennett: 
Edward James Young: She never makes any political speeches?


Richard Bedford Bennett: The voice of Weyburn
has spoken. That being so, I do say to the Minister of Labour that in all fairness to the people of this country and to the women of this country Who are not all of one political faith, he has not treated them fairly and he has not treated the League of Nations fairly iby selecting the head of a great political organization, the Liberal Women's Association of Canada, to represent the women of Canada at the League of Nations. When she returns the Conservative women are going to stay away from her meetings because she will be a political propagandist and it is not fair and right to ask women to attend who have taken an active interest in the work of the League of Nations. When the right hon. the Prime Minister returned from the League of Nations we all attended a banquet given in his honour because he was the head of the government of this country, but when Mrs. Smith returns a condition will be created which will preclude many women from taking an active interest in the work of the League of Nations.


Ernest Lapointe: Surely my hon. friend
is not serious?


Richard Bedford Bennett: I am very serious.


Ernest Lapointe: The government is not supposed to select neutrals as delegates to the League of Nations. There are very few people of that classification in Canada, and this is the first time such a doctrine has been propounded. I have been to the Leauge of Nations, and I was not a neutral then and I am not now.


Richard Bedford Bennett: But the hon. minister
represented the government.


Ernest Lapointe: When I was there I saw many lady delegates. There was a member from the British House of Commons, a supporter of the government of the day, and I am sure that she had been making speeches in her own country. A delegate to the International Labour Conference or to the League of Nations is not a civil servanC-far from it. People would not undertake such work if they had to renounce their right to their own opinions upon public affairs. The men or women who are qualified to represent this country are those who have views of their own -upon the public affairs of Canada. This lady has occupied' very high .positions in her own province and elsewhere. I remember when I came to parliament twenty-five years ago, Mrs. Smith was holding in Ottawa meetings which women and men of all political persuasions attended, when she was advocating the doctrine of suffrage for women. She has been one of the pioneers in the country in getting the vote for women. She has been interested in social and public matters all her life. Does the fact that she happens to have been elected president of the Liberal women of Canada disqualify her from being appointed to represent Canada on a body dealing with social matters, such as the International Labour Conference? She is not disqualified and she has the right to make speeches on public affairs in Canada. She is not an employee of this government.


Richard Bedford Bennett: Of course not.


Ernest Lapointe: Then why ail this
storm? Mrs. Smith has just as much right to air her views as my hon. friend has or I have, and this does not in any way disqualify her from representing the country at an international conference. I think it is a reflection on the women of Canada that they should be told that they cannot speak their minds on public matters, that if they do they must stay at home, that they can have no place in the representation of the country. My hon. friends are absolutely wrong in regard to the matter. Mrs. Smith has the right
3G62
Supply-Labour

to do what she has done, and I congratulate the Minister of Labour on having appointed a lady who will bring credit to her country at the International Labour Conference.


Robert James Manion: With all due respect, I
differ entirely from the Minister of Justice.


Ernest Lapointe: I know my hon. friend
does.


Robert James Manion: I know I do, and that is
something I am proud of. I absolutely differ from him in this, that I believe no woman who is having her expenses paid from her home to the League of Nations, has the right to air her political views when dhe is representing all the women of this country. The only reflection made on the women of Canada has been made by the Minister of Justice in saying that she can do so. I would urge the same thing if she were airing Conservative views under the same circumstances. Nobody is taking issue with Mrs. Mary Ellen Smith's politics.


Ernest Lapointe: Mrs. Smith.


Robert James Manion: I said Mrs. Mary Ellen
Smith.


Ernest Lapointe: I did not hear it.


Robert James Manion: I submit that Mrs. Mary Ellen Smith, when she was appointed to represent the people of Canada and being paid her expenses by all the people of this country, should have the good taste, even if the Minister of Justice does mot have it, to agree to keep away from politics for the two or three months She is representing the people of Canada. When she returns and ceases to represent the people of this country, she can talk her politics and nobody can object to that. But when she is representing a whole people, she has no right to make herself a political partisan and represent only a few of them.


Agnes Campbell Macphail: I really think that a
person who is appointed to go to the League of Nations represents all the people in a rather peculiar sense. I think it is quite right to say "Mary Ellen Smith," but if the Minister of Justice prefers "Mrs. Smith," I am quite willing to say that. If it was government-money that helped Mrs. Smith to travel across Canada; if it was government money that paid her expenses to come here, she had no right to make political speeches as she did. I should like to ask the leader of the opposition and also the Minister of Labour who, I think, divided the women into half Liberals and half Conservatives, how they arrive at that. They are not quite half Liberals and

half Conservatives, I am very happy to say.
I am a little fearful that women have been driven into the old parties without really digesting what it is all about. I am still hoping that some day they may know. May I make this suggestion? I made it in private to the government, or at least to the Prime Minister in 1926. It would be a very fine thing if we started to send parliamentary representatives to the League of Nations, and I at that time suggested Sir George Foster, because I thought he had done such splendid work for peace. This was not to the labour end of the league, but to the assembly. It is the people of Canada who are represented there and we should pretty soon get away from the idea of always having partisan representatives, and representing only one party in the house. We are pretty much in agreement; there is not much quarrel amongst us on the subject, and the government, if it wanted to do so, might see that such a man as Sir George Foster, for instance, was honoured by being sent as a representative of the Canadian parliament. I believe he is attending the league in any case whether he has been sent by the country or not. That is all I have to say on the matter. I quite agree with the leader of the opposition and the hon. member for Fort William; they are quite right in contending that the women of Canada will more or less resent the fact that all the appointments have been strictly partisan. Nobody can deny that. The appointments of the women have been as strictly partisan as those of the men.


Peter Heenan: I can hardly let this pass without saying a few words. My esteemed friend from Southeast Grey is not quite fair in the matter because, being the only lady member of the house, she could very well have answered the leader of the opposition when he said that the lady member of the house might have been sent. The lady member herself could have answered that suggestion. I do not care to answer it.


Agnes Campbell Macphail: May I do so? I could have been the representative sent, but as all the other women were partisans, I feared to accept the offer because I did not want to be thought a partisan.


Peter Heenan: Hon. members will see now by direct evidence that we tried to get away from being partisans so far as the ladies were concerned. Seeing that the political aspect of the ladies has been mentioned, I understand there is a Miss Carmichael from Nova Scotia who was appointed on one delegation. Hon. gentlemen opposite will know her politics much better than I do.

