Mr. WEIR (Macdonald):: 1.	Did the Dominion government guarantee or agree to guarantee the various banks which took over the deposit liability of the province of Manitoba savings office, if so, what was the nature of the guarantee and what was the amount thereof?
2.	If no guarantee was given said banks, was any other arrangement or agreement made or entered into by the Dominion government with the banks in connection with the taking over of the said deposit liability?


Mr. BENNETT:: Mr. Speaker, the house passed an order for the production of the papers with regard to this matter, and therefore I think the question should be dropped.


Mr. BROWN:: Is it certain that the papers to be brought down will give definite answers to those questions?


Richard Bedford Bennett: They must.


Mr. SPEAKER:: Dropped.



LUMSDEN, SASK., POST OFFICE

Mr. BUTCHER:: 1.	What was the total cost of post office at Lumsden, Saskatchewan?
2.	Were tenders invited, what are the names of persons tendering, and amount of tender in each case?
3.	If total cost of building exceeded amount of successful tender, give details of extras and cost of same?


Mr. STEWART (Leeds):: 1.	$22,889.37, as follows:
Site	
Legal services	
Contract for building	
Contract for interior fittings.. .
Post office boxes	
Salary of Clerk of Works	
Safe (including tax and freight) Brass plates, window blinds, etc Advertising and printing	
2.	Yes.
Tenders for construction:
School Builders & Equipment Co., Regina	
Poole Construction Co., Ltd., Regina	
The Waterman Waterbury Mfg. Co., Ltd., Regina Bird, Woodall & Simpson Ltd., Moose Jaw	

	2,000	00
	61	51
	17,016	70
	978	00
	1,294	10
	637	10
	424	63
	362	10
	114	93
$	22,889	37.$	15,940	0016,357	0016,574	0016,600	00
Questions	
Tenders for construction-Concluded			
Broders Limited, Regina				
Hipperson Construction Co., Ltd., Regina.				 16,750 00
Lockwood Bros., Regina					 17,597 00
Smith Bros. & Simpson, Ltd., Regina.. ..				 17,650 00
Wilson & Wilson, Ltd., Regina					 18,400 00
Tenders for interior fittings:			Birch B.C. Fir
Can. Office & School Furn., Ltd., Preston..			$ 978 00 No quotation
Regina Sash & Door Co., Ltd., Regina.. ..			1,094 00 $ 940 00
Sterling Millwork Ltd., Saskatoon				1,141 00 928 00
School Builders & Equipment Co., Regina			1,249 00 1,095 00
The Western Mfg. Co., Ltd., Regina.. ..			1,259 00 1,014 00
The Office Specialty Mfg., Co., Ltd., Ottawa.. ..			1,269 00 1,396 00
The Interior Hardwood Co., Ltd., Kitchener				1,367 00 1,408 00
W. H. Cushing Ltd., Regina				1,403 00 1,061 00
Tenders for post office boxes:			
Rubenstein Bros				81,294.10 tax included
Office Specialty Mfg. Co., Ltd				1,316.25 tax included
Robert Mitchell Co				1,459.50 tax extra
3. Contract for construction of building:			
School Builders & Equipment Co					 815,940 00
Less deduction for face brick					 154 50
Extras on contract:			
Installation of steel boiler					 175 00
Installation of gate valve to basement drain.. ..				 26 50
Eavetrough, conductor pipe, and tank in	basement				 Ill 00
Blower system for boiler				
Sewerage pump well complete					 522 70
Sinking well extra 3 feet				
			$ 17,016 70
UNEMPLOYMENT RELIEF-QUEBEC		CLOSING	OF FACTORIES


Mr. LARUE:: Mr.	RHEAUME:	
1. Were requests for funds from the muni-	How	many factories closed their doors from	cipalities of the villages of Amqui and	September 1, 1930 to	date?Causapseal, and the parishes of St. Benoit,	Joseph-Labre and St. Leon le Grand, to carry	Mr. STEVENS:	out works pursuant to the Unemployment Relief Act, and approved by the Quebec government, received by the Dominion committee on unemployment relief?	No	information.	2. If so, how has said Dominion committee	DOMINION BONDS	settled this matter?	Mr.	SPENCER:


Mr. GORDON:: Of the Dominion government of Canada bonds		
1. No.	issued	during 1931, what quantity was bought	
	by: (1) railways: (2) mortgage companies: (3)		
2. Answered by No. 1.	banks;	(4) insurance	companies ?
41761-124^			
Questions


Mr. RHODES:: Statistics are not compiled showing classification of bond buyers. Complete data is not available for such purpose as many buyers act through agents-their banks or bond dealers.



QUESTIONS PASSED AS ORDERS FOR RETURNS


Mr. POULIOT:: 1.	How many postmasters had to undergo inquiries for political partisanship since August, 1930: (a) each month, and (b) in each province?
2.	In how many eases: (a) each month since August 1, 1930, and (b) in each province, did the Postmaster General require a written complaint accompanied by an affidavit before granting an inquiry for political partisanship?


NOVA SCOTIA COAL
Mr. ILSLEY:: 1.	Has the government taken any steps to secure markets in Canada for an additional quantity of Nova Scotia coal?
2.	If so: (a) what steps have been taken; (b) will the government's policy be submitted to parliament for its consideration?
3.	Has the sale of Nova Scotia coal in Canada
been increased since the initiation of the government's national fuel policy, so called, last session, and if so, by what tonnage as compared with the same months in the year before the initiation of such policy?	,
4.	If such sale has not increased, has it decreased, and if so, to what extent?


UNEMPLOYMENT RELIEF-QUEBEC
Mr. BOULANGER:: 1.	What are the various amounts disbursed by the Dominion government, from December 1, 1931, to April 1, 1932, relating to the eost of the works carried out in the province of Quebec to relieve unemployment?
2.	To whom and on what dates were said disbursements made?
3.	On what works were said disbursements made?


ALBERTA TIMBER AREAS
Mr. COOTE:: 1.	What is the area in square miles of the merchantable timber in Alberta?
2.	What is the area in square miles of the merchantable timber in Manitoba?
3.	What has been the cost of maintaining that part of the Royal Canadian Air Force engaged in forest-fire protection and patrol work inMberta during the period, January 1, 1929, to January 1, 1931?
4.	What has been the eost of maintaining that part of the Royal Canadian Air Force engaged in forest-fire protection and patrol work in Manitoba during the period, January 1, 1929, to January 1, 1931?


Mr. CAHAN:: Stand as an order for return, tabled herewith.


WILLIAM NOBLETT
Mr. DUFF:: 1.	Was William Noblett, LL.B., of Sydney, Nova Scotia, appointed a commissioner to investigate cases of political partisanship?
2.	How many of such cases did he investigate?
3.	How many dismissals were made on his recommendation ?
4.	What amount did he receive for:	(a)
remuneration; (b) expenses, for any work done in connection with said investigation?


NOVA SCOTIA-APPLE CROP
Mr. DUFF:: 

DAUGHTERS OF THE EMPIRE

[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. OSCAR L. BOULANGER (Belle-chasse): I would like to direct a question to the Secretary of State (Mr. Cahan). I should like to ask if he has given permission for the use of the Dominion archives building, which belongs to the Canadian people, by the Imperial Order of Daughters of the Empire

Unemployment Orders in Council
for the holding of a reception- in aid of the relief work carried on by the order, at which there will be dancing and bridge playing. I should like to ask also if the minister would condescend to do the same thing for the Native Sons of Canada should they desire to organize a charity ball or bridge party in aid of the civil servants or railway men, for instance, recently dismissed by the government.
Charles Hazlitt Cahan: I remember that I gave permission for a reception to be held, but whether or not that permission was given the Imperial Order of Daughters of the Empire I am not sure. It was not brought to my attention that there was to be dancing or bridge playing, or any other form of entertainment; I understood it was to be a reception, and I followed the precedent laid down by my predecessors.
If the Native Sons of Canada desire to hold a reception in the same building they should apply in the usual way and I will take the matter into consideration before giving an answer.


Hon. R. J. MANION (Minister of Railways and Canals):: In his concluding words the
hon. gentleman spoke of railway men who had been dismissed by the government. I wish to say there have been no railway men dismissed by the government; any dismissal of railway men was done by the Canadian National Railways management.



CIVIL SERVICE SALARIES

[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. T. FRANKLIN AHEARN (Ottawa):: I should like to direct a question to the Minister of Finance (Mr. Rhodes). Will cheques be issued to the civil servants on April 15, and, if cheques are issued, will the ten per cent reduction be made?


Edgar Nelson Rhodes: As to the first part of the question,
the answer will depend upon the attitude of another chamber with respect to the supply bill now before it. As to the second part of the question I would anticipate that we would have a right to have regard to the legislation which has been advanced in this house almost to the final stage.



UNEMPLOYMENT ORDERS IN COUNCIL

[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. WILLIAM DUFF (Antigonish-Guys-borough):: I should like- to direct the attention of the Prime Minister to the suggestion
I made a few days ago that the orders in council which are laid on the table from day to day with regard to unemployment and farm relief moneys be either printed in the votes and proceedings or made an appendix to Hansard. When only one copy is available it is a great inconvenience to members of parliament, and I wondered if the Prime Minister had been able to give the matter consideration and if he had come to a favourable decision.


Richard Bedford Bennett: Looking up the orders in council I
find they are practically all the same, varying mainly in the amounts for the various provinces to which payments are made, and unless it becomes the general will of the house it is not at the moment regarded as wise that the additional expenditure should be incurred in printing orders in council of that character, which would involve a very large number of pages added either to the votes and proceedings or to the daily copy of Hansard.
Before we proceed with the next order I would like to point out to the hon. member for Antigonish-Guysborough the fact that at page 246 of the votes and proceedings the orders in council tabled yesterday indicate to whom payments are to be made. I think perhaps in the first one the amount is mentioned, $2,000,000, and that succeeding orders in council might be amplified by stating the amount involved; then you would have the name of the province to which payment had been made, and the amount. If that would meet the hon. gentleman's wishes, I might-give directions this afternoon that it be done.


William Duff: That is quite satisfactory, Mr. Speaker. I had intended to suggest it to the Prime Minister.



RACE TRACK EMPLOYEES

[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. ECCLES J. GOTT (South Essex): I should like to direct the attention of the government, and particularly of the Minister of Immigration (Mr. Gordon) to the fact that a number of pari-mutuel operators working on race tracks in the southern United States have been dismissed for no other reason than that they are Canadian citizens. There are a large number of Americans who work on Canadian race tracks, and I would ask the minister to see how many Canadians have been dismissed from American tracks and try to prohibit the employment of Americans on Canadian race tracks during the race meetings this summer.
[Stage Direction]
The Budget-Mr. Edwards
Wesley Ashton Gordon: The matter to which the
hon. member has made reference has been under consideration by the Department of Immigration for the past week or so. All the information we can secure is being assembled for the guidance of the officers of the department.



THE BUDGET


[Stage Direction]
The house resumed from Tuesday, April 12, consideration of the motion of Hon. E. N. Rhodes (Minister of Finance) that Mr. Speaker do now leave the chair for the house to go into committee of ways and means, the proposed amendment thereto of Mr. Ralston, and the proposed amendment to the amendment of Mr. Gardiner.
Mr. A. M. EDWARDS (South Waterloo):: Mr. Speaker, may I first of all extend my congratulations to the architeot of this budget, the present Minister of Finance (Mr. Rhodes). While it has in it many tax levies which possibly bear heavily on a certain portion of the community, still I feel that these levies have been placed upon those people best able to pay, and it is to be hoped that ere another year rolls around and another budget has to be prepared better times will prevail which will permit these taxes to foe lowered.
I am not one of those who think that wealth should be conscripted for tax purposes. We depend on the circulation of capital for the development of our industries, and we usually find that those possessing wealth invest it in our industrial establishments. The levying of an excessive income tax seems to me to be a restriction on initiative, for it means that the man who goes out and makes good is penalized until in the higher categories he loses fifty per cent of his income. However, as I said before, perhaps an upturn in business before next session will enable the government to lessen these imposts.
May I say a word to my good friend who preceded me in this debate, the hon. member for South Huron (Mr. McMillan). I have a very great respect for him. For several sessions I have listened to his views on the tariff question, unquestionably they do not change, and I think the hon. member has advanced them so often that he almost believes them himself. I wonder if hon. gentlemen who are constantly advocating a reduction in protection both for business and for industry have ever pictured to themselves what would have happened to this country if we

had not had the tariff protection enacted in the special session of 1930. That measure was taken barely in time. We had the debacle of business in the United States, industrialists there selling their wares for almost anything they could get for them, not on any fair com-i petitive basis by any means. Two years ago I cited an instance, and perhaps it will bear repetition now, with respect ito the heavier lines of goods manufactured in different parts of the United States where freight rates are sufficiently low to offset the long haul, and where they have in operation what is known as a zoning system. The manufacturers of these heavier lines of goods in the New England states have a zone, we will say, as far west as Buffalo; the Buffalo zone extends to Toledo and Detroit; the Toledo and Detroit zone extends as far west as Chicago and Minneapolis, and from those points the zone extends to the Pacific coast. In normal times it is the understanding between those manufacturers that they shall market their goods within itheir respective zones, but when abnormal conditions arise, as was the case in 1930, this understanding is ignored and they have a free hand. The manufacturer of heavy ware in the eastern states will, for instance, market his goods as far west as Minneapolis or Chicago. He is not particular about the price he gets in that zone, but he is particular about the price in his own zone. In other words, he endeavours to hold up the market for his product in bis own zone, and slaughter it in the other zone. Now, what happened on that occasion? Those goods were coming into Canada for a while, but, due to the vigilance of our National Revenue department, their entry was soon stopped. Those goods were valued for duty purposes at the prices at which they were sold in the slaughter zone, so our manufacturers were subjected to most unfair competition, no regard whatever being paid to cost or to distance of distribution; it was simply a matter of keeping their factories going, getting their prices in their own market and slaughtering them in the foreign market. That happened in various lines of industry. If in 1930 we had not taken means to protect ourselves, what would have happened? We would have been faced with an army of 120,000,000 people as against our small army of 10,000,000. As an inevitable result, our market would have been ruined, and there would be no business for our own industries. Therefore I most heartily commend, as do the people whom I have the honour to represent, the action taken by this government in 1930 to protect our home market.

The Budget-Mr. Edwards
Before I deal with the subject matter of my remarks, I desire to say a word with respect to the suggestion made yesterday by the hon. member for Dufferin-Simcoe (Mr. Rowe), that mixed farming be encouraged by means of a cash bonus. While I am not in favour of such a proposal as a general rule, yet at the present time we have an emergency situation, a situation that must be dealt with, and if it is fair to grant a cash bonus of five cents a bushel on wheat, which benefits more particularly our western people-and it was right; I quite agree with it-then I think there is a reasonable argument in favour of giving similar assistance to our farmers in Ontario and Quebec, who to-day are suffering from a deflation of prices such as has never been known before. I am not a farmer and do not pretend to know very much about farming, and while I am not giving it as my considered opinion, still I think the proposal is worthy of consideration by the government, and I hope they will deal with it at the proper time.
With regard to industry in Canada: During the last two sessions we have heard from hon. gentlemen opposite a great deal about the calamity that they prophesied as a result of the government's action in protecting our home market. To show what actually happened, I have secured data from the Bureau of Statistics with respect to the employment afforded by the 157 new concerns established in Canada since 1930. The first group includes the companies which furnish monthly data
on employment. These number 58 and as of March 1, 1932, employed 2,124 people. These are new factories which have opened up since the imposition of the tariff in 1930. The next group includes firms whose products are manufactured in other factories. There are five companies in this group employing 317 people. The next group includes three companies whose business has been reorganized, employing a total of 172 people. There are other classifications for which the data is not given. There are fifty-two firms employing less than fifteen people. There are fourteen firms which although not operating at present will shortly commence to do so, while others have stated that they do not intend to open up in Canada. There are twenty-five firms from which no information was obtainable. This completes the total of 157 companies.
These companies are summarized according to their manufactures. There are nine producing vegetable products; six producing animal products outside of textiles; nine producing textiles; thirteen producing wood and paper products; forty producing iron products; twenty-eight producing non-ferrous metal products; six producing non-metallic mineral products; fifteen producing chemical and allied products; four producing mining and metallurgical products and eight producing miscellaneous products, etc. With the permission of the house I will place the details on Hansard:
List of New Concerns Establishing in Canada Since August, 1930 United States
A.	Vegetable Products-
1.	Baldwin Rubber Co. of Canada Ltd
2.	Campbell Soup Co., Ltd	
3.	Fine Foods of Canada, Ltd	
4.	Hill Nut Co. Ltd	
5.	Liberty Cherry Co. of Can. Ltd....
6.	Newton Products	
7.	Siren Mills Corp. Ltd	
8.	Stedfast Rubber Co	
9.	Minute Tapioca Co. Ltd	
B.	Animal Products (except Textiles)-
1.	Appollo Fur Dyeing Co	
2.	Cantilever Shoe Co. of Can. Ltd...
3.	Griffith Laboratories, Ltd	
4.	Lackawanna Leather Co. of Can. Ltd
5.	Schwegler's Hatchery	
6.	Selby Shoes, Ltd	
C.	Textiles

1.	M. E. Binz Co	Montmagny, Que.2.	B. Edmund David Silk Mills of Can. Ltd	Hawkesbury, Ont.3.	Dominion Webbing Co. Ltd	Kingston, Ont.4.	Donahue Corp. of Can. Ltd	St. Hyaeinthe, Que.5.	Esmond Mills, Ltd. of Canada	Granby, Que.6.	Herbert Hosiery Mills, Ltd	Toronto, Ont.7.	Schlegel Co. of Canada, Ltd	Toronto, Ont.8.	Stark Bros. Ribbon Mfg. Co. of Canada	Granby. Que.9.	Westminster Hosiery Ltd	Mount Denis, Ont.
Montreal, Que. Toronto, Ont. Toronto, Ont. Toronto, Ont. Bridgeburg. Ont. Montreal, Que.
New Toronto, Ont.
Windsor, Ont.
Toronto, Ont.
Toronto, Ont.
(Commenced August 15/30). Toronto, Ont.
Montreal, Que.
Granby, Que.
Montreal, Que.
1976	COMMONS
The Budget-Mr. Edwards
List of New Concerns Establishing in Canada Since
United States-Continued
D.	Wood and Paper Products-
1.	Brown & Bigelow Ltd	
2.	E. L. Bruce Co. of Can. Ltd	
3.	Dixon Pencil Co	
4.	Eagle Pencil Co. of Can. Ltd	
5.	International Lithographing Co. Ltd	
6.	McFadden Magazines of Can. Ltd	
7.	Northern Lumber Co	
8.	Rochester Paper Co. Ltd	
9.	Schaeffer Ross Co. of Can. Ltd	
10.	Stanley Manufacturing Co. Ltd	
11.	Venus Pencil Co. of Can. Ltd	
12.	Wood-Mosaic Co. (Canada) Ltd	
E.	Iron and its Products-
1.	A.B.C. Washer Co	
2.	Josiah Antice Co. Ltd	
3.	Belleville-Sargent & Co. Ltd	
4.	Essex Wire Corporation	
5.	Hardware, Woodenware and Toys Ltd	
6.	CrossUoal-O-Matic Co. of Can. Ltd	
7.	Diamond Iron Works of Can. Ltd	
8.	Dominion Body Co. Ltd	
9.	Dominion Hoist & Shovel Co	
10.	Dominion Motors Ltd. (operating agreement)....'	
11.	Dresser Mfg. Co. Ltd. (non-mfg.)	
12.	Evans Products Ltd	
13.	Eedders Manufacturing Co	
14.	Gardner-Denver Co. Canada Ltd	
15.	Heaters of Canada	
16.	Hump Hairpin Mfg. Co. of Can. Ltd	
17.	Hupp Motor Car Corp	
18.	Hudson-Essex of Canada, Ltd	
19.	Iron Fireman Manufacturing Co	
20.	Johnson (S. T.) Oil Burners of Can. Ltd. (non-mfg.) . ...
21.	Lodge Motor Co. Ltd	
22.	Lynn Canadian Products Ltd	
23.	Maytag Co. Ltd	
24.	Metal Textile Corp	
25.	Otis Steel Co. of Canada Ltd	
26.	Packard Motor Car Co. of Can. Ltd	
27.	Pierce-Arrow Co. of Can. Ltd	
28.	Pioneer Equipment Co. (Can.) Ltd	
29.	Pfaudler Co. of Canada Ltd. (non-mfg.)	
30.	Radiator Specialty Co. of Canada	
31.	Reo Motor Co. of Canada	
32.	Silent Glow Oil Burner Corporation, Ltd	
33.	L. C. Smith & Corona Typewriters of Can. Ltd	
34.	Snap-On-Tools Ltd. of Canada (non-mfg.)	
35.	Stewart Truck Corp. of Canada (assembling)	
36.	Taco Heater Ltd. of Canada	
37.	D. D. Terrill Saw Co	
38.	Tower Oil Burner Co. Ltd	
39.	Walter Motor Truck Co. Ltd	
40.	White Co	
F.	Manufacturers of Non-Ferrous Metals-
1.	Arrow-Hart & liegeman. Canada, Ltd	
2.	Baldor Electric Co. Ltd	
3.	Barometric Fuel Saver of Can. Ltd. (royalty basis) ....
4.	L. S. Brach of Canada Ltd	
5.	Burr-Patterson & Auld Co	
6.	Canadian Controllers. Ltd	
7.	Continental Carbon Co	
8.	Curtis Lighting Co. of Can. Ltd	
9.	Dennison Electric Co	
10.	Dictograph Co. of Can. Ltd	
It. Eastern Power Devices, Ltd. (formerly sales office)....
12.	Erie Resistor of Canada Ltd	
13.	General Railway Signal Co. of Can. Ltd	
14.	Hammond Co. of Canada, Ltd	
15.	International Resistance Co. Ltd	
August, 1930-Continued
Toronto, Ont.
Toronto, Ont. Newmarket, Ont. Drummondville, Que. Toronto, Ont.
Sault Ste. Marie, Ont. Toronto, Ont.
Toronto, Ont.
Toronto, Ont.
Toronto, Ont. Woodstock, Ont.
Granby, Que. Toronto, Ont. Belleville, Ont. Windsor, Ont. Coaticook, Que. Montreal. Que.
Port Arthur, Ont. Walkerville. Ont. Longueuil, Que. Toronto, Qnt. Toronto, Ont. Vancouver, B.C. Toronto, Ont. Toronto, Ont. Oak\ille, Ont.
St. Hyacinthe, Que. Windsor, Ont. Tilbury, Ont. Toronto, Ont. Montreal. Que. Walkerville, Ont. Brockville. Ont. Toronto. Ont. Hamilton. Ont. Toronto, Ont. Windsor, Ont. Walkerville, Ont. Brantford, Ont. Montreal, Que. Toronto, Ont. Toronto, Ont. Montreal, Que. Toronto, Ont. Toronto, Ont.
Fort Erie. Ont. Toronto, Ont. Pembroke, Ont. Montreal, Que. Toronto, Ont. Montreal, Que.
Toronto, Ont. Toronto, Ont. Toronto, Ont. Toronto, Ont. Walkerville, Ont. Toronto, Ont. Toronto, Ont. Toronto, Ont. Toronto, Ont. Toronto, Ont. Toronto, Ont. Toronto. Ont. Montreal, Que. Toronto, Ont. Toronto, Ont.

The Budget-Mr. Edwards
List of New Concerns Establishing in Canada Since August, 1930-Continued. United States-Concluded
F.	Manufacturers of Non-Ferrous Metals-Concluded
16.	Leland Electric of Canada, Ltd. (mfg. rights).
17.	Mayflower Co. of Canada	
18.	Noma Electric Co. of Canada	
19.	Packard Cable Co. of Canada, Ltd	
20.	Polymet Manufacturing Corp	
21.	J. P. Seeburg Corp	
22.	Silver Marshall of Canada, Ltd	
23.	Simms Motor Units of Canada Ltd	
24.	Utah Carter Radio Co	
25.	John C. Virden Co. Ltd	
26.	Wheeler Reflector Co	,	27.	Wilson Illuminating Co. Ltd	,	28.	Wiremould Co., of Canada, Ltd	G.	Manufacturers of Non-Metallie Minerals-1.	Bundy Incubator Co.	of Canada. Ltd	Toronto, Ont.2.	Canadian Rockbestos	Products	Ltd	Montreal, Que.3.	Cork Insulation Co.	(Canada)	Ltd	Montreal, Que.4.	Masters Builders, Ltd	Toronto, Ont.5.	Tremco Manufacturing Co. (Canada) Ltd (formerly salesoffice)	Leaside, Ont.6.	James Vernor Co	Walkerville, Ont.
Toronto, Ont. Hamilton, Ont. Toronto, Ont. Toronto, Ont. Hamilton. Ont. Toronto, Ont. Toronto, Ont. Toronto, Ont. Toronto, Ont. Toronto, Ont. Toronto, Ont. Toronto, Ont. Toronto, Ont.
H.	Chemicals and Allied Products-
1.	Bromo-Seltzer, Ltd	Toronto, Ont.2.	Everett & Barron of Canada, Ltd	Toronto. Ont.3.	Ex-Lax, Ltd	Montreal, Que.4.	F. W. Fitch Co. Ltd	Toronto, Ont.5.	Fyr-Fyter Co. of Canada, Ltd	Hamilton. Ont.6.	General Printing Ink Corp. of Canada	Toronto, Ont.7.	The A. W. Higgins, Co	St. Johns. N.B.8.	Huntington Laboratories of Canada	Ltd	Toronto, Ont.9.	Mallinckrodt Chemicals Works of Can. Ltd. (formerlysales office)	Toronto, Ont.10.	Mum Manufacturing Co. Inc	Windsor, Ont.11.	Nestle-Le Mur Co. of Canada Ltd	Toronto, Ont.,	12. Noxzema Chemical Co. of Canada	Toronto, Ont.13.	Ober Fertilizer Co	Welland, Ont.14.	Sheffield Bronze Powder Co. Ltd. (formerly sales office) . Toronto, Ont.15.	Summers Fertilizer Co. Inc	St. Stephen, N.B.16.	Talcum Puff Co. Ltd	Toronto, Ont.17.	Ultra Chemical Co. Ltd	Louiseville, Que.I.	Miscellaneous Industries-1.	Aero Corp. of Canada	Kitchener, Ont.2.	Automatic Industries of Can. Ltd	Toronto, Ont.3.	L. G. Balfour Co	Sherbrooke, Que.4.	Film Laboratories of Canada, Ltd	Toronto, Ont.5.	Mack Miller Candle Co	Niagara Falls, Ont.6.	Mimeograph Co. Ltd	Toronto, Ont.7.	South Bend Bait Co. of Canada, Ltd	Cobourg, Ont.8.	Wilcox Canadian Ltd	Toronto, Ont.J.	Mining and Metallurgical-1.	Northwest Stellarene Co	Coutts, Alta.2.	Parco Oil Co. Ltd	Calgary, Alta.3.	Radium Corp. of Canada, Ltd	Toronto, Ont.4.	Simrall Refining Corp. of Canada, Ltd	Amherstburg, Ont.
N.B.-A. (1) American Wringer Co. of Canada, Ltd., Farnham, Que., began manufacturing Stedman Naturized Rubber Flooring in Canada in October, 1930.
(2) Teabury Chewing Gum Co., Sherbrooke, Que., is owned by Canadian capital, but is working on a royalty basis with a United States concern.
Great Britain
C. Textiles-
1.	Heild Bros	Kingston, Ont.2.	G. H. Hirst & Co	Carleton Place, Ont.3.	Hiram Leach & Co	Huntingdon, Que.4.	Lancashire Felt Co. of Canada, Ltd	Guelph, Ont.5.	Barry & Staines Linoleum (Can.) Ltd	Farnham, Que.
The Budget-Mr. Edwards