Supply-Labour


Richard Bedford Bennett: She is a very strong Liberal. Go on with the next one.


Hugh Guthrie: Head of the organization.


Peter Heenan: Thank heaven she is a strong Liberal, because she is a very smart woman. She is from the maritimes. Then we had Mrs. Thorburn from Ottawa.


Richard Bedford Bennett: Another Liberal.


Peter Heenan: That shows that she is a lady of good judgment.


Richard Bedford Bennett: President of the local
Liberal Association.


Peter Heenan: Then we had a lady from
tfie middle west, Mrs. Rogers.


Richard Bedford Bennett: A Liberal member of a
legislature.


Ernest Lapointe: What is the objection to a woman being a Liberal?


Robert James Manion: We were not objecting to the woman being a Liberal, but to her airing her Liberal views while representing the whole people of the country.


Peter Heenan: Hon. members can see
that we have selected ladies who have been prominent in the public life of the country, who have been elected by the people as their representatives. My hon. friend from Fort William has narrowed down his objections now to the point where these ladies ought not to make speeches.


Robert James Manion: I did not narrow down my objections at all. Those have been my objections from the beginning. I have made no other objections.


Peter Heenan: I said: He has narrowed
them down.


Robert James Manion: I did not narrow them
down.


Peter Heenan: I said:	He has narrowed them down from the time he first rose to his feet, because he went on to say that she had lost the confidence of the people of British Columbia-


Robert James Manion: So she did.


Peter Heenan: -that she had lost the confidence of the women of this country. Then when the hon. member for Southeast Grey agreed with him in regard to the travelling expenses, he said: That is the whole objection.


Robert James Manion: That is the whole objection, too. I was simply giving her record in a general way before I gave my objection. 78594-232
My objection was to her talking politics while she was representing the people of Canada and having her expenses paid by the people of Canada.


Peter Heenan: I will give the other side of the record. Unfortunately the lady is a widow and has no one to defend her. I am surprised that hon. members in any part of this house would take advantage-


An hon. MEMBER:: Of a widow.


Peter Heenan: -of a lady who has done more for social legislation than any other woman in this country, whose husband was president of the Trades and Labour Congress of Canada, who has been elected several times to the British Columbia legislature, who has been a member of the British Columbia government, and who has been head of nearly every ladies' organization of which she has been a member. I wonder if hon. gentlemen would say that she has lost the confidence of the women of this country when only a few days ago a resolution was passed by the National Council of Women thanking the government for appointing Mrs. Mary Ellen Smith to be a delegate to the International Labour Conference.


Robert James Manion: She lost the confidence of her constituents when she was defeated. That is all I said.


Peter Heenan: Has every member on the other side lost the confidence of the people because he was defeated at some time or other?


Robert James Manion: He has lost the confidence of his constituents if he is defeated.


Peter Heenan: Mrs. Smith is an ex-regent, Municipal Chapter, I.O.D.E.; past president, Women's Canadian Club; past president Women's Forum (Women's Ratepayers' Association of Vancouver); past regent of Primary Chapter, I.O.D.E.; member of the Suffrage League of Canada, having as its object the passing of protective legislation and the fostering of same. Mrs. Mary Ellen Smith was one lady, like Mrs. Rogers of Winnipeg, who stood on the floor of the legislature and advocated and fought for the passing of legislation in their respective provinces pertaining to old age pensions. I have here a long list of the activities in which Mrs. Mary Ellen Smith has been engaged.


An hon. MEMBER:: Read it all.


Peter Heenan: It is too long. Just within the last two or three days, while she has been overseas and since she has been engaged in these political activities, the Na-

Supply-Labour

tional Council of Women passed a resolution thanking the government for appointing Mrs. Smith to represent the women of Canada. Consequently I do not think it is fair that hon. gentlemen, a body of men, should stand up in this house and try to discredit Canada's delegate to the conference while she is over there.


Robert James Manion: Nobody is trying to discredit her.	.


Edward James Young: I would ask hon. gentlemen opposite, and particularly the hon. member for Fort William, whether it is any worse for Mrs. Smith to be airing her political views while she holds this position than for an hon. member to air his political views while he is a member of the Ontario liquor control board.


Jean-François Pouliot: I like to hear the hon. member for Fort William, who always makes nice speeches. He made nice speeches for his party in this house when he was a liquor commissioner for the province of Ontario, if I am not mistaken.


Robert James Manion: What has that to do with the League of Nations?


Jean-François Pouliot: I do not blame him for
doing that, but he was in exactly the same position as Mrs. Smith. I would ask the Minister of Labour if he could intervene for the relief of the Quebec labour men.


Mr. KAISER:: I would like to say a word in reply to the request made of the hon. Minister of Labour-"Can you do something for the labouring men of Quebec and other parts of Canada?" I understand that it is the business of the minister and his department to supervise contracts in which public money is being spent in Canada, that it is their business to see that a fair wage clause is inserted in those contracts. I think it is also their business to see that the work that is done under these contracts, and which is paid for out of the public treasury, should be given to the people of Canada. We do not need to go outside the city of Ottawa to see a very striking example of work being given to people outside of this country. We spent a tremendous sum of money to build in Ottawa a very fine hotel. I went through it the other day for the first time and I was delighted with it. I was quite charmed with the totem poles I saw there, and I saluted those pagan gods. I was charmed with the gurgling waters of the fountain. With another member of parliament I proceeded to examine the furniture that was there, and the only 
furniture that I could examine at all thoroughly was the chairs-the rest were all too big to examine. We turned the chairs upside down and we observed on them a remarkable motto. The first word of the motto was "Made". I could not see very well with the glasses I was wearing, and for a moment I thought that the motto read "Made in Kincardine." I thought I had something on the Minister of Trade and Commerce, but on looking at it a little more closely I discovered that the words were "Made in Czechoslovakia. ' Does the Minister of Labour know that money is being spent out of the public treasury of this country in that way? Does he take any interest in those contracts at all,? I would suggest that when the next election comes around the Minister of Labour and the Minister of Trade and Commerce march around under a banner on which are the words "Made in Czechoslovakia" and that they sing a duet to the workingmen of Canada as they salpte their banner, singing, "O, Canada, I stand on guard for thee."


Jean-François Pouliot: I would ask the minister to tell the committee if he can intervene on behalf of the Quebec labour men.