List of New Concerns Establishing in Canada Since August, 1930-Concluded Great Britain-Concluded
E.	Iron and its Products-
1.	Beacon Windows Ltd	Toronto,	Ont.
2.	Imperial Typewriter Co. (Canada) Ltd. (assembly)

Toronto, Ont.
3.	Quasi-Arc Co. Ltd. (non-mfg.)	Toronto,	Ont.4.	Warwick Time Stamp Co. (non-mfg.)	Toronto,	Ont.5.	Zanogen Steel Co. of Canada (non-mfg.)	Toronto,	Ont.F.	Manufacturers of Non-Ferrous Metals
1.	Hackbridge Transformer Co. of Can. Ltd. (formerly sales
office)	Montreal,	Que.2.	Johnson Matliey Co. of Can. Ltd. (non-mfg.)	Toronto,	Ont.G.	Manufacturers of Non-Metallic Minerals-1. Colade Ontario, Ltd	Brantford, Ont.H.	Chemicals and Allied Products-1.	British Drug Houses (Canada) Ltd. (non-mfg.)	Toronto,	Ont,2.	Bovil & Hood (Canada) Ltd	Montreal,	Que.
N.Il.-Henry Hamer & Sons, Ltd., St. George de Beauce, Que., a Canadian firm bought by British interests.
I. Miscellaneous Industries

1. Henry Pote of Canada, Ltd
France
Cap de la Madeleine, Que.
The Mail and Empire of April 8 contains an article to the effect that the Dominion Foundries and Steel Company will open up a plant in Hamilton. The Montreal Gazette of April 1 gives a list of firms opening up branch factories in Montreal, including Prolac Limited, Asbestos Manufacturing Company Limited, Victor Hacksaw Manufacturing Company of Middletown, New York, and sixteen others which I shall not enumerate. A recent issue of the Border Cities Star-I assume this is with the authority of the hon. member for South Essex (Mr. Gott)-contained glaring head lines to the effect that the auto factories were awaiting a rush, that improvement was seen in the business as the new Fords were ready, that one billion dollars was invested in the industry, and that the number on the Ford pay-roll had risen from 70,000 to 100,000. Information from eastern Canada is to the effect that the Eastern Hosiery Mills Limited, the Eastern Hat and Cap Manufacturing Company Limited and Eastern Shirts Limited will open in Truro, Nova Scotia. There will be manufactured in this city those socks for which the hon. member for Wey-burn (Mr. Young) was famous during the last elections.


Mr. YOUNG:: How much will they cost
then?


Alexander McKay Edwards: They will cost $1.60 per dozen.


An hon. MEMBER:: What about the quality?


Alexander McKay Edwards: They will be manufactured of rayon and cotton and will be first quality, large size.


Edward James Young: The hon. member has the
wrong socks.


Alexander McKay Edwards: These plants have not
only taken the machinery from their old plants in the United States, but have purchased ten additional machines of the latest type from the W. J. Westaway Company of Hamilton, Ontario. Certain of the machines will be imported from the United States because no hosiery knitting machines of any description are manufactured in Canada. There are not only industries manufacturing new lines, but others are supplementing their regular lines in an effort to increase their business in Canada. Many of these products can be profitably manufactured ini Canada, and there is a market here. It can be seen quite readily that the tariff of 1930 has been productive of very good results.
For several sessions I have spoken on behalf of the textile industry of Canada, and I have asked both the former and present governments to give some consideration to this industry. I am sure I have been and will be backed up in this connection by the hon. member for Sherbrooke (Mr. Howard). I shall endeavour to give the house some idea of the extent of this industry, and I intend to devote myself more particularly to the woollen and worsted cloth branches, making some reference to knitted goods and silks. Ramifications of this industry are many and thousands of people are affected, both directly and indirectly, ranging all the way from the farmer who grows the wool to the man who produces the soap and chemicals used in the processing. This industry is second only to agriculture, and the number employed therein

The Budget-Mr. Edwards
in normal times amounts to about one hundred thousand. The Textile Journal gives the number of employees in 1927 as 58,937 women on wages and salaries, and 41,497 men in the same category. It will be seen that this industry is a woman's industry. In those sections of the country where steel and iron or furniture industries are located, textile mills give employment to a number of the daughters of the men working in the other mills. It is essential to have these textile mills in order to have a balanced community. I think the hon. member for North Waterloo (Mr. Euler) will agree with me when I say that the constituencies which he and I represent in this house comprise about as nearly a balanced community as it is possible to get. It is estimated that about 95 per cent of the farm products of this county are consumed in the county. Therefore the textile mills which employ female labour are very necessary to help balance the labour in this community.
Prior to 1930, and while the King administration was in office, we had constant adjustments of the tariff; we had for instance, the tariff entirely removed from worsted yarn which was carrying a duty of 12i per cent. What result did this have on our spinning mills? I am speaking now more particularly of the large mills that spin their yam and weave it into cloth. One in Sherbrooke and another in Hespeler are two of the largest mills in Canada; they spin the worsted yam from the raw wool and when this tariff was removed, the result was that worsted yarn was brought into this country free of duty and the spinning plants of these mills were closed down. I am not so sure of the one in Sherbrooke, but I know the one in my district was closed. Following this, yarn was brought in from Bradford, England, cheaper than it could be produced in Canada. When this government came into office a net duty of 9 per cent and 9 cents a pound was imposed, with the result that all these mills that had been standing idle are now working at full capacity and worsted yarn is being produced in Canada. Canadian wool in certain proportions is being used.


Edward James Young: What	proportion?


Alexander McKay Edwards: A	small proportion; it
is not very large. It is mostly merino wool from Australia and New Zealand that is used, but if the wool in this country is protected and the farmers are given a chance, the proportion of Canadian wool used will be increased.


Edward James Young: If t'he wool is protected from the weather, the hon. member means?


Alexander McKay Edwards: You cannot produce fine merino wool in western Canada. There are two things necessary in producing wool: grazing and climate, and in the west you have neither for producing fine merino wool. But you have facilities for producing certain wools that can be used in Canada and I am of opinion that those classes that can be produced here should be taken care of and protected.
As I said, many plants were entirely closed down. What does this mean to Canada? Textile mills with few exceptions are located in the smaller communities. There are in this country fifty-six mills producing woollen and worsted cloth, and of these fourteen produce worsted cloth. To give the house a picture of what happens to this industry and the effect on the country generally, whether it is assisted or retarded, I may say that these fourteen mills are located as follows:
Number
Locality	of mills
Huntingdon, Quebec	 1
St. Johns, Quebec	 1
Sherbrooke, Quebec	 1
Kingston, Ontario	 1
Almonte, Ontario	 1
Peterborough, Ontario	 1
Renfrew, Ontario	 1
Toronto, Ontario	 3
Hespeler, Ontario	 1
Campbellford, Ontario	 1
Milton, Ontario	_	 1
Vancouver, British Columbia	 1


Mr. RYERSON:: There is one in Brantford.


Alexander McKay Edwards: My hon. friend beside me says that there is one in Brantford. I do not have it listed. '
Tariff item 554b covers both woollen and worsted cloth, and in September, 1930, this item was increased while at the same time, as I have explained, rates on worsted weaving yarns were also increased. These duties were imposed in order to provide employment for the spinning plants in Canada. At the time the change was made in 1930 it was pointed out that while the rates in item 554b would materially assist and improve the condition in the woollen cloth mills, there would be no particular benefit to the worsted mills. The reason is that worsted yarn is much lighter than woollen yarn and they had to absorb the increased duty on worsted yarn without any corresponding duty on the finished product. Let us see what result this had on production:
Woollen Cloth Produced in Canada
Year	Yards
1930		 3,660,154
1931		 5,591,355

The Budget-Mr. Edwards
Or an increase under this protective tariff of 52-7 per cent. Worsteds and serges, as I have said, did not benefit by this tariff. Let us see what happened to them:
Worsteds and Serges produced in Canada
Year	Yards
1030	 2.036,477
1931	 1,998,043
Or a decrease of 1-8 per cent. The increase in employment and production in woollen cloth mills was most satisfactory. Some of these mills are now running to full capacity. I could name one or two big mills with the best equipment in the world that formerly were running about two or three days a week on short time, that are now running to capacity on woollen cloths. I should like at this stage to distinguish between woollen and worsted cloth. Woollen cloths, as hon. members no doubt know, are represented by such materials as tweeds, overcoatings, blankets and that sort of thing. The worsted mills produce worsted cloths and serges. Therefore there is a very large difference in the two lines of cloth produced in the textile mills. That will give hon. members some idea of the different ramifications of the industry and the various lines produced.
The market in Canada in 1931 for worsteds and serges was handled as follows:
Yards
From Canadian mills	 1,998,043
From English mills.. ,. ..	3,433,933
From Foreign mills	 505,777
Total	 5,937,753
It will be noted immediately that the Canadian worsted weaving mills are getting only one-third of the quantity of cloth consumed
in Canada. If the position were bettered- and it would take very little to bring that about-and they could get two-thirds or 75 per cent of the Canadian consumption, they would be able very materially not only to increase their plants but to reduce their prices, because the whole thing revolves around production. It is a straight run through the machine and if you can produce in sufficient quantities you can certainly bring down the prices.
In one mill in my constituency, making worsted yarns, they increased their capacity in 1931 about 20 per cent over that over 1930.


Mr. HOWARD:: What about their employees?


Alexander McKay Edwards: They increased accordingly.
Mr. ST-PERE: What about salaries?


Alexander McKay Edwards: The salaries are not too high.
Mr. ST-PERE: Oh, no.


Alexander McKay Edwards: May I read from a bulletin issued by the Canadian Woollen and Knit Goods Manufacturers' Association, which says in part:
During the last three months, 1931, the share of the Canadian import market for woollen and worsted cloth supplied by English manufacturers has steadily increased, while the proportion supplied by the foreign manufacturers has decreased. This is the result of depreciated and appreciated currency legislation, combined with exchange, which favours the import of English cloth as against foreign cloth. The effect is cumulative, and as was to be expected, the full effect was not felt until December. The following table showrs the percentage of imports for the three months in detail.
Then follows the table giving the imports, which perhaps you will permit me, Mr. Speaker, to put on record:
Percentage of Imports of Cloth in Quantities
Nine months ending December	1931.. ..	British 73%	Foreign 27%Last three months, 1931	75%	25%December, 1931	81%	19%October,	1931	November, 1931	December, 1931	British Foreign	British	Foreign	British	ForeignFlannels	65	35	75	25	100	-Cut pile	52	48	87	13	89	11Lightweights	61	39	59	41	71	29Linings	100	-	99	1	100	-Overcoatings	69	31	85	15	81	19Tweeds	72	28	85	15	87	13Worsteds	77	23	85	15	87	13Other cloths	54	46	62	38	62	38

The Budget-Mr. Edwards
Following are a few examples of the import figures in pounds:
British	Foreign
Oct., 1931 Dec., 1931 Oct., 1931 Dec., 1931
Lightweights	
39,883	41,975	25,329	17,790Tweeds	
23,372	40.415	9,081	6,350Worsteds	
220.175	211,299	65,131	31,816Flannels	
2,333	5,212	1,260	
Now I want to say a word regarding the knit goods branch of this industry. I am not going to say very much about it because I understand that the hon. member for Haldi-mand (Mr. Senn) and one or two others are going to (present the case for the knit goods industry.
All knit goods sucih as knitted outer-wear, sweaters, knitted dresses, underwear, bathing suits, knitted fabrics and so forth enter Canada under tariff item 568, with duties as follows: British preference, 224 per cent net; treaty, 25 per cent; intermediate, 25 per cent; general, 45 per cent. There are 130 mills in Canada producing knit goods similar to those entering under tariff item 568. There is enough machinery in Canada to supply all the requirements of the market. The principal raw materials of this particular industry are wool yarns, artificial silk yarn and cotton yarns. Prior to the September, 1930, budget it was found that knit goods manufacturers could not obtain immediate tariff relief because the French treaty fixed the rate at 25 per cent. I understand that that treaty will expire in June. I wish to draw the attention of the government to the fact that in 1930 the tariff rate on wool yarns and artificial silk yarns was increased so that for fifteen months the industry has been operating with increased tariff rates on raw materials with no compensating duty on their finished product. It is to be hoped therefore that on the expiration of the French treaty in June next a complete survey will be made of the knit goods industry, and while I am not one of those who advocate high tariffs at all, if it is found that the knit goods industry requires assistance then I hope that that assistance will be given.


Edward James Young: What is the duty on yarns?


Alexander McKay Edwards: Nine per cent and nine cents per pound.


Edward James Young: What is the duty on the
finished product?


Alexander McKay Edwards: That is what is happening in England since they have had this protection. The German people are even offering to sell their machinery to manufacturers in England.
Now just a word about wool. I was very sorry that I was not present when the hon. member for Maple Creek (Mr. Swanston) introduced his resolution on wool. I think I can state pretty clearly the position of the manufacturers in my district, and it is this: I wish to make it clear that the Canadian woollen manufacturers with whom I have talked have raised no objection to a duty being placed on empire wools to protect the Canadian sheep grower provided compensating duties are placed on all customs items covering semi-manufactured or fully manufactured goods made from wool.
The branch of the wool industry which produces the greatest value of manufactures of wool is the knitting industry. The knit goods industry was not protected in 1930 or 1931, and in my opinion duties cannot be placed on wool effectively or without seriously affecting the knitting industry until the French treaty is out of the way and the knitting industry is protected.
In the riding of South Waterloo, which I have the honour to represent in this house, there are two large silk mills. Of course, there are many others in other parts of the country. I wish to take a few minutes of the time of the house to quote from two bulletins issued by the Silk Association of Canada, which very clearly set forth the position of this very important and ever growing industry. The Silk Association of Canada in its bulletin of January 13, 1932 says:
Substantial increase in employment in the full fashioned hosiery mills in Canada in 1931 over 1930 is indicated by comparative production and sales figures now available. For seventeen out of the twenty-one mills in Canada the comparative figures for the nine months ending November, 1931, show an increase of 1,146,600 pairs over the same period in 1930, while the actual figures for hosiery shipped during the same nine months' periods are: 1931, 9,948.360 pairs; 1930, 8,787,156; increase in 1931 over 1930, 1.151,204 pairs. All full-fashioned hosiery now used in Canada is produced in Canada, the imports for the period in review of all classes of silk hosiery, men's and women's, circular and full fashioned, amounted to only 49,392 pairs. As Canada was machined to supply all requirements in normal times, there was no machinery expansion in 1931, present general conditions not warranting any increase.
In its bulletin of January 27, 1932, tihe Silk Association of Canada gives the number of broad silk looms in this country, with the number of yards produced. It says:
Reports from individual mills indicate a substantial increase in production and employment in 1931 over 1930, particularly since last June

when tariff changes were made. The effect of this change is strikingly shown by the import figures of silk fabrics, dyed and finished, for three-month periods during 1931.
Then it gives the figures by quarters, -but as my time is nearly up I will simply say that the importations for 1931 declined steadily in each quarter, with a total importation for 1931 of 5,944,487 yards, valued at $3,031,738.
I listened very -carefully during the debate on unemployment to hear if some solution would be presented that had not already been advanced by the government of Canada, and I heard none. I want to advance this suggestion, -for whatever it may be worth. Prior to seven, eight or nine years ago it was customary for travelling men to go out selling seasonal goods produced in Canada, goods which have always been required in this country. For instance, a man would go out on March 1 to sell underwear, and have his sales completed by May 1. Those goods would be shipped in August or September, and terms of either thirty days less a discount or ninety days net would be given. The result was that the mills had orders, men were engaged, and the financing of operations was carried on under genuine orders. The goods were delivered in the fall and were not paid for until sold. I think that was a very satisfactory way of handling the matter. That condition applied to many lines, particularly those which owing to climatic conditions are required in Canada. That practice is being followed and must be followed in connection with purchases from foreign countries. Why could it not -be carried out in Canada?
We will suppose a man requires fifty dozens of a certain article. He does not necessarily place an order for fifty dozens, but due to his expectation that he will do business equal to the business of the past year, he may place an order for half the quantity. If the half quantity could be secured in the manner I have described I am sure our unemployment situation would be very materially relieved, and with expense to nobody. I offer that suggestion, believing it to be workable. To make it effective extensive educational propaganda would have to be placed in the newspapers. I believe that sustained advertising of any particular line will make it known.


Mr. HENRI BOURASSA (Labelle):: Mr. Speaker, will my hon. friend from South Waterloo (Mr. Edwards) excuse me if I do not follow his argument? With a good deal of what he has said I could agree; but the tariff is not the issue now before the house. The Minister of Finance (Mr. Rhodes) has made it quite clear, the government does not

The Budget-Mr. Bourassa
contemplate at this session to express any opinion or offer any tariff policy until after the Imperial economic conference; and in that attitude I think they are right.
I wish to put myself on record candidly and clearly with regard to the three proposals now before us:	The subamendment moved
by the hon. member for Acadia (Mr. Gardiner), the amendment moved by the hon. member for Shelburne-Yarmouth (Mr. Ralston) and the budget proposals.
With much that the hon. member for Acadia has said I fully agree, especially with his denunciation of the capitalistic system. I am fully convinced, and have been for many years, that that system, as practised throughout the so-called western world, but especially in North America, is bound to bring dire results. War has merely accentuated the evil consequences of that system, and precipitated the issue. But with all due deference, may I say to my hon. friend from Acadia that he has not fully covered the ground. He has truly stated that the so-called capitalistic system has been of very short duration. INoth-ing indeed is more inaccurate than the prevailing opinion that capitalism is the basis of our economic and social fabric. The origin of capitalism, according to the member for Acadia, is the discovery of steam and its application to industry. May I embroaden the statement and say that what has been termed the mechanization of industry is but a material factor which has contributed to the building up of the capitalistic system. To fully understand the problem and its consequences, one has to go further and, as in everything human, to find out the moral and social factors. With my very short studies of economics and sociology I consider the two main sources out of which this system has arisen are to be found in the French revolution and in the doctrines of the Manchester school in England. First, there is the French Jacobinistic theory of unlimited rights of individual property, and then the Manchester advocacy of laisser faire and laisser passer. Applied to the condition described by the hon. member for Acadia, to the mechanization of industry, these two schools of thought have brought the uncontrolled concentration, first of capital, and then of potential wealth in the hands of a few individuals who are practically beyond control. These men, or corporations, have now in their hands, not only the sources of wealth of the masses of the people, but they practically control the sources of credit of the state. When I use the word state I use it in the broadest sense, including federal, provincial and municipal governments.
What has been the result? Within the last twenty or twenty-five years, the irresponsible masters of that system have not only concentrated real wealth and capital sources of production, but they have created artificial wealth. They have created so-called capital and issued paper in the form of stocks, debentures and titles of all sorts, which have no reality. The gullible public have purchased that paper; it has been broadcast, and the masses of the consuming public are paying interest upon false capital and giving to it a value it does not possess.
The credit of the country maintained through the banks and large financial institutions has been lent as a moral-or should I say immoral-support to that fictitious capital. The condition existing in Canada exists on a much larger scale in the United States, and in practically all the countries of the western world. I say now, weighing fully my remarks, that the best incentive which can be given to the doctrines and practices of extreme socialism, even in the form of bolshevism, is not by allowing the distribution of a few pamphlets, or the making of a few silly speeches in some dark corners of the cities of Montreal or Toronto, but by lending the authority of parliament and the government to the maintenance of a system which is just as immoral and anti-social as the system now being practised in Russia.
If this is true1-and I am, and have been convinced for many years that it is-I venture to say that the remedy offered by the hon. member for Acadia is altogether insufficient to cure the evil. Nationalization of currency is a pretty broad expression. In what form it could be practised, or how it could be executed I am not sure; the hon. member has not quite explained. As I understand it he wants the country, through the inflation of money and the control of currency, to pay its debts at an easier rate than the present value of state paper. That might be discussed, though I think it should be discussed internationally. I do not think the situation of Canada or of any other country will be remedied until there is a courageous international understanding to bring down all debts of all countries.
But where I differ still more with the hon. member is in the suggestion that we should have an artificial inflation of money in order to enable people to purchase more. Would it mean purchasing more or simply giving a few more pieces of paper-inflated paper-to purchase the same quantity of goods? I do not see where the people would be better off. I agree much more with the proposal made
19S4
The Budget-Mr. Bourassa

last year by the hon. member for Winnipeg North Centre (Mr. Woodsworth), that the evil from which we are suffering is not the dearth of wealth or of production but the lack of proper distribution, and I fail to see how by increasing the number of pieces of paper which people accept as the standard of wealth we will foster that better distribution.
Suppose we increase the number of banknotes or government notes, what will it mean? It will mean that if the man who to-day has 100,000 dollar bills, worth perhaps ninety cents, gets double that amount of paper, he will be worth $180,000, nominally. The poor man will double his small amount of money, and the rich man will double his large amount of money; but this will not equalize anything- unless there is some method not contained in the proposal by which we will take from the man who has too much and give to the man who has too little. It may come to that. Certainly, if the so called captains of industry and the chiefs of the large financial institutions do not open their eyes to the situation and come to an understanding with the leaders of state, whether federal, provincial or municipal, and create of their own goodwill and through a sense of the realities, a better distribution of wealth, a time will come-and probably sooner than we expect-when the distribution will be enforced by brutal means. That I do not wish, and for that reason I think it is better to deal with the evil now rather than to shut our eyes to the danger that lies ahead.	.
Being an old-fashioned man, Mr. Speaker, with a limited knowledge of economics, I think many of the remedies that have been propounded in this and other countries since the war, have one defect: they lack the good old quality of simplicity. I do not think any artificial means, legal or financial, will cure the evils of the world, and our own particular evils, until we all come back to our senses. Public bodies and individuals have more or less lost their heads for the last twenty years. The period of the war, and the short period following it, was a time of intense inebriation. What we need now is to get sober; but not by the old method of taking more gin or whiskey in the morning to cure the headache caused by the intoxication of the preceding evening. At one time that was very much the fashion, but I think that practice has been eliminated by common sense and proper hygiene. What we want is to get sober in the true sense of the word. We must get more economical. People should not be shown a way of spending as much or more money;

they should be shown the way back to common sense by spending less. That is the lesson which should be learned and practised first by governments, by public bodies, by great industrialists and by all men who spend a good deal of money. It should be learned by all classes of people, from the wealthiest to the poorest. We must get back to the point where we live according to our means; and when we get to that point the poor will be entitled to better care by the rich and by public bodies.
The immediate object which this government should have in mind is a reduction in debt and in expenditure. Of course they have to discriminate; of course they have to think of the immediate needs of the people who must be helped; but frankly if the present Minister of Finance (Mr. Rhodes), who is a man of common sense and of judgment, had been given time to look at the figures showing the expenditures of each department of the government and compare them with the expenditures of each department twenty years ago, would he not have found some means of reducing the expenditures of the country to a muoh larger extent, at the same time giving the people who are in dire need what they may require in the way of work, food and clothing?
Then we want a reduction in debts. I am not going to discuss that question at length, because in order to cover the whole issue one would have to consider the international situation. May I simply suggest to the government that they should miss no opportunity in their relations with the British government and with foreign governments, at Geneva and elsewhere, to enhance and foster against all odds and upon all occasions the need of a reduction and even of a cancellation of all war debts? Until that has been done, the world will find no rest, and there is no possibility of an adjustment.
Now, sir, I come to the amendment proposed by the hon. member for Shelburne-Yarmouth (Mr. Ralston). May I say that I read his excellent speech with much interest, particularly the first part of it; but to speak quite frankly, when I came to the end of his remarks and read the amendment I was simply dumbfounded. He gave a broad criticism covering the whole of the budget, with breadth of mind and common sense, and then reduced it all to a small motion confined to the tariff. It seems as if the tariff question has monopolized the minds of a certain number of members in this house; but surely men of broad views, possessing a fair

The Budget-Mr. Bourassa
knowledge of things social, economic and political, ought to realize that in the present state of affairs the tariff is but a small issue in our whole economic problem. Of course, the tariff has to be considered, and I recognize the right of every group and every individual to their own views in that regard; but when the government comes along with a budget which practically does not touch the tariff at all, how can the opposition gain much confidence throughout the country by reducing its policy to a consideration of the tariff?
Possibly it may be said that in his amendment the hon. member condemns the policy of the government in dealing with these matters by order in council. Well and good; but why was not the amendment so framed as to condemn the policy of dealing with all matters by order in council? I offered the opposition that chance last year, when I presented a motion condemning the practice of determining policies by orders in council, especially in relation to the Russian embargo; but, frightened by fits of terror on the part of some of their friends from Quebec because the word "Russia" was mentioned, they did not dare vote for a motion condemning in much broader terms the policy adopted by the present government of dealing with these matters by orders in council. In the present amendment the opposition condemns only one policy effected by order in council. I suppose next session they will move another amendment condemning the order in council dealing with insurance companies; two years hence probably they will move another amendment condemning tJhe order in council dealing with bank values, and three years hence they may move still another amendment condemning some other order in council, and so on, until after a decade the people of Canada may be able to find out what is the policy of the Liberal party.


Mr. SPOTTON:: They never will.


Joseph Henri Napoléon Bourassa: If they do not, they will find out the sooner what is the policy of the Conservative party, and the Liberals will benefit thereby.
Now to come to the budget. My hon. friend the Minister of Finance has received so many compliments that I am diffident about adding to them. Undoubtedly all those compliments are deserved. As an old-fashioned man, may I add one observation? He has proven that even in the exposition of a dry summary of figures, it does not spoil anything to be a gentleman and speak as a gentleman.


An hon. MEMBER:: Is any comparison meant?