Peter Heenan: I think my hon. friend from Temiscouata will appreciate that the government has very little to do with contracts between labour and employers except when there are disputes, but as this matter has been brought up under the conciliation vote I would suggest that if my hon. friend and the Premier of Quebec cannot settle their disagreement I shall be glad to appoint a board of conciliation to arbitrate between the two. So far as the government of Quebec is concerned, I do know this, that of late they have been coming up to date. They have recently passed a minimum wage act for women and girls, and the' legislation is on a fair level with that of the province of Ontario, which I consider is the best province in the Dominion.


Charles Hazlitt Cahan: The best province or the
best legislation?


Peter Heenan: Oh, the best province.


Mr. PLUNKETT:: Does the minister consider Ontario more advanced in social legislation than British Columbia?


Peter Heenan: I will give you credit
out there. The social legislation Mrs. Mary Ellen Smith was instrumental in-

Supply-Labour


D'Arcy Britton Plunkett: The people of British
Columbia-


Some hon. MEMBERS:: Order.


Peter Heenan: Last session they accepted
a resolution requiring the insertion of a fair wage clause in pulp and paper mill and waterpower contracts. It is probably the second province in Canada to accept that principle. They have put into operation an up-to-date workmen's compensation act. So taking all in all the province is doing fairly well. As between employer and employee, I do not think any government, either provincial or federal, will interfere with any contract between employer and employee.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Administration, Employment Offices' Coordination Act, $17,000.
James Shaver Woodsworth: It seems to me,
Mr. Chairman, that there ought to be a much closer arrangement between the Department of Immigration and the employment agencies as operated under the Department of Labour.
I should like to read two or three paragraphs from a letter that I received about two months ago, simply because this very well illustrates the position in which a great many casual labourers find themselves in this country. The writer used to be in British Columbia; I knew him there some years ago. For a time he was a settler on a farm there. Then he says:
Owing 'to my wife's death our home in British Columbia was broken up and I went back to bush work, which I had followed up when I was a single man.
This fall I happened to be in Ofctawa^ after doing a summer's work in Ontario, working as navvy on the new highways. Well soon I was broke, had to go to work again. Engaged as general bushman at thirty-five dollars a month, board and bunk found, went down the Soo to work. Well when we goit there we found the camp full of Swedes. Started work November 5th and finished work January 30th. Well after paying train fare here and living expenses got a few needful lumbermen's clothes, etc., I was broke. Then I found myself in Port Arthur destitute, stone broke. So had to go to the police station. I asked the police officer if I was to commit a crime or what. I wanted the right to work to live. They said, commit no crime but come up and the magistrate will sentence you under charge of vagrancy-no visible means of support. I got two months at the industrial farm. There -fere several I found at the farm in the same boat, no work, but the farm. Well, I came out of the jail farm at Fort William this morning. The work there is all right, food and bunk good, but the disgrace of mixing up and being locked up with petty thieves, etc. Surely there can be something done better than jail hard-working men.
Then he comments on the cause of himself and other men being placed in this position, He says:
Now, as I said when I arrived at the Soo camp it was full of Swedes. We the Britishspeaking men were fired when the logs and roads were finished, the Swedes were kept on because they had been imported for twelve months' work, after the sleigh haul they were to start in the saw-mill. You see, sir, the timber companies know a thing or two about labour-every year they import green young men from Europe to atop the older men from organization to better thirty-five dollars a month, etc. So the new blood is kept on and the older bushmen take down the road. If broke we go to jail as vagrants.
I venture to read those paragraphs because in their own way, in not the very best English, they very well put the situation in which a great many casual labourers find themselves to-day. And we have to remember that a great deal of the construction work, bush work and harvest work across this country is carried on by these same transient labourers. It does seem that so long as there is a supply of these men in this country we have absolutely no right to admit any others. I think the labour department has a responsibility to insure that these men's jobs are protected. In this case the foreign-born men were given the preference, and men who had been for the greater part of their lives in this country were left jobless. What does the Minister of Labour propose to do in such a case? The other day the Minister of Immigration said that it was not his responsibility. The Minister of Labour was present, I think, when his colleague said: "That is a matter the labour employment bureaux will have to take care of." So he got through his estimates in that way. Now, I ask the Minister of Labour-


Robert Forke: Taking a bare statement
and placing it before the committee as my considered opinion is not fair.


James Shaver Woodsworth: I have not Hansard here, but I thought I was being fair.


Robert Forke: I do not deny using those
words, but you should give the context leading up to them.


James Shaver Woodsworth: My impression is
that the Minister of Immigration took the ground that he could not be responsible for employment in such cases.


Peter Heenan: A specific case was mentioned.


James Shaver Woodsworth: Quite so. But here is another case, and there are a great many of a similar kind, so I should like to ask the Minister of Labour how this difficulty can be obviated. I do not care whether the matter is taken up by the Department of Im-migiation or by the Department of Labour.
Supply-Labour

I want to see these transient labourers protected in their livelihood and not sent to gaol as this man was, in order to obtain a little to eat and a place in which to sleep.


Peter Heenan: In what month was it?


James Shaver Woodsworth: The letter is dated Fort William, March 30. The man had been in gaol two months and had just been released that morning.


Mr. McLEAN (Melfort):: The case cited
by the member for Winnipeg North Centre is one that occurs, to some degree at least, quite often. Men who move around from one province to another, two-thirds of the way across Canada, very often find themselves in difficulties. The hon. member has not given us any statement as to the character of this xnlan or why he was sent to gaol, but surely when the authorities took that course there must have been something wrong with the man. Otherwise it is an accusation against the civil authorities.


James Shaver Woodsworth: No, Mr. Chairman. I explained that the man found himseif absolutely destitute and went to the authorities and asked if he could be put in gaol or given a lodging and food. At his own request he was placed in gaol.


Malcolm McLean: For two months?


James Shaver Woodsworth: For vagrancy.


Malcolm McLean: Even then it is a reflection on the civil authorities, not on the Minister of Labour at all. I have seen many men drifting around the country, knowing that when they got stuck they would get, in the common parlance of the casual labourer, grubstaked to a job. To complain that certain Scandinavians at the Soo were held on while this man was let out, is hardly fair. Everybody who is connected with bush work knows that Scandinavians as a rule are first class men, and lumber companies like other employers will keep tihe men who are most valuable to them. On the strength of a letter from a particular man who finds himself in unfortunate circumstances and about whom we know little, it is hardly fair to criticise the Minister of Labour. These men of their own volition wander up and down the country and take a certain amount of pleasure in seeing the country and moving around. Generally I agree with the hon. member for Winnipeg North Centre in his views on labour, but this is something that occurs frequently and it cannot be stopped by any Minister of Labour.


James Shaver Woodsworth: I gave this as a concrete instance. I have been up and down this 
country for the last twenty years and I know very intimately the position of these casual workers all the way from here to the coast, and I could give from my own personal knowledge scores and scores of eases like this; or I could take statistics to illustrate the situation. I do not think I need to tell the Minister of Labour that frequently native born Canadians have their places taken by newly arrived immigrants, and I Should like him to inform the committee what steps he proposes to take in order to prevent this injustice being perpetuated.


Malcolm McLean: The hon. member has certainly used this case as an illustration of the complaint he was making.


James Shaver Woodsworth: An illustration, yes; of course I did.


Malcolm McLean: He based his argument on that, instance.


James Shaver Woodsworth: No; I did not base it on that instance; I gave the instance as an illustration.


Malcolm McLean: I am pointing out that hundreds of men go "booming," as they themselves say, over the country. This man was working in British Columbia and he wandered to Sault Ste. Marie and Fort William, and we all know that throughout the country there is a large amount of casual labour to be obtained between those points at the time he went there.


Herbert Bealey Adshead: I have two telegrams from Calgary dealing with this question. These telegrams were sent to me by the Trades and Labour Council of that city. For some reason or other the new arrivals land in Calgary every year in the spring. In this wire from the Trades and Labour Council no blame is laid on the Minister of Labour himself, but the statement is made that last week a number of continentals arrived through colonization associations. I know the particular colonization society m Calgary, but it is difficult to ascertain where they get these new continentals. At any rate, every year a number of these people-continentals, as this communication says-arrive in Calgary and take jobs at lower wages than those current in the city. The Trades and Labour Council also refer to the fair wage clause, which varies in the different departments. The gist of their representation is that there is not a uniform wage clause so far as the Dominion government is concerned, and I trust that the Minister of Labour will take cognizance of this telegram with a view to devising one uniform provision which shall apply to all contracts let by the Dominion,

Supply-Labour
and which he will be in a position to supervise.
I have no doubt the minister realizes the importance of uniformity in this matter; he knows how desirable it is to have one wage clause which can be put. into force by himself, obviating conflict as between one department and another. This telegram states that they know the Minister of Labour has done his best to enforce the act and to observe the minimum wage clause, and I just want to impress upon the minister the fact that if a uniform wage clause is not adopted it will simply prevent both himself and the labour council from properly enforcing the act. I do not know of any department of the government with which I have been more closely in touch than that of the Minister of Labour, particularly this session, for I have been there nearly every day in connection with a very serious wage dispute about which he knows; and so far as his department is concerned I can say I have received every consideration. And the Trades and Labour Council have so stated here. I hope that this question of uniformity in the matter of the fair wage clause will be seriously considered by the Minister of Labour, and I should be glad to be able to go back with the news that in future the various clauses will be eliminated and one uniform wage clause adopted which will enable the minister to enforce the provision more effectively and to the greater advantage of the labouring classes.


Richard Bedford Bennett: Why is it that, notwithstanding the minister's deep concern to have provision for an eight hour day inserted in contracts for public works, workmen who left Halifax under Mr. MacMillan and workmen who went to Churchill and have been employed directly by the government, are compelled to work ten hours a day with time and a half for work beyond that?


Peter Heenan: I have no direct knowledge of the case my hon. friend speaks of, but the eight hour provision is not in all public contracts. The custom which prevails in the particular district is what obtains in the fair wage clause. The government does not fix wages or conditions or hours of employment.


Richard Bedford Bennett: An eight hour day was
agreed to in the Treaty of Versailles.


Peter Heenan: Yes; but the prevailing
rate of wages is paid and the conditions are those that prevail in the district. I have no knowledge of the case to which my hon. friend refers.


Richard Bedford Bennett: Does not the minister
read the reports of the public accounts committee which are printed and which show that
the contracts were produced in evidence? The statement was made by his colleague, the Minister of Railways the other night in answer to a question of mine as to what were the hours of labour at Churchill on work for the government of Canada. The Minister of Railways said ten hours.


Peter Heenan: I do not know anything
about it. In regard to the question asked by my hon. friend (Mr. Woodsworth), the prdblem he has stated1 is an important one and one which I wish I could solve at once. In cooperation with the provincial governments we have sixty-four employment offices just to take care of these transient workers. They get information free as to where vacancies occur, the rates of wages, the conditions of employment, and so forth, and last year we placed 470,000 men through the agency of these sixty-four offices. My hon. friend should consider his question in relation to immigration. There is only one way I know of whereby we could solve this problem and that would be to have a system which would allow to come in only as many men as there are jobs for.


James Shaver Woodsworth: Well, isn't that
reasonable?


Peter Heenan: That would involve a
change of policy in immigration matters; it would call for a new general policy. 1 would point out to my hon. friend that every time I mention anything about restrictive immigration some hon. gentleman opposite as well as some newspapers take exception to my views in that regard.


Herbert Bealey Adshead: Labour will back you up.


Peter Heenan: Thank heaven for a little help anyway. With respect -to the point raised by my hon. friend from East Calgary in regard to the fair wage clause,, I may point out that we have in operation at the present time what might be called two wage policies.


Herbert Bealey Adshead: Three.


Peter Heenan: There are two. One is
where we contribute by public expenditure to any public contracts, public buildings and so forth; and the other is where we insert a clause in water-power leases providing that those who obtain the leases shall not pay less than the prevailing rate. But in the latter case the administration is different in that we have not provided that the decision of the Minister of Labour in the matter shall be final; it is more in the nature of a contract, and if they do not observe this particular section the
Supply-Labour

lease is subject to 'cancellation. However, I may tell my hon. friend that we intend changing the contracts so that the clause will be uniform from now on.


Herbert Bealey Adshead: I want to give the minister credit for helping us fight that particular clause, which contained the words, "in similar undertakings." That prevented him from putting the fair wage clause into effect; if that were eliminated and a fair wage clause put in which was uniform we would not have had the difficulty we experienced in the past in this connection.