Joseph Henri Napoléon Bourassa: All comparisons are
odious. If the task of the government-and I presume they consider it as such-is by their budget to apply to the problems of the next twelve months a fairly safe and makeshift policy in order to collect money enough to pay what they expect to spend, then I think it is a good budget. Taking only the financial aspect, I do not begrudge the Prime Minister all the praise that he deserves in that respect. He has a great capacity in those matters. Of all the public men in Canada to-day he is probably the best financier. And he has proven it in the last twelve months. His followers having empowered him to rule as a dictator, parliament having abdicated to him, I will not say its rights, but its functions and duties, he is undoubtedly the best man to deal with the purely financial aspect of the situation. One of the Prime Minister's followers, in his juvenile enthusiasm, has said that the right hon. gentleman outshines Mussolini. Perhaps next year someone will say that Napoleon Bonaparte is blushing in his tomb at the idea that a much bigger man has succeeded him in the estimation of the world. But, I repeat, all comparisons are odious.
Simply on the matter of finance, authority having been given to the government to meet the situation as they please, I think the Prime Minister has done what he should have done, and has done it well. His order in council to prohibit the export of gold, the moment the government found out what the result would be of the sudden change of policy in Great Britain, was effective. The manner in which he launched and reaped the result of his conversion loan was excellent. I do not share the view of my friend from Shelburne-Yarmouth, that the Prime Minister does not deserve any credit because the people of Canada gave him the money, and will lose by the exchange of their loans. From the purely financial point of view, it was very clever on the part of the Prime Minister to take advantage of a moment of panic, when the people were afraid to risk their money in industry or elsewhere and were gathering up their capital and savings, to invite them to give him that money. So long as the people of Canada and the money investors trust the Prime Minister, it was very clever on his part to hold out his hand and grab their millions at the moment he did-and the treasury has been benefited thereby.
With regard to the national service loan, I am bound to express some little doubt.

19S6
The Budget-Mr. Bourassa

When the loan was launched and oversubscribed, the Montreal Gazette-which is one day of the week the organ of the Tory party in Ottawa, another day the organ of the so-called Liberal government in Quebec, and all other days the organ of the Bank of Montreal and high finance-the Montreal Gazette expressed its horror at the idea of the government of Canada accepting $71,000,000 more than what had been asked for. It considered this a breach of faith with the subscribers because the amount asked for was to be limited to S150,000,000 and was for a precise object. Well, although I had no brief from the Prime Minister and his government to plead their case against the Montreal Gazette, next day I came out with an expression of my doubts as to the validity of the criticism of the financial men at the back of the Montreal Gazette. First, I dealt with the object of the loan. All that the prospectus -I have it in my hand-mentioned was that the proceeds of the loan would be used "to promote the economic and financial welfare of Canada." There was no limitation, it was just like the carte blanche which parliament gave the Prime Minister. Suppose the Prime Minister had seen fit, for "the economic and financial welfare of Canada," to erect to himself a statue, as did Nebuchadnezzar in years past, he could have spent $50,000,000 of that loan on a golden statue of himself somewhere in this city, and he would have been within the terms of the prospectus. He is to be congratulated on not having abused the carte blanche which was given to him by parliament in this regard as in all others.
But where I think the government went a little beyond the mark was in the use they made of the surplus. Of course, it was sheer nonsense to say that by accepting the $71,000,000 the value of the other $150,000,000 was diminished; ridiculous. There is no such thing as first, second or third mortgages for the various creditors of the government of Canada. All the resources of Canada are pledged to her creditors, whatever piece of paper they may have in their hands or their portfolios. Therefore, I submit the government was not at fault in accepting the oversubscription, but the use they made of it, I think, is matter for fair criticism. In his speech .the other day the Minister of Finance explained that out of the surplus the government advanced $11,600,000 odd to the provinces, and devoted about $41,000,000 to cover deficits of the Canadian National Railways. Well, although nothing was mentioned in the prospectus, I do not believe that anybody who subscribed the $221,000,000 thought the government would make use of any portion of

it to cover a part of the deficits of the Canadian National Railways so as to enable them to bring down a better budget. I will come back to that in a moment. It was centainly not contemplated, it was not mentioned, and I believe the sooner the government .take steps to apply the whole of the $221,000,000 in reducing the outstanding debt of the country, or rather in substituting these new securities for the old securities that may become due before long, the closer they will be .to carrying out their moral obligation towards the people of Canada.
With regard to the advances to the provinces, I have no hesitation in saying that the federal government only did what it had to do. I am not referring to the amounts or to the manner in which they were paid, I refer only to the basic principle that the government of Canada, being responsible for the credit of Canada as a whole, has not only -the right but the duty to see that no public, body in Canada goes by default and thereby creates a feeling in the financial world which will react against the credit of the government of Canada. So, in that respect I think the government did right. On the other hand, I do not agree absolutely with the view expressed the other day by the hon. member for North Winnipeg (Mr. Heaps) in connection with the observations of the hon. member for Shelburne-Yarmouth (Mr. Ralston) in this regard. I do not think the criticism of the hon. member for Shelburne-Yarmouth warranted the comment that he was merely raising a technicality against these advances. The government did what it should have done, and what it may have to do again in the future, in coming to the rescue of the provinces; but surely some basis must be arrived at whereby the provinces and the government respectively would not foe in the position of bankrupt clients at the mercy of their banker. As I understood the hon. member for Shelburne-Yarmouth, that was his contention, and in that respect I fully agree.


Edgar Nelson Rhodes: I believe my hon. friend desires to be absolutely accurate, but I think he is in error when he says that Canadian obligations have been retired to the extent of $41,000,000. What I did say was that fifty odd millions were taken up in retired debts.


Joseph Henri Napoléon Bourassa: I think the statement appears on page 1758 of Hansard; one column shows the Minister oi Finance dealing with part of the deficit of the Canadian National Railways, and the other column shows him dealing with the provinces.

The Budget-Mr. Bourassa


Edgar Nelson Rhodes: These are the exact words:
As of this date, S50.745.000 of debt has been taken up, while over $11,600,000 is temporarily invested in provincial treasury bills.


Joseph Henri Napoléon Bourassa: Later on the minister
dealt with the Canadian National Railways.


Mr. HACKETT:: That is temporary.


Joseph Henri Napoléon Bourassa: That is dealt with at the head of the second column of page 1758.


Edgar Nelson Rhodes: That has no reference to the surplus.


Joseph Henri Napoléon Bourassa: Quite so, but there is
something much more important than that. The duty of the government is not merely to make matters more or less right for twelve months. It has undertaken the obligation of providing some remedy, some permanent remedy for the situation now confronting Canada. Then I say that the matter of finance, important as it is, concerns only a small portion of the situation.
It may be considered to be a hobby of mine; but I have long advocated the necessity of a complete recasting of our taxation system. This system has grown up haphazardly through the various changes in government and the necessities of the times; but since the war, and largely on account of the war, the economic, social and financial condition of the world has been so completely altered as to make it impossible to maintain unaltered the old systems of finance and administration. I do not contend that these systems should be discarded entirely, but I do say that a deep study of these matters should be made by thinking men, irrespective of party and political creeds in matters of trade or tariffs, in order to find some basis of taxation which will result in bettering conditions for the people of Canada. It has been written of late, and I think quite rightly, that perhaps the greatest administrator in England during the last two centuries was Robert Walpole. This man's name was long a matter of obloquy, his reputation was much discussed; but in my opinion, in matters economic, he rendered better service to Great Britain than any other man. The permanent results of his policy were brought about because of the fact that in all matters of taxation and finance he endeavoured to arrive at a proper apportionment of sources of profit and of state burdens as between the different classes of the community. He was not a man of the city, he was a man of the country; he was not an instrument of the tradesmen, the agriculturists or the industrialists; he wanted to make
41761-125j
matters such that all classes should derive a proper share of benefits and contribute a proper share of support to the maintenance of their country. I think the same thing might be said, although to a lesser degree, of Mr. Gladstone as a chancellor of the exchequer.
In connection with the income tax, I approve heartily of the reductions made in the exemptions. On the whole the proposals of the government are far in advance of those of last year. Nevertheless, I suggest, as I have suggested to predecessors of the minister, that in order to give social and economic justice, there should be a sharp difference as between salaries earned from year to year and income derived from invested capital. Proper means should also be taken to prevent debenture holders from defrauding the state as they have been doing ever since the income tax was established. These people do not declare their coupons because they are paid through the banks. I was told repeatedly by the late Mr. Leroux of Montreal, a gentleman who gave excellent service to the crown, that he was convinced the government had lost millions of dollars in the case of his own office alone. I have been told also by different accountants in Montreal, the most respected men in their profession, that estates with incomes of between $20,000 to $30,000 have not paid one cent of income tax for years, because all their holdings being invested in debentures payable to bearer, no declarations have been made, and no trace left of the evasions. In the past, I have suggested the affixing of a stamp to the coupons, as is done in England; but I have come to the conclusion that this would not be sufficient; the holders of large quantities of debentures would pay simply so much per hundred instead of paying on a sliding scale. The only way to handle these debentures is to adopt the method used in the case of stocks; force the debenture holders to inscribe their debentures, and then force the company to give a yearly report of the debentures inscribed, just as is done in the case of dividends paid on stocks. In this way the government could reach the debenture holder as it reaches the shareholder.
I come now to the excise tax. Why should not the government call this tax by its true name and term it a special customs duty? It is not an excise tax, it is a customs duty levied over and above the ordinary rates established by the customs tariff.
With regard to the sales tax, I claim, without discussing the rate now, because I have no time, that the tax should be levied at the
19S8
The Budget-Mr. Bourassa

end and not at the root; in other words, that it should be paid by the consumer when he purchases his needs instead of being charged to the manufacturer or the wholesale merchant. Under the present system the people do not know what proportion they pay to the government, what to the retailer, what to the wholesaler and what to the middleman. My authority for making this suggestion to the government is one which I think will commend itself to members on the other side of the house, that of their own Prime Minister when, sitting on this side, he stated emphatically that one of the essential things connected with taxation is that it should be visible. This kind of invisible taxation which enables a series of intermediaries to pile up profits, dividends and interest upon the sales tax they have paid to the government, is wrong. The government does not get the whole amount and the ratepayers do not realize what they are paying.
I shall not dwell upon the question of trade. I am glad, however, the hon. member for Shelburne-Yarmouth once more pricked that old bubble, a "'favourable balance of trade." I well remember in the old days, disputes, discourses and debates between the two parties, the two main speakers of which were then Sir Richard Cartwright and Sir George Foster. How many illustrations and counter-examples I have heard about the favourable balance of trade! To reduce the question to an argument ad absurdum which should appeal to the common sense of the Minister of Finance, supposing by your trade policy, or as a result of existing conditions, all the imports of Canada were reduced to S500 and our exports reached the high sum of SI,000. Of course, you would have a favourable balance of trade of 100 per cent over your imports; but where would the Canadian people be? Undoubtedly, these things are very complex. I well remember the great fight in England on Mr. Chamberlain's proposals for trade reform. The strongest argument made against his reasoning about the decline in the trade balance was that of Mr. Asquith, regarding the amount of invisible trade, for example, the value of the shipbuilding industry and of the shipping trade, which were not tabulated in trade returns, but which meant to the people of England much more than the difference between imports and exports. I am giving that simply as an example to show that this shibboleth of favourable balance of trade does not mean much. What counts, after all, is what every man is capable of selling, what he gets for what he sells, what he is capable of

purchasing, and what he pays for his purchases.
In closing may I say that if the budget is looked upon as a balance sheet of a private corporation, then it is a fairly well balanced sheet-with this little difference between a private concern and the government, that the Minister of Finance will endeavour, by taxing the people of Canada, to make good the deficit. Of course he does not expect that with this new taxation he will overcome his deficit next year; he knows he will not, and it would be far better to let the people of Canada know this. I suppose, as we do with children, he wants to give the medicine by doses, but I do not believe in deceit. It is just as well to tell the Canadian people that we are in for a few more black years; that they must prepare to pay more and to be more in debt, and therefore they must economize, economize and economize. The government and all the public and financial bodies should show them an example in this regard. It is no use buoying up the people with false hopes-


Pierre Édouard Blondin: The hon. member has spoken for forty minutes.


Joseph Henri Napoléon Bourassa: May I finish my sentence? All I want to say is this: I hope next year the Minister of Finance, after twelve months' experience, will present a budget as sensible as this in viewpoint of immediate accounting, but with a much broader aspect with regard to the deeper and general problem of fiscal and financial readjustment in Canada.


Charles Benjamin Howard: Mr. Speaker, I should like first to congratulate the Minister of Finance (Mr. Rhodes) on his appointment to his new position, and also on the businesslike way in which he presented his first budget to the house the other day. I want also to say, so as not to cover the same ground except in a couple of places, that I agree one hundred per cent with the remarks made by the hon. member for Shelburne-Yarmouth (Mr. Ralston) the other day in criticism of the budget. I must say that the budget was no surprise to me and was exactly as I had expected it would be, because after nearly two years of administration under the present government it is not surprising that the public debt should be increased. During the last seven years, from 1924 to 1930 inclusive, when hon. members on this side of the house were in power, the public debt of Canada was reduced by $276,000,000. Against that we must contrast conditions as they have been since the present government has been in power. According to the funded debt state-

The Budget-Mr. Howard
ment as supplied by the Minister of Finance in his budget speech, the figures are as follows:
Year	Funded debt
1930		 $2,194,000,000
1931		 2,319,000,000
1932		 2,501,000,000
In other words, in the last seven years of the Liberal administration the funded debt was reduced by $276,000,000, whereas in less than two years under the present government it has been increased by $307,000,000.


John Thomas Hackett: Will the hon. member tell the house what is the relative position of the United States during the same period?