Peter Heenan: We will fix it.


Mr. HOWARD:: I would like to correct a statement made by the hon. member for Ontario a moment ago, because I do not think we should let false information go out to the country. I happen to camp around the Chateau Laurier and I am proud to be there. The hon. member stated that all the furniture in the new w'ing of the Chateau Laurier was made in Czechoslovakia, but .that is not the case. The furniture in the Chateau Laurier was purchased from three Canadian firms employing Canadian workmen, but there is one chair which is used not only in the Chateau Laurier but in every hotel on the North American continent, a bent wood chair, which is not manufactured anywhere in the world except in Czechoslovakia; that is the ballroom chair. With that exception every bit of furniture in the Chateau Laurier was made in Canada.


Thomas Erlin Kaiser: Did I understand the hon. gentleman to say there was only one chair in the Chateau not made in Canada?


Charles Benjamin Howard: One type of chair.


James Shaver Woodsworth: I notice that the
Minister of Labour of the new government in Great Britain has announced that the eight hour day is to be enforced. I should like to know whether the eight hour day cannot be enforced at once in connection with the government's own work in Canada, and I should like to know what excuse the minister can offer for not having taken this action before now. There is no British North America Act to prevent him from doing so.


Peter Heenan: In answering my hon.
friend from East Calgary the other day with regard to this point, I stated that the government had the matter under consideration and I hope to be able to satisfy my hon. friends before next session.


Mr. MACDOUGALL:: The point brought up by the member for Winnipeg North Cen-

tre is of very great importance to every person who is sympathetic to labour in Canada. Labour throughout this country is vitally interested in a reasonably short work day. I quite understand that this government cannot legislate for the provinces generally in the matter of the eight hour day, but certainly this government has the power to put in the eight hour day in connection with government work, and if my hon. friend the minister deserves a thousandth part of the eulogy, the panegyric and the bouquets flung at him tonight by the hon. member for Temiscouata he should give a lead to industrial corporations in this matter. To say that we will have it next session is merely to say that although he has been eulogized as the greatest Minister of Labour we have ever known he has fallen down on one of the most vital questions concerning organized and unorganized labour throughout Canada. There is absolutely no reason for delay in this matter. When workingmen try to obtain a reasonably short working day, one which will give them an opportunity for recreation, a chance to improve their mental faculties and sufficient rest, they are generally met with the statement that the government of this country itself asks its employees on its public works to work ten hours a day, at a wage of twenty-five cents an hour. That is the situation with regard to the construction of wharves and breakwaters in the maritime provinces. My hon. friend has mentioned the application of a fair wage clause. I want to ask the minister why it is that when the Department of Public Works starts to construct a wharf somewhere in the maritime provinces they always base what they call their fair wage clause on the rate prevailing in that district for unorganized labour. Why do they not take the rate which has been obtained by the organized workmen through collective bargaining? If we are to judge by the minister's reply to-night he hardly merits the very splendid and carefully prepared eulogy sung by the hon. member for Temiscouata. I do not think there should be any further delay in this matter; if my hon. friend is a real friend of labour, as I believe he is, he should use those powers which he possesses as Minister of Labour to see that organized and unorganized labour throughout Canada have a reasonably short work day. He can do it with respect to government contracts; the matter brooks no delay, and there is absolutely no shadow or semblance of an excuse for delay.


Henry Elvins Spencer: I should like to refer to the report made by the select standing com-

Supply-Labour
mitte on industrial and international relations in 1926. At page 17 Mr. Bolton of the Department of Labour stated that what he considered a comfort budget was $2,400; I take that to be a budget giving a reasonable standard of living. I should like to ask the Minister of Labour if he thinks that figure is too high.


Peter Heenan: Perhaps my hon. friend
would bring up that matter when we come to a later item which covers it.


Henry Elvins Spencer: Very well.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Pair wages and inspection, $10,000.
Henry Elvins Spencer: Would my last question come under this item?


Isaac Duncan MacDougall: I would like to ask the minister what is the status of the Industrial Disputes Investigation Act at present. How many provinces have passed enabling legislation to make this act effective, in view of the decision of the privy council that it was ultra vires of the federal parliament?


Peter Heenan: All the provinces except Quebec and Ontario.


Isaac Duncan MacDougall: Has the .minister
held any conferences with the governments of these two provinces with a view to having enabling legislation passed?


Peter Heenan: Yes, but only in an_ indirect way; I do not think the federal Minister of Labour has any right to tell the provincial governments what they Should do in this connection. We placed this question before the Dominion-provincial conference and said it would make it much easier for us if they passed that legislation, but that has not been done as yet by those two provinces.


Isaac Duncan MacDougall: Not only is it the night, but it is the duty of the Minister of Labour to approach the provinces of Ontario and Quebec in an endeavour to have such legislation enacted. The old bahbaric method of settlement by force still prevails in those provinces, and I think the minister should approach them with a view to having enabling legislation passed.


Peter Heenan: I have done that in an indirect way. The Trades and Labour Congress of Canada has been asking these provinces to pass enabling legislation, but up to the present time they have not done so.


Isaac Duncan MacDougall: Could not the minister use his good offices in an endeavour to have that done?


Henry Elvins Spencer: The minister has not
answered my question.


Peter Heenan: Will the hon. member
please repeat it?


Henry Elvins Spencer: On page 17 of the proceedings of the industrial and international relations committee of 1926, I find that Mr. Bolton of the Labour department gave what he called a comfort budget, or decent standard of living, as $2,400 for a family of five. I would like ito know if the minister thinks that that figure is too high, or does he agree with it?


Peter Heenan: I think the hon. member will find that Mr. Bolton was only quoting what someone else had said; I do not think he gave that figure as his own.


Henry Elvins Spencer: A member who was
present in the committee has told me that he gave the figure as being the correct one.


Peter Heenan: I think he was quoting Professor Douglas.


Henry Elvins Spencer: The average wage is given as $1,003 for a family of five. If my figures are correct, does not the minister think that there is something wrong with the prosperity of this country? The prosperity must be very one-sided if the average wage earner is only receiving $1,003 per year.


Peter Heenan: If that is the average wage, it is too low, but the hon. member will understand that the Minister of Labour do-es not regulate wages.


Henry Elvins Spencer: Could the minister give
me the average earnings of farmers throughout Canada?


Milton Neil Campbell: It is less than nothing.


Peter Heenan: The April number of the Labour Gazette contains considerable information at page 453. Conditions have not changed since 1925, and wages of $40, $45 and so on are mentioned. It gives the board, wages, the earnings of female workers and so on.


Henry Elvins Spencer: That is for farm labour? Mr. HEENAN: Yes.


Henry Elvins Spencer: Could the minister give me the net income of the farmers?


Peter Heenan: We have no statistics for the farmers.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Industrial Disputes Investigation Act, $20,000. Mr. CAMPBELL: What was the expenditure last year?
Supply-Labour
Peter Heenan: The total vote.


Milton Neil Campbell: Is this volte for overhead, or are there extra expenses in connection with particular investigations?


Peter Heenan: It is for all expenses in
connection with the boards.


Milton Neil Campbell: It apparently does not make very much difference whether or not they are acting, the overhead remains the same.
value there is in our sending delegates so long as this parliament takes the attitude that it has no power to pass the necessary legislation.


Peter Heenan: We are obligated under the peace treaty to make this appropriation for the purpose. I agree with my hon. friend that it would be better if the provinces took an interest in this matter. I might inform my hon. friend that every year we invite the provinces to send delegates to this conference.


Peter Heenan: Oh, no, it depends upon the number of boards which are appointed. The expenditures in round figures for the past few years have been as follows:
1923-	24. .
1924-	25. .
1925-	26..
1926-	27..
1927-	28..
1928-	29..


Milton Neil Campbell: Could the minister give us some particulars as to the disputes investigated last year?


Edward Joseph Garland: Have they ever dome that?


Peter Heenan: On two or three occasions, I am informed. The question was discussed during the Dominion-provincial conference. The government stated to the provinces that if they would get together and select one delegate representing the provinces we would name him as a Dominion representative. We offered to do that, but so far they have not got together to select a delegate to represent the provinces.


Peter Heenan: There were twenty-two applications made last year; thirteen boards were established and the remainder were settled by conciliation without establishing boards.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
International Labour Conference, $20,000.
Edward Joseph Garland: We1 have been voting in this parliament from time to time veiy large sums of money in connection with this international conference, but the only result seems to be to furnish political planks which appear in the platforms of both parties. I am at a loss to find any other benefit in connection with these votes. Every time the Labour men in the house rise and 'ask for the application of the definite pledges of the political party in power, the answer is made that that is purely a matter for provincial legislation. Would it not be better if this money were voted for the purpose of endeavouring to encourage the provinces to undertake the sending of delegates to this International Labour Conference? Those delegates could return and the political parties in the provinces could put these planks into their platforms and we might get some legislation put through. Possibly the Department of Labour at Ottawa could act as a coordinating body in an endeavour to standardize the legislation of the different provinces, but at the present time I am at a loss to know what


Edward Joseph Garland: The statement of the minister would indicate quite clearly that he is of much the same opinion as I am with regard to this vote, namely, that until the provinces are as fully apprised as his delegates are of the situation at these international conferences, it is unlikely that we are going to get as speedy action as labour really requires and is justified in asking. Is the minister in further communication with the provinces at this time in regard to the matter, and when will the next international conference be held?


Peter Heenan: We asked the provinces
again this year if they would name delegates or advisers and they have not done so. Therefore we do the next best thing; we select . delegates and advisers from as many of the provinces as we can, consistent with the vote.


Edward Joseph Garland: When is the next conference?


Peter Heenan: There are twio this year. There is the maritime conference in the fall, and of course there is this one every year.


Isaac Duncan MacDougall: How many accompanied the minister to Geneva when he attended the economic conference? What are their names, and what was the total expense of that joy trip?


Peter Heenan: Does the hon. member
mean those who accompanied me?


Isaac Duncan MacDougall: Yes.

Supply-Labour


Peter Heenan: Mrs. R. A. Rogers of Winnipeg; Mr. T. J. Cochrane of Otitawa, who, by the way, is a British Columbia man; Mr. H. B. McKinnon of Kenora, and Mr. 0. Fiiiotn of Montreal.


James Shaver Woodsworth: It seeims to me
that we ought not to let our obligations under the Versailles treaty and the Washington conference pass by so lightly as we are doing. Either we as a nation were serious iin signing that treaty and those conventions or we were not. I recognize there are certain ocn-stituibional difficulties, but I should like to take the broad ground that if we have the right to sign the treaty, we have the power to see that its terms are enforced.


Richard Bedford Bennett: In our own work at any raite.


James Shaver Woodsworth: Yes; and even in a broader way than in our own work. I would say it is our responsibility to see that its terms are enforced. In the British North America Act there are certain clauses regarding residual powers which can be readily interpreted as giving us the power to enforce treaties, and if the government were serious about this matter we could have these treaties enforced. We have held up before us on every occasion the provisions of the British North America Act and we are told that we cannot do anything. I have already pointed out in one instance to-day that the government is not attempting to give us the eight-hour day even on its own public works. There are in the public service of Canada men who are working seven days a week and no attempt whatever is being made to give them one day's rest in seven.


James Alexander Robb: Is my bon. friend referring to the ministers of the crown?


James Shaver Woodsworth: I am not, although some of them must work very long hours. Indeed some of us object to being called upon to work until twelve o'clock midnight after having commenced at eight, but that is the government's own responsibility in that matter. There are in the government service, employees who are working seven days a week. There are others who are working at less than a minimum wage. We have again and again brought that to the attention of the government. There are civil servants who are getting less than $100 a month, only $85, a month. I have repeatedly urged the government to bring the salaries of its own employees up to a decent standard of living, but nothing is done in that regard.
Early in the session I presented the plight of steel workers in Sydney who are working eleven hours by day and thirteen hours at night. They get one Sunday off in two weeks, and they make up for that by working on alternate fortnights for twenty-four hours on end. That is a scandal, a disgrace to any country that calls itself civilized. Yet when we bring this to the attention of the government they say simply: " Oh the British North America Act!"
"We are giving special concessions to that steel company, to all steel companies. There is the same situation at the Soo as at Sydney and to a lesser degree at Hamilton in connection with some of the continuous operations. We might make it a condition precedent to the giving of any sort of special consideration to the companies that their employees must not be permitted to work more than eight hours a day. That is quite within the power of the government, but year after year the matter is passed by, the government saying that it has no power. If we had in authority a government that wanted to enforce the provisions of the Versailles treaty, it could do it and do it at once. But it is easier to hold up excuses rather than frankly to face the problem. I can hardly understand the Prime Minister taking the attitude he does; I know he personally would like to see these reforms. He is an idealist; he has sympathy; but the fact remains that he is not taking any action with regard to these matters.
I am speaking now on the estimates of the Minister of Labour. He apparently, although personally sympathetic with labour, has not the power inside the cabinet to make his wishes prevail. I do not know whether he has courage enough to face the issue and force the government to take action along this line. But I know labour across the country has been waiting-waiting in vain for some action to be taken along this line. Three or four years ago in reviewing the sessions of 1921 to 1925 I remember taking up in detail the planks of the Liberal platform and showing that there had been no earnest effort to implement any of those planks in so far as they referred to labour. I do not know whether the situation would be any better if we had another government in power. Both the Liberals and the Conservatives, representing the major part of the membership of this house, are definitely pledged to the main planks in the platform of organized labour, and yet nothing happens. That is the situation we face. I cannot quite see
Supply-Labour