Charles Benjamin Howard: That is the argument which is usually put up in the house, and I should like to make this statement frankly: I cannot see what that has to do with Canadians. What I am interested in is the position of the people of Canada.
In passing, may I make this suggestion to the Minister of Finance, and I am sure in his fairmindedness he will accept it; when he presents his next budget twelve months from now, I would appreciate it very much if he would have it translated and presented to the house in both languages at the same time. There are many French newspapers throughout the country and it is a great hardship to them to have to translate the budget and publish it at the same time as it appears in English newspapers.
I remember sitting in the house last year when the former Minister of Finance, the present Prime Minister (Mr. Bennett), presented 'his budget. As reported on page 2168 of Hansard of 1931, he said:
I shall come first of all to a statement of anticipated revenues and expenditures. I will admit that this is the first time for many years that this country has had a budget.
Then he estimated the revenues at $410,000,000, and he estimated that there would be a deficit of $7,000,000 in the operations for the past twelve months. Now for that period for which the former Minister of Finance estimated there would be a deficit of $7,000,000 we actually had a deficit of $119,000,000. In other words, the former Minister of Finance was $112,000,000 out in his calculations for those twelve months, and that is some difference.
The hon. Minister of Trade and Commerce (Mr. Stevens) criticized very severely the manner of presentation of former budgets. May I say to him in passing that in comparing the two administrations, we want the Liberal government to be judged on performance, and I am sure that the present government will have to be judged on its promises. In presenting the budget the other day the Minister of Finance on page 1751 of Hansard gave a summary of all revenues for five-year periods. I shall take only the figures for the last year of the Liberal administration, as given by the Minister of Finance. The revenues in 1930 amounted to $446,000,000, and during the past year they dropped to $334,000,000, or a decrease of nearly $112,000,000 under the present government as compared with the last year under the former administration. Against those revenues, according to this same table supplied by the Minister of Finance, the expenditures during the last year of the late Liberal administration were $398,000,000, and last year the expenditures under the present government were $454,000,000, or an increase in expenditure of almost $56,000,000, plus a declining revenue of $112,000,000.	If we were the
directors of a corporation whose business manager presented any such statement as that to the board, I leave it to the judgment of the house to say what would happen to him.
Dealing as concisely as I can with some other figures which I wish to give to the house, the estimated taxation revenue for this year is $273,000,000, and with the tax increases proposed that amount should be raised to $319,000,000. The Finance minister estimates that at the end of this year's operations he will have a surplus of $4,300,000. Well, all I can say with regard to that estimate is that I hope the year's operations will come nearer to the estimate than was the case with the estimate of the former Minister of Finance.
I do not wish to criticize the budget in detail, but there are a few comments which I wish to make before taking it up in another way. First a word as to the sales tax. The Business Week of March 16, 1932, commenting on the sales tax, says:
Heavy sales taxation is a stigma that attaches to the fiscal system of every backward and benighted nation, and is an underlying cause of their backwardness because it retards business expansion and the development of new industries.
If, as some hon. gentlemen opposite suggest, the sales tax is to be passed on to the consumer, then it immediately becomes a poor man's income tax. Take the case of two men, one with an income of three thousand dollars and the other with an income of ten thousand dollars. The house must realize that regardless of what a person's income is, almost any two people will consume about the same
The Budget-Mr. Howard

amount of certain commodities-soap, for instance. The sales tax on soap will therefore represent a greater percentage of the three thousand dollar income than of the ten thousand dollar income. On the other hand, some hon. gentlemen may say that the manufacturer will absorb the tax. Let me give an illustration in that connection. In the city of Sherbrooke a certain manufacturer is producing a product which sells in the markets of the world to the amount of $100,000. In an adjoining city another manufacturer is producing a product which sells to the amount of $100,000. Each of these manufacturers pays $6,000 into the treasury under this proposed taxation, but if one manufacturer has a profit of $15,000 on his turnover, and the other a profit of $20,000, it means that the man with the less profit will pay 40 per cent as compared with the other man's 15 per cent, and that I say is unfair.
I notice that the stamp tax on cheques has been raised to six cents on every cheque over $10.0. I cannot see that that will make much difference because during the last year and a half the cheques drawn in my constituency for over $100 were very much fewer than they used to be.
But if we are to accept the budget as the inevitable consequence of the government's policies in the past, I appeal to the government now to say what their policies are going to be in the future to remedy the situation in this country within the next twelve months. What is their policy to be in connection with industry during the next twelve months? What is their policy to be in connection with agriculture, and every member of the house knows the deplorable condition of agriculture in this country? What is their policy to be in connection with unemployment? What is their policy to be in connection with finance? What is their policy to be in connection with trade? If this budget is to be imposed upon the people and the people are to be called upon to deny themselves to meet this increased taxation, we have a right to know what the government policies will be upon the five subjects that I have just enumerated.
Touching for a moment on the trade figures, I find that in 1930, the last year of the Liberal administration, the total foreign trade of Canada, imports and exports combined, was $2,393,000,000. One year later, in 1931, that figure had shrunk to $1,723,000,000, and for the year ending March 31, 1932, the figure had shrunk still further to $1,168,000,000, or less than fifty per cent of what the trade of this country was when the Liberal government went out of power. I attribute a great deal of that shrink-
age in the trade of this country to the tariff policies of this government, and again I ask the government, what is their tariff policy going to be in the next twelve months, so that industry and agriculture and labour will know what is going to happen to them. I notice that in making these remarks I am in agreement with the present Minister of Railways and Canals (Mr. Manion) who, at page 2836 of Hansard of April 20, 192:6, condemned the government of that day because they had made tariff changes without first referring them to a tariff board for consideration, and he moved an amendment which concluded with these words:
And this house regrets that in the case of drastic changes announced in the budget such assurances-
That is, assurances to refer the proposed changes to the tariff board:
-have not been fulfilled.
I ask him this question:	During the last
twelve months how have the changes in the tariff been made? When I ask for a statement of the policy of the present government,
I must refer to the remarks of the hon. member for Labelle (Mr. Bourassa) who said that these changes should be decried by everybody because they were not made on business principles. I believe those changes were made in the manner described by the hon. member for Shelburne-Yarmouth, because of pressure in certain places by certain manufacturers who either were or were not friends of the government. The changes in the tariff which have been made by order in council I would call grasshopper tariff regulations, and I make that classification advisedly. After all, if there is one thing which requires stability, certainly that thing is the changing of the tariff. A man wants to know what the present tariff on an article is, and what it is going to be. After he has shipped the goods he does not want to learn that the rate has been changed to such an extent that he cannot enter the market.
The two greatest problems before Canada to-day are those concerning our railways and the deepening of the St. Lawrence river. Neither of these matters has been submitted ' to the house during this session, and the subjects which have been brought up for discussion, and most of the bills considered, have been of very little interest to Canada. Certainly their importance is small when we compare them with the outstanding questions we should consider. I should like to draw to the attention of hon. members the position,

The Budget-Mr. Howard
as I see it, of labour, agriculture and finance. Two years ago government financing was done at an interest rate of only four and one-half per cent. At that time labourers were receiving about forty cents an hour, and receipts for agricultural products were on a fairly profitable basis. What is the position to-day? I think the conditions obtaining in this particular connection are more serious than any other phase of the problem. The rates of interest on government financing have increased to five per cent, six per cent and six and cne-quarter per cent. Wages have gone below twenty cents an hour, and the prices for agricultural products are lower than they have been during the past twenty-five years. This condition of affairs cannot continue. The rate of interest on money cannot be maintained by depreciating the wages paid to labour and the prices of agricultural products. The rates of interest must come down to a reasonable basis; wages must go up, and there must be fair receipts on the sale of agricultural products, if we are to maintain a business equilibrium in Canada.
I shall now direct my remarks to the question of unemployment, and appeal to the government to proclaim their policy for the next twelve months. I do not like to repeat the promises made, but I am tempted to quote the words of the Prime Minister at Regina on June 12, 1930:
This is a new country, and there is no excuse for unemployment in Canada if a government does its duty.
Speaking in Moncton on July 10, he said:
The Conservative party is going to find work for all who are willing to work, or perish in the attempt, and take such steps as will end this tragic condition of unemployment and bring prosperity to the country as a whole.
Month-Year	Amount
October, 1931	
213	loadsNovember, 1931	
361	loadsDecember, 1931	
766	loadsFebruary, 1932	
949	loads
And then this further appeal was made to the electors.
Mr. King promises consideration of the problem of unemployment; I promise to end unemployment. Which plan do you like best?
For the information of hon. members I should like to present some figures concerning unemployment. I have (before me a list of unemployment statistics for about twenty countries. These figures, which are for the last twelve months, show that Great Britain is second from the 'bottom, unemployment in that country having increased only 12 per cent. Canada, however, is fifth from the top, unemployment having increased (by 80 per cent. I have before me a letter from the secretary-treasurer of the city of Sherbrooke comparing the unemployment situation of 1931 with that of 1932. The total number of unemployed in Sherbrooke in 1931 was 1,201; today it is 1,812.
I should like to outline the assistance given to the unemployed in the city of Sherbrooke. Possibly the facts I am about to, disclose will indicate at least one reason why agricultural products are selling at such a low level. Single men are allowed to work one day per week at 25 cents an hour for an eight hour day, yielding $2, on which they must subsist. Married men without children receive two days work each week at the same rate, yielding .$4; married men with families work three days a week at the same rate, and receive $6. The total number of unemployed who got employment from the city in the year 1931 was 945; this year on February 24, 1,614 were receiving employment.
In the city of Sherbrooke we supply those without funds with free wood, and I should like to run over a few of the figures in this connection. I shall place on Hansard the following record of delivery of wood:
Month-Year	Amount
October, 1930	
148	loadsNovember, 1930	
270	loadsDecember, 1930	
613	loadsFebruary, 1930	
770	loads
This shows the situation as to unemployment relief. I suggest when the government asks for increased taxation, at least it should tell the house its policy in connection with unemployment relief.
I should like to tell hon. members something about the industrial situation in Sherbrooke. A few days ago the Prime Minister referred to the silk industry of that city, and made the statement that that industry was in a prosperous condition. We have two silk
industries in Sherbrooke which produce 60 per cent of all the full-fashioned silk hosiery' manufactured in Canada, or ten per cent more than half. Those industries are fairly prosperous, although I shall give some figures in a few moments which may indicate that during the past year sales have been much lower. The profit is lower than it was previously, the 3 per cent excise on the raw material, the ten per cent depreciation in currency, the eleven per cent profit tax, and
The Budget-Mr. Howard

the six per cent sales tax will be detrimental to those industries. I am waiting to learn the result of next year's operations.
Our specialty steel manufacturers, which used to employ 75 hands, now employ only 15. This year those employees are working only 28 hours per week as against 35 last year. There is a wage reduction of ten per cent and the foundry is closed entirely. Further, I shall relate the conditions in connection with our largest steel manufacturing industry. The pay-roll to-day shows 200 or 300 men less than it did at peak periods, and in that large industry the foundry is closed alternate weeks. This year the plant is operating only four days per week, while last year it operated five.
One of our textile industries has dropped twelve employees; they are paying $500 per week less wages, and the value of their product has dropped 40 per cent. Another textile industry which formerly employed 1,500 hands employs now only 200 or 300, some of which work two days and others three days per week. Only a few work the full week. Another industry reports that business has dropped 40 per cent during the last year; it has reduced the number of its employees 20 per cent, and is working four days a week as compared with five and a half days last year. Another steel industry states its profits this year are much less than they were last year; they are working one hour less per day and the number of employees has been reduced by ten per cent. Here is a rubber industry doing only one-half the business of last year, with wages 15 per cent less and the number of employees reduced by 10 per cent. Here is another steel industry; whose volume of business this year is only one-sixth what it was last year; wages are down 25 per cent; the number of employees has been reduced 40 per cent and they are working a seven-hour day and a five-day week as against a ten-hour day and six-day week last year. Another steel industry which ordinarily employs about 150 men last year employed about 80, and I consulted the manager of that company last Friday and found that the company was now employing only 7 men. Consider what that means, with the overhead and everything else, and only 7 employees working. It means the company will have to draw on its surplus, dividends will be passed and so on; it also means no work for the labouring men and no wages with which to pay the bills of their families.
I was surprised to learn the facts connected with another manufacturing concern in Sherbrooke. It went out of business two weeks ago, loaded all its machinery on freight cars and shipped it back to the United States. 
Formerly this concern employed 40 hands, but it will do no more business in Canada. Last year our Sherbrooke street railway suspended operations. I am not trying to find fault with my own town, but I do wish to place before this government the gravity of the situation, and to appeal to them again to tell us what they are going to do to settle the unemployment problem, what they intend to do for industry, and what they are going to do for our trade, because if we have no trade we will have no labour and no industries in this country.
I should like to give just one more outstanding example of what this grasshopper tariff legislation can do for a country. In the budget presented last year by the right hon. Prime Minister a one per cent excise tax was imposed on all imports, including lumber. It must be remembered that a very small quantity of lumber comes into Canada in comparison with the enormous quantity of lumber we export to the United States, but the one per cent excise tax was applied, and what happened? In the United States tariff law there is a provision, which I will not read, that if Canada, for instance, applies a duty against United States lumber, that country will apply a duty of $1 per thousand feet against lumber entering the United States from Canada. That stopped shipments of Canadian lumber to the United States. It did not take long to get some action; delegations stormed Ottawa, and the then Minister of Finance saw that a serious mistake had been made. By order in council, again, he amended the tariff and took off the one per cent excise tax on lumber. The Prime Minister was trying to blast his way into the markets of the world; this was one of his experiments. Uncle Sam was not satisfied with that action, however; he said, "That is a very good order in council, but I am sorry we will still have to apply the duty of $1 against Canadian lumber." Then what happened? This government had to pass another order in council making that regulation retroactive, so that it was as though the one per cent tax had never applied to lumber, and they had to refund all the money collected up to that time. That demonstrates the extraordinary habit of this government of changing duties, applying taxes and granting exemptions without due consideration.
Before I leave the question of industry there is another point with which I should like to deal. At page 54 of Hansard the Prime Minister is reported as having said:
Incidentally to the discharge of these obligations we have improved employment in Canada.