how the Minister of Labour, this human dynamo as to-night he has been characterized, can sit quietly, in face of this kind of thing, and refuse to give the little bit of that dynamic that would put these reforms into effect.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Joint Industrial Councils, $5,000.
Milton Neil Campbell: Will the minister explain the relationship between this item and item 208, referring to the Industrial Disputes Investigation Act? Are they not one and the same?


Peter Heenan: There is no relationship
between the two items. As my hon. friend knows, the appropriation for the joint industrial councils was inserted in the estimates during the war. During the time there was unrest in this country it was thought if there were joint industrial councils, this might eliminate some of the industrial disputes. It was found that the government could not do very much; that it was a matter between employers and employees whether they would establish joint industrial councils or not. Therefore we have kept this item in the estimates purposely to keep the vote alive in case it might be needed.


James Shaver Woodsworth: Must we have another industrial upheaval before we get the councils?


Peter Heenan: It was thought that joint industrial councils might eliminate strife in part, but no one knows better than my hon. friend that you cannot establish joint industrial councils unless the workmen and the employers are themselves satisfied to establish them. There is an industrial council, for instance, in the very works where men are working, my hon. friend says, under disgraceful conditions, and I agree with him that they are working under disgraceful conditions.


James Shaver Woodsworth: In the steel plant
at Sydney?


Peter Heenan: In the steel plant.


James Shaver Woodsworth: Does the minister
mean that Bishoff scheme-the company union that is in operation there?


Peter Heenan: Yes.


James Shaver Woodsworth: I hope that we will not spend one cent to have anything of that character established.


Peter Heenan: So do I. The fair wage
officer that we have in Montreal is paid under this vote. He was appointed, not by the Civil Service Commission, but by the Union government during the war, and he has been giving very good service. We also intend to utilize this vote to pay expenses in connection with the national council for the civil service, which will be establishied I hope in a few weeks.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Administration, Old Age Pensions Act,
Milton Neil Campbell: This does not oover
all the cost- of administration of the Old Age Pensions Act, does it?


Peter Heenan: The administration comes
under the provinces. This is to provide for printing, travelling expenses and so forth. The vote was $5,000 last year, but owing to the other provinces coming in we expect a greater expenditure this year.


James Shaver Woodsworth: Has the minister
any indication to give as to whether Quebec and the maritime provinces will enter the scheme?


Peter Heenan: Nothing except that they
have shown that they are interested by inquiring how the scheme is working out, the cost and so forth. We have no encouragement to say that they are coming in, other than the inquiries that have been made. But we are encouraged because of the fact that they have not said that they are not coming in.


Henry Elvins Spencer: Five provinces so far are taking advantage of the scheme?


Peter Heenan: Yes, British Columbia,
Alberta, Saskatchewan, Manitoba and Ontario.


Herbert Bealey Adshead: How much has the Dominion government paid out in old age pensions so far?


Peter Heenan: For the fiscal year ending March 31, 1929, $832,668.78. The total amount up to date paid out by the provinces is SI .928,277.58. The federal government pays half.
Item agreed' to.
Labour - salaries, $251,450; contingencies, $30,000.


Richard Bedford Bennett: I desire to make a few
observations with respect to the increased salaries of deputy ministers. I promised the other evening that I would do so. I find

Supply-La hour
that Mr. Fielding, speaking as Minister of Finance, in the House of Commons, in 1923, said:
The salaries of the deputies is a troublesome question at all times. We have adopted a rule, which when I mention it, I 'think will be accepted. It was felt at first that the salaries of the deputies were not high and that there was fair claim for consideration. Then it was argued with some force that regard must be had for length of service, and the decision we reached was that in the case of any deputy in active service at the head of a department who had a service to his credit of ten years or more, we would consider that he was entitled to an advance; hut those whose terms of service were less than ten years were left out,_ hut not because they were not capable or efficient, but because it was held, and I think with_ reason, that some regard should be had for tile term of service. At all events that is the explanation. In every case where a deputy has served for ten years or moire, and is in active service at the head of the department, he receives the increase, unless he already has the increased salary; but as to the others there is no discrimination, except that which arises from the term of service.
Looking over the salaries proposed for the various deputies as contained in the estimates,
I find that some are to be increased by $2,000, others by $1,000, and others receive no increase. Some of these deputies have served ten years, some less than ten years. The deputy of the department now under discussion was appointed originally at $6,000. His salary was raised to $8,000, and now it is proposed to make it $9,000, although according to the record, he has not been in the service ten years altogether as deputy. He may have been longer in the service than ten years, because the records do not clearly indicate the length of service. What'I am saying has nothing to do with respect to the individual; it applies merely to the office, and I am discussing the question from that standpoint.
I come to the next question, which I discussed briefly the other evening when we had under consideration the salary paid to the clerk of the privy council. If the committee will look at the revised statutes of Canada of 1927, chapter 22, the Civil Service Act, they will find the following in subsection 2:
2.	(3) "deputy" or "deputy head" means and includes the deputy minister of the crown presiding over the department, the clerk of the privy council, the clerks of the senate and House of Commons, the librarians of parliament, the comptroller of the Royal Canadian Mounted Police, the superintendent of insurance

His salary is increased :
-the Dominion archivist-
His salary also is increased:
-'the Board of Railway Commissioners for Canada and, in all cases in which such meaning is not inconsistent with his powers and duties under the Consolidated Revenue and Audit Act, the Auditor General.
2.	(e) "head of the department" means the minister of the crown for the time being presiding over the department and includes the Speakers of the Senate and House of Commons.
I find that those are the only terms that are used with respect to them. The Prime Minister the other evening said that the clerk of the privy council is a deputy head. If he is a deputy head he is a deputy head by virtue of section 2 of chapter 22 of the revised statutes of 1927, which places in the same category, within the next few words, the clerks of the Senate and House of Commons, the librarians of parliament, the comptroller of the Royal Canadian Mounted Police-


William Lyon Mackenzie King: I think my hon. friend will find that the clerk of the privy council is a deputy by virtue of the statute which relates to the privy council, and which was passed many years ago.