The Budget-Mr. Howard
I am not going to answer that statement, but I cannot understand 'how it could have been made. The Prime Minister then said:
There are a hundred more industries in this country than there were when the present government came into power.
The hon. member for South Waterloo (Mr. Edwards) said there were 157 new industries, and yesterday the hon. member for Dufferin-Simcoe (Mr. Rowe) said there were 142 What are the facts?


John Thomas Hackett: They are increasing every day.


Charles Benjamin Howard: The Prime Minister
knows, and the hon. member for Stanstead (Mr. Hackett) knows, that before making a statement of that kind consideration should be given t'he number of factories which have closed their doors. As a matter of fact, during the period in which one hundred new industries came to Canada, 464 industries closed their doors.
Now I wish to touch on agriculture. This question does not affect the county of Sherbrooke so greatly, but it will have to be dealt with by my hon. friend from Compton (Mr. Gobeil), my hon. friend from Stanstead (Mr. Hackett), my hon. friend from Brome-Missisquoi (Mr. Pickel) and my hon. friend from Shefford (Mr. Tetreault) when the timp comes. I would like to have time to compare some of the ministers of agriculture of the past with the present minister, but I never deal with .personalities. I will only say that the Minister of Agriculture (Mr. Weir) from his place in this house called an hon. member on this side a back bencher. I want to say to the minister that the only difference between himself and a back bencher is that a back ibencher is a future .cabinet minister who has not lost touch with the common people.
This week, coming through the city of Montreal, I learned to my surprise that the new price for milk, which will be announced on April 15, will be $1.35 per hundred pounds delivered in Montreal. If you take off 35 cents a hundred for express it means that $1 per hundred will be paid for milk delivered in Montreal. I do not want to criticize those engaged in the milk business in that city; I know something about that business, but they will sell it at $4 per hundred. If this government were alive to the situation surely they could at least reduce the price of milk to the consumer or, 'better still, increase the price to the farmer, and God knows he needs it.
In going over the estimates this year and noticing the way they 'have been curtailed
I marvelled that the ministers of the crown, knowing the condition of agriculture, should have consented to the reduction of the agricultural estimates by some $3,000,000. I do not criticize the idea of lessening our expenditures, but if there is one place where under present conditions this government has no right to curtail expenditures it is in connection with the agriculture of Canada. I would ask the members from the eastern townships what they are going to do with regard to the Sherbrooke exhibition, which up to this year has been granted $5,000 yearly by the Dominion government. That money does not go into the treasury of the Sherbrooke fair; it represents one-third of the amount paid directly to the farmers in that part of the .country. Now this government have cut off that grant; in other words they have refused to pay one-third of the prize money given the farmers of the eastern townships. What did the Quebec government do? They are just as hard up as this government is and their situation is just as bad. But the Quebec government are paying two-thirds, or $10,000, to the Sherbrooke fair. Although this government has gone 'back on agriculture in the eastern townships, the Quebec government are paying their $10,000 just the same, and they have also given $2,500 to apply on the deficit of last year.
May I, Mr. Speaker, place upon Hansard certain comparative figures with regard to prices of farm products. Each year I have watched this situation, and I have before me the prices for February 15, 1930, February 15, 1931, and yesterday's prices. These are taken from the Montreal Gazette. In 1930 eggs sold at 50 cents a dozen. That is what the farmers in the eastern townships were getting when the Mackenzie King government was in power. In 1931 eggs sold at 30 cents a dozen. Yesterday the price of eggs was 22 cents, in fact, some extras were sold at 19 cents. In 1930 butter fat sold at 42 cents a pound; in 1931 at 33 cents a pound; and yesterday at 21 cents. Fluid milk brought 7 cents a quart in 1930, 5 cents in 1931, and 4 cents yesterday. Butter was selling at 37 cents a pound in 1930, and the farmers were fooled and voted against the King administration because the price dropped 5 cents a pound at that time, but last year the price receded to 30 cents a pound, and yesterday it was only 17 cents a pound. This week farmers' butter was selling at 10 cents a pound in Lennoxville. Live stock prices have dropped in the same proportion.
Does the Minister of Finance realize the situation in which our eastern township farmers find themselves to-day? Any farmer who has
The Budget-Mr. Howard

no mortgage interest to meet and food in his cellar can at least get three meals a day, but the farmer whose land is encumbered cannot meet even his interest payments. Within the last two months two farmers who had put all their money into their farms and were financially embarrassed saw their property sold over their heads to speculators, and those speculators have since come to this government to ask assistance under the farm loan credit legislation.
A few minutes ago the hon, member for Labelle (Mr. Bourassa) said the Prime Minister is supposed to be an expert in finance. If I had time I should like to talk about the financing that has been done by this government during the past two years. Take the conversion loan. It is true our people came across with their money. But, as member for the county of Sherbrooke, I feel a terrible responsibility, because men of that county came to me and said, "We are invited to convert our victory bonds. Do you think, Mr. Howard, we should do so V' I am proud of the answer I gave them, but, Mr. Speaker, I am sorry for the results. But, the results would have been different if we had not had a change of government. I told those men, "If the government want you to convert your bonds I think you should do so." They converted their bonds. What happened? Insiders of this government did not convert their bonds; the people of Sherbrooke and the eastern townships did. To-day their bonds are selling at 92, and the bonds that those insiders did not convert are selling at 104. When I look around and see the lack of confidence, the financial hysteria that has overcome this country, I am appalled. I stand here as a business man, and if I could do anything to inspire confidence in our people I would do so. I think we have the best banking system in the world, but the banks of Canada and this government are one, they are working together. Surely they could work together in such a way as to show better results.


The ACTING SPEAKER (Mr. MacNico!):: The hon. gentleman has spoken forty minutes.


Mr. J. S. W OODS WORTH (Winnipeg North Centre):: Mr. Speaker, I must congratulate the Minister of Finance (Mr. Rhodes) on the clarity and comprehensiveness of his statement. He began with a review of the events which have so profoundly influenced international finance and reacted on our own stiuation. In that review he asserted:
The world is close knit to-day in matters of trade and finance as never before in history . . . and we cannot expect normal or prosperous conditions apart from the general world trend. 
I agree heartily with this statement, and, so far as I can recall, it is the best we have had on our international relationships. But I could have wished that the Minister of Finance had gone a little bit further and offered some definite course of action which would have helped to promote some sort of international solution. The budget does not indicate any international cooperation whatever. Let me give one or two illustrations as to how this lack may affect us. Out in the west all our agricultural arrangements are built up on the principle of a large export crop. Within the last few years the export markets have been very largely closed. So far as I can see the situation, there is no future for western agriculture unless the markets in Europe, or possibly in the orient, are open, and yet there is no indication whatever that the government is taking any steps through which we might hope for an opening-up of markets for western wheat.
Moreover, the tariff arrangements, in the last few months have been such as to make more difficult the selling of our goods abroad. Doctor Marvin, an economist of the Royal bank, in a recent address before the Canadian club of Toronto, as reported in the Financial Times of February 26, said:
Tariff barriers have hindered the free interchange of goods, and the recent increases in tariffs are more than likely to delay recovery.
I presume Doctor Marvin was speaking of world tariffs, but what is true of tariffs in Europe is equally true of tariffs on this continent. There is no indication that our own government is giving any lead in the direction of lowering those tariffs and thus making possible a greater measure of international cooperation.
I was very glad to hear the Minister of Trade and Commerce (Mr. Stevens) deal with the question of finance. Up to a very short time ago we in this comer had very little support when we mentioned matters of finance.
I am hoping that before very long the minister will get a little further than to think that if we have bimetalism we shall have solved our problems. He did, however, advance some very sound propositions. In this connection I would quote a further extract from Doctor Marvin's address:
The price level depends upon the ratio of credit and production. When credit expands excessively prices rise, and when credit is unduly contracted prices fall . . . volume of credit has fallen faster than volume of production ... it is this relationship which has produced falling prices. . . . There cannot be a return to the price level of 1926-28 unless credit

The Budget-Mr. Woodsworth
expansion is more rapid than increase in production, and a return to that price level is essential if the world's load of indebtedness is to be tolerable.
I am not very much concerned in keeping the world's indebtedness as it is, but I would point out that unless it is made tolerable, the present system is in danger of eminent collapse. Although the government presumably is in favour of maintaining the present system, it is taking no steps to ensure that it will extend even for a comparatively limited period.
Let us consider our rigid adherence to gold as the basis of currency and credit. In his very admirable review the Minister of Finance (Mr. Rhodes) said that gold was ceasing to be a medium of exchange and was becoming instead a commodity to be jealously guarded. If that is true, I cannot for the life of me understand why the Minister of Finance should not take steps to get away from the gold standard. If gold is ceasing to perform its primary function, that is, to permit the exchange of goods, why should we continue to use it as the basis of our medium of exchange? Why not select some other- medium which would enable us to perform the task of effecting exchange? However, if the minister is determined to cling to the gold standard, then I have a suggestion to make. Why not expropriate the gold mines of this country and enlist an army of unemployed -to work those mines to the very limit? If gold is to be the basis of our credit system and if the recovery of prosperity of this country is to depend upon the increase in gold, then let us work our gold mines and get things started. Instead of doing that, we are passing over to private individuals whatever profits may be made out of gold. Apparently we cannot produce sufficient gold to form a basis upon which our credit can be extended and prosperity brought back.


Mr. McMILLAN (Huron):: If the hon.
member had money at his command, would he invest it in a gold mine and employ unemployed to work it?


James Shaver Woodsworth: I am not talking
about private investments; I am saying that if gold is necessary as a basis the government should expropriate the gold mines and produce enough to form a basis for the additional credit which is declared to be necessary. As I said a moment ago, as far as I am concerned I do not believe in retaining the gold standard. I do not believe gold is necessary as a medium of exchange. In western Canada, we have an abundance of agricultural products, in eastern Canada we have agricultural
machinery and textiles and I cannot see why these two sets of commodities cannot be exchanged directly or that some simple medium for their exchange cannot be invented. Under present conditions we have to send people into the mines of northern Ontario to blast out the rock, to crush the rock to powder and extract, the gold in order that we may affect an exchange of the wheat of the west for the textiles and machinery of the east. It seems to me to be an absurd arrangement.


Mr. COOTE:: And then they cannot seem
to arrange it.


James Shaver Woodsworth: And it cannot be
arranged even then.	_
There is an incidental matter to which I shall refer for a moment. The revenue from public services is given as $54,000,000, the greater part being from the post office, which shows an increase of $1,500,000. Since this is true, I suggest that in these times of depression we attempt to give public ownership a chance and extend public service into other fields. The government is expected to carry on non-profit bearing enterprises and leave the profit-bearing to private individuals. Coming down on the train I was talking to a gentleman about the output of the briquetting plant near Estevan. I understand that this is a fairly remunerative proposition, it being now in the hands of an American company. Hon. members who have been in the house for some years will remember that large sums of money were paid out for experimental work in the development of that briquetting plant. I do not see why, when we develop an enterprise of this kind, we cannot hold on to it and make it produce revenue for the country and give service to the people rather than turn it over to a private concern.
The Minister of Finance was able to report that he had balanced the budget so far as current services were concerned, but I ask: What has been the cost to the countiy as a whole for this balancing of the budget? I venture to say that the minister's method of balancing has made it more difficult for the majority of the people to balance their own private budgets. There has been a lessening of income because of increased taxation and an increase in other costs because of customs duties and so on. Although this problem may have been settled from the standpoint of the minister, it means that most of us will have difficulty in balancing our own budgets.
This balancing has been effected in two ways, by a reduction in expenditure, that is, by the cutting down of staffs, salaries and
The Budget-Mr. Woodsworth

services, and by increased taxation. I suggest respectfully to the Minister of Finance that there are other ways in which the budget might have been balanced. It might have been balanced by increasing the taxes on great wealth, it might have been balanced by the cutting down of debts, or it might have been balanced by the concurrent application of both methods.
The minister referred to uncontrollable expenditures which include debt charges, pensions, ex-soldier welfare work, provincial subsidies and other writings, aggregating altogether $236,000,000, or 62 per cent of the total debt. I always object to the word "uncontrollable," I do not like to think that bondholders are in a class by themselves and that we cannot touch anything which concerns them. Let me point out to the house that the real value of these debts has practically doubled since they were contracted. We heard a great deal this afternoon from the hon. member for South Waterloo (Mr. Edwards) about cloth. Supposing he contracted to deliver one hundred yards of cloth; the yardstick is three feet in length but if in some mysterious way that yardstick was stretched to six feet, I wonder if he would like to have to fulfil his contract and deliver one hundred yards of six feet each. That is precisely what we are asked to do with regard to our debts. There has been a contraction of credit, price levels have fallen and the purchasing power of the dollar to-day is practically twice what it was when these debts were contracted. We are continuing to pay interest on bonds based on their face value, and that seems to me to be absolutely unjustifiable ethically. The hon. member for Labelle (Mr. Bourassa) a few moments ago was speaking of the iniquity of paying dividends on watered stock, but it seems to me to be equally iniquitous to ask this country to pay interest on the the face value of bonds when their real value has doubled since the time they were issued.


An hon. MEMBER:: That is unearned increment?


James Shaver Woodsworth: It is unearned increment with a vengeance. The owners have no right whatever to this increased increment.
The hon. member for Labelle seemed to be afraid of artificially tinkering with price levels. But I would point out that the rise or fall in the price level can be and is definitely brought about by the increase or the contraction of credit or by the increase or decrease in the amount of currency. The price level has been changed; why not change it back? The other day Sir Josiah Stamp, at that luncheon which

many members were privileged to attend, said that every change in price level means a change in distribution of wealth. In saying that, he was taking the ground which was taken by Mr. Irving Fisher some years ago, in 1924, I think, when he appeared before the banking and commerce committee of this house:	.
_ Every change in price level means a change in distribution of wealth.
We have been doing that on a wholesale scale; hundreds of millions of dollars have been transferred from one set of pockets into another. That is undoubtedly true; no one can controvert it. That is why I say we ought not to call these "uncontrollable" expenditures, but we ought to deal with that side of our account just as much as we do with the other.


George Gibson Coote: Just as Australia did.


James Shaver Woodsworth: Yes. A ten per cent cut in the salaries of the civil service has been justified on the ground of lower price levels; it is said that civil service employees will be just as well off at 'ten per cent less salary as they were a few years ago at the salaries they then received. If there is any justification whatever for cutting down salaries because of the change in the price level, there is the same justification for cutting down the bonds to the point where they represent the purchasing power which they had when the bonds were issued. Even after you have cut the bonds in two, I would suggest that is no reason why bondholders should be exempt from taxation. There may be some difficulty with the foreign investor, but as regards bonds held by the investor in Canada we could easily impose a tax involving a reduction in his interest of, say one or two per cent. This would bring in revenues to a much greater extent than is done by the taxes which are imposed under the budget. There is, of course, a certain consolation which comes to me in viewing the whole situation, namely, that it is only a ' matter of time until most of these debts will be cancelled in any case. Doctor Marvin, in that speech to which I have previously referred, said:
Prices must rise-
That means inflation or "anti-deflation" or "reflation" as they call it in 'the United States.
Prices must rise or there will be a wholesale cancellation or repudiation of such debts.
He was speaking of international debts, but what is true of international debts is surely equally true of internal debts, and unless our bondholders are a little less greedy than they have been in the past, they may take warning

The Budget-Mr. Woodsworth
that it will be only a certain time before they must relinquish the whole instead of a part of what they now claim.
The minister has, as I have said, brought about a balancing in the budget, in part by reduction in expenditures, but while this may help to balance the budget it is having a very serious effect upon the country. The hon. member for Sherbrooke (M,r. Howard), who preceded me, referred to the reductions that had taken .place in the services given to agriculture. That -miay prove to be very serious in western 'Canada. For example, we are threatened with an outbreak of the grasshopper plague. I am told that although some were killed off last year, the eggs are still there and we are likely to have a plague this year. Nevertheless, large numbers of our entomologists have been laid off. That is very shortsighted economy. When we so much need every agricultural aid, it is absurd to cut down the chances which the farmer may have of making a living or from the standpoint of the mortgage companies, of paying his debts.
I come now to the additional taxation. How is this to be raised? Out of $55,000,000, some $40,000,000 or over two-thirds is to be raised through sales tax, import duties and nuisance taxes. Only a very small proportion is to be raised by direct taxation, a tax on incomes. This is in considerable contrast to the situation in other countries. In Great Britain 60 per cent of the revenue was raised last year through income and estate tax. In the United States, under the latest tax bill, 38 per cent was raised through income and estate tax. In Canada last year only 24 per cent was raised through income tax. I cannot see why we should not extend our income tax to at least the level which exists in the United States. This year, of course, we cannot tell exactly what the income tax will bring in, but the rate is so arranged that the tax will fall more heavily on the moderately well-to-do than on the very wealthy. The increases are as follows:
Taxable	Percentage
income	increase of tax
$ 4,000	100 per cent
10,000	53 per cent
20,000	40 per cent
50,000	33 per cent
100,000	32 per cent
1,000,000	31 per cent
Surely these figures ought to be reversed. The millionaires have been very gently dealt with by the Minister of Finance. As regards the discrimination against the poor man to which I have referred, might I quote from an advertisement which has appeared in our papers within the last few days. I quote from
a three-quarter page advertisement in the Citizen of April 11, sponsored by the Canadian Daily Newspapers Association, as follows:
The true nature of this unlaboured progress of Canada in motion is revealed in the fact that dividends .amounting to $226,351,000 were paid by Canadian corporations in 1931, an increase of $32,500,000 over the average of the six years ending 1930, and $50,000,000 better than any year previous to 1929.
That is, in this time of depression enormous dividends are being paid; a comparatively small number of people are doing very well indeed. In spite of this we find in the speech from the throne, which I looked up after reading this, the following words:
I sincerely congratulate you on the fortitude and patience with which the people of Canada have borne the hardships of this period of depression and maintained their usual high regard for law and order.
I am not at all sure that fortitude and patience are a virtue under those conditions. I do not know how much longer the people of Canada are going to stand for the building up of still larger fortunes by the rich when the masses are suffering from this terrific taxation and the various hardships which are brought about by the policy under which we are living to-day.
In one portion of the Finance minister's budget statement I find the following:
In order to protect the credit of Canada as a whole, temporary assistance was given to certain of the provinces in meeting their obligations.
The minister went on to give the loans to the different provinces, as follows: Manitoba, $2,938,918; Saskatchewan, $10,934,341; Alberta, $4,142,000; British Columbia, $4,371,664. My colleague from North Winnipeg (Mr. Heaps) has given full credit to the Finance minister for his attitude in helping out the western provinces, but I would point out that in my opinion the province was given a very small sum, and the Winnipeg Tribune, which is usually a strong supporter of the present government, charges discrimination against Manitoba. In its issue of January 13 last, in an editorial entitled Politics Everywhere I read:
The Bennett government is taking a quiet hand in the political game. It is refusing measures of financial cooperation to the Bracken government which it would readily and cheerfully afford a provincial government of its own political stripe.
I think that is a very serious charge. I do not know the details-


Mr. STITT (Selkirk):: But is it true?


James Shaver Woodsworth: I say that when a newspaper that is a strong supporter of the

The Budget-Mr. Woodsworth
government makes a charge of that kind, we ought to have some statement with regard to the matter. I think we all do know something about a later transaction than that in connection with the .provincial savings bank of Manitoba, which was forced to close its doors a few weeks ago. We do know that Mr. Bracken, the premier of the province of Manitoba, appealed to the Prime Minister of Canada for help, and at first it was refused. Later, after some negotiations, the Prime Minister took the matter into his consideration, and finally on February 9 he wired to Premier Bracken:
You will be advised by code telegram to-morrow the terms on which your proposals will be accepted.
There came no further word from the Prime Minister. The next communication to Mr. Bracken was from the banks, a telegram dated February 11, which reads in part as follows:
Referring to your previous conversations with bankers and also with the Prime Minister of Canada and the Prime Minister's message to you last night, banks represented in Winnipeg are willing to assume deposit liabilities if you address a communication in the following terms to them.
Here is a message from the private banks to a provincial government saying that "if you address a communication in the following terms to them," then there followed a number of definite conditions, among which I find the following:
The government of the province of Manitoba will within a period not exceeding fourteen days from the date hereof convene the legislature and repeal said chapter 174 and amendments thereto.
That is I believe the statute providing for the establishment of a provincial savings bank in Manitoba. Premier Bracken protested against some of the conditions dictated to him by the banks. Negotiations went on for a little time and the banks finally consented to his plea that .the legislation should not be repealed, but Premier Bracken agreed that the government would not again go into savings bank business. Finally we have this from the banks:
Referring your message of Saturday, have consulted banks, who are agreeable to waiving the repeal feature provided legislature is convened within two weeks from to-morrow.
There you have private banks indicating how this country is to be governed.


Mr. HEAPS:: Where was the lieutenant-governor that time?


James Herbert Stitt: They asked the
private banks to take over the liabilities.


James Shaver Woodsworth: That may be, but I do not want to discuss that as I have only a few moments left. We finally have Premier Bracken undergoing the humiliation of having to reply:
Wire received. Legislature called twenty-ninth. Writing officially to-morrow.
And Premier Bracken writes in the terms dictated to him by the banks. In my experience I have never known anything that quite so clearly illustrates the stranglehold which the banks have on the government of this country.


Miss MACPHAIL:: They are the government.


James Shaver Woodsworth: I do not know anything that quite so clearly demonstrates that the banks, in the last analysis, as my hon. friend from Southeast Grey (Miss Macphail) suggests, are the government of this country. It is an astonishing state of affairs, and I am surprised that Conservative members will even attempt to justify that kind of thing. What I should like to ask is this, and possibly the Finance minister can tell us: Did the government of this country give guarantees to the banks. I am informed that the government gave to the banks guarantees similar in terms to those which they refused to the province of Manitoba. That is something which I think we are entitled to know in this house. In the meantime we have this governmental institution, the savings bank of the province of Manitoba, forced to go out of business. Further the federal government apparently, so far as anything to the contrary has yet been revealed, refused to give the assistance which might have saved the provincial savings bank.
Further than that, let me say that the banks are going outside of their own realm to such an extent that only the other day I had this resolution sent to me from the city clerk of the city of Winnipeg. I am not blaming the government for this situation, but I think it is well that the government and the country should know how far the banks are going and what resentment they are arousing even in official quarters in my part of Canada. This letter from the city olerk of the city of Winnipeg, dated March 30, 1932, reads as follows :
I beg to append a copy of resolution passed by the council of the city of Winnipeg this morning, namely:-
Whereas there appears to be a growing tendency for certain banks to engage in the purchase and sale of municipal securities;
And whereas owing to the relationship between municipalities and their bankers this

The Budget-Mr. Woodsworth
18 an undesirable and dangerous development which tends to place too much control in the hands of the banks, undermine their prestige and work to the disadvantage of the people as a whole;
Now therefore be it resolved that this council does protest against the present practice whereby certain banks purchase and sell municipal securities, even the securities of their own clients.
And it is further resolved that this council is of the opinion, and recommends, that this whole question be thoroughly investigated by the Dominion government before the time when amendments to the Bank Act are up for consideration in 1933; and further recommends that a thorough inquiry be made by parliament into all the circumstances relating to the connection of certain banks with the municipal and provincial bond and debenture issues which have been oifered to the public in recent months.
I pass that on from the city council of Winnipeg to the Minister of Finance urging that he make the investigation requested.
My colleague spoke with regard to the question of unemployment. I have not very much to add to what he said, but I would point this out, that we have no indication that the government is taking any steps adequate to meet the needs of the situation.
Might I offer a suggestion which was given to me and which I think has some merit, and that is with regard to single men, of whom we have so many in the west, men recruited very largely to do harvesting and construction work which was necessary in the earlier days. It is suggested that as an emergency measure-it is no permanent solution whatever, but it would be greatly preferable to the soup kitchen idea-that there be recruited a peace army; that every unemployed man be given a chance to earn $1.10 a day, with everything found, and that this peace army go into the north country to clear brush, to make highways and to beautify our parks and other areas, thus creating assets which would be of permanent value to us, especially so in view of the tourist business which has developed in Canada. More than anything else such an arrangement might help to save the morale of these men who are being degraded by hand-outs of food, and provision of very wretched shelter. I cannot see how any men with spirit in them can very long tolerate the kind of treatment single men are now receiving.
Further than that, I think of the families and their sufferings. In the outskirts of Winnipeg, forming part of my own constituency, is the little village of Brooklands. Recently^ survey was made in that village, and out of 600 families it was found that heads of 180 families were out of work. That situation is fairly typical of a very considerable portion of my constituency. When I was home at Easter I visited some of the homes in that section, and I should like to tell about one of them. In that home I found a man, a skilled mechanic, who has not had work for months. At the present time he is ill. His wife, a woman of rather exceptional ability, came from the old land, and has had good cultural opportunities. There are seven children. The city is supporting that family entirely, giving them groceries, milk, bread, fuhl, light and water. Further than that, it is making a small grant to the mortgage company, because in part the home is owned by the family, and in order that the mortgage should not be foreclosed and the people forced out on the street certain payments are being made to the mortgage company. Clothing has to be obtained in indirect ways. The worst feature however is this: In that home there were four big boys, out of school, sitting hour after hour, day after day, week after week, and month after month with absolutely nothing to do. Two of the older boys, since they were thirteen or fourteen years of age had helped on western farms, getting out as best they could and finding jobs. A few years ago that was possible, but to-day no such work is available. One of those boys told me he had been working in this haphazard way since he was thirteen years of age. and he was coming to realize that unless he soon learned a trade he could not make a success of life.
Thousands of boys are in precisely the same condition. I wish I could tell hon. members of this house about an exhibition I attended at Easter time showing work done by a group of unemployed boys. The finances of the department in charge however are at an end, and those boys are now on the street again with nothing to do. It seems to me a heavy responsibility rests upon some public body. As we say in our amendment, as this parliament is the body with the widest legislative power, it seems it is the responsibility of parliament definitely to lay plans to meet a need of this character. While I do not think the constructive suggestion we make in our amendment goes very far, it does seem to me it would cut down the debts, stabilize the dollar and help stimulate industrial activity that would tide us over for the time being. I urge upon hon. members that they must recognize the fact that we are in no temporary depression; we are facing the break-up of the system. That break-up may not come for a period of a few months or
Royal Assent

years or it may come quiekljr. We are not justified however in neglecting to face the seriousness of the situation.
On motion of Mr. Dickie the debate was adjourned.



ADJOURNMENT-BUSINESS OF THE HOUSE

Mr. MACKENZIE KING:: I suppose this debate will continue to-morrow?



INDUSTRIAL PROPERTY


Charles Hazlitt Cahan: I beg to submit the first and final report of the special committee appointed to consider Bill No. 5, respecting Unfair Competition in Trade and Commerce. I may add that the report is unanimous.



RAILWAY COMMITTEE

Edgar Nelson Rhodes: Yes.


[Stage Direction]
At six o'clock the house adjourned without question put, pursuant to standing order.
Thursday, April 14, 1932