Richard Bedford Bennett: But the Civil Service Act distinctly says-


William Lyon Mackenzie King: For the purposes of the Civil Service Act.


Richard Bedford Bennett: The Civil Service Act is what I have been reading from. I am reading from section 2 of chapter 22 of the revised statutes of 1927, and it says:
"deputy" or "deputy head" means and includes the deputy minister of the crown presiding over the department-


William Lyon Mackenzie King: Referring to that act.


Richard Bedford Bennett: Certainly. It goes on:
the clerk of the privy council, the clerks of the Senate and House of Commons-
The significance given to those words is attached to them in all the other statutes referring to them-the Superannuation Act, the Retirement Fund Act, the Insurance Act, and other acts. In other words, the definition given by the Civil Service Act is the definition that is accepted in the other statutes in dealing with various appointees. So that a discrimination has been practised with respect to a number of these gentlemen. In addition to that there is no fixed principle applied to those who are deputy ministers of departments. Mr. Fielding said it was difficult, but he laid down a rule. In this instance, as I pointed out the other day, if you take the various departments and go through
Supply-Labour

them you will see one deputy minister getting an increase of $1,000, another an increase of $2,000, another an increase of $1,800, and so on, without regard to any fixed principle that could be applied; and certainly with respect to one or two of them it is perfectly clear that their duties are very, very light, while in other cases they are very, very onerous. I take this opportunity of mentioning this because the other evening I mentioned the deputy of the Minister of National Defence, whose duties have become very much lighter because of the disarmament alleged by the minister, and the position of the Deputy Minister of Marine and Fisheries, to which reference was made the other evening. Now we come to the Department of Labour, in which I think there has been a departure from the principle laid down by Mr. Fielding in the first instance.


Mr. STEWART (Leeds):: I should like also to refer to a statement made by the right hon. the Prime Minister in discussing the position of the chairman of the Civil Service Commission. He was under the impression that Doctor Roche simply held office for a fixed term and was not in the same position as a deputy minister. In the Civil Service Act of 1918, chapter 12, part 1, section 3, it is provided:
There shall be three commissioners each with the rank of a deputy minister. Each commissioner shall hold office during good behaviour, but shall be removable by the Governor General on address of the Senate and House of Commons.
Provided, however, that any commissioner hereafter appointed shall hold office during good behaviour for a period of ten years from the date of his appointment, but shall be removable by the Governor General on address of the Senate and House of Commons, and shall cease to hold office upon reaching the age of sixty-five years.
Then the Civil Service Act found in the present revised statutes, chapter 22, provides by subsection 3 of section 3:-
3.	The commissioners in office on the twenty-fourth day of May, one thousand nine hundred and eighteen, shall hold office during good behaviour. Each subsequently appointed commissioner hsall hold office during good behaviour cor a period of ten years from the date of his appointment, save that his tenure of office shall cease upon his attaining the age of sixty-five years.
By subsection 4 it is provided:
Any commissioner shall be removed from office at any time by the Governor General on address of the Senate and House of Commons.
So that the head of the Civil Service Commission holds office for life, and not for a fixed period of ten years. He is in all respects in the same position as any deputy minister.

In fact, he is in a stronger position, I should think. It would appear that he ought to be treated in the same way as other deputy ministers.


William Lyon Mackenzie King: Apparently I
was mistaken, and I am glad my hon. friend has directed my attention to it. But what strikes me from his reading the statutes is that the discrimination to which the hon. leader of the opposition has been referring seems in that case to have been practised with a vengeance.


Hugh Alexander Stewart: In what respect?


William Lyon Mackenzie King: The government of the day was looking after its own friends by making the appointments outright, but taking care to see that subsequent governments could appoint members to the 'board for ten years only.


Hugh Alexander Stewart: I cannot see any discrimination in that. They have to take the same chance as their opponents in future.


William Lyon Mackenzie King: All right.


James Shaver Woodsworth: With this fully
developed Department of Labour and highly-paid officials, it seems to me we should look for some very much overdue labour legislation. Let me give simply one instance. This year there was trouble in Toronto. The Rapid Grip Company brought in from Europe workmen to take the place of their regular employees. If I understand aright, the Minister claims that under the alien labour legislation he has not the power effectively to handle a situation of that kind. Why does he not introduce legislation that will give him that power? In this case certain German workmen were introduced into the city of Toronto and took the places of the regular workmen. The same thing has been occurring in other places-in Edlmonton and out at the coast. Does the minister propose introducing legislation which will enable him to handle a situation of this kind' and thus protect Canadian workmen?


Some hon. MEMBERS:: Carried.


James Shaver Woodsworth: Cannot we have
some answer in regard to this matter? The minister, I know, has had this situation under consideration.


Peter Heenan: The Prime Minister has
already said that there will be no further legislation this session. The question of what should be done in future might be left until we see whether further legislation is necessary, because the case of which the hon. member speaks is to-day in litigation. Of course, the

Questions
hon. member realizes that there is no doubt about the present law applying to workmen from the United States. When these men were brought in I called the attention of the company to the fact, and they immediately sent back the American workmen; they did retain a few of the Frenchmen, Germans and Swiss. The union interested thinks that the Alien Labour Act does apply, and have taken action in the courts.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Civil government-Public Archives-salaries, $110,180; contingencies, $20,000.
Henry Elvins Spencer: What is the explanation
of the increase?


Louis Édouard Fernand Rinfret: This is the usual vote.
There is no change except the statutory increase of $1,364.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Progress reported.
On motion of Mr. Mackenzie King the house adjourned1 at 12 o'clock midnight.
Thursday, June 13, 1929