DEATH OF MR. J. D. F. DRUMMOND, M.P.

Right Hon. W. L. MACKENZIE KING (Prime Minister):: Mr. Speaker, for the third time, within less than a month, it is my painful duty to be called upon to refer at the opening of Monday's proceedings, to the removal by the hand of death, during the brief adjournment over the week-end, of an hon. member of this House.
Three weeks ago it was hon. members on this side of the House who were bereaved of one of their numbers; last week, it was hon. gentlemen immediately opposite; to-day it is the leader and members of the Progressive party. In each instance, death followed swiftly upon a brief illness.
John Douglas Fraser Drummond, who died in this city yesterday afternoon, was the member for West Middlesex, in this province. He was in his sixty-sixth year. Mr. Drummond was one of the best-known farmers of western Ontario. He started farming as a boy on his father's farm in Middlesex, and attained marked success in mixed farming and in the raising of grade Durham cattle. He became actively identified with the United Farmers' movement when it took its rise in the province a few years ago, and at the last general election was returned to this parliament, defeating nominees of both the Liberal and Conservative parties.
Mr. Drummond's life rvas continuously associated with the interests of agriculture and the county he represented, which was also the county of his birth. Before entering federal politics he had during a period of thirty years, been successively councillor, reeve and clerk of his native township, having held the latter office for sixteen years.
Greatly respected by all who knew him, and especially by hon. members of this House, the country loses in the death of the hon. member a well-informed and faithful representative of its agricultural interests in parliament, and the constituency of West Middlesex one of her best-known and most devoted sons.	'
The sympathy of hon. members of this House will go out in fullest measure to the widow and others of the family of our late fellow-member who have been so suddenly and so greatly bereaved.


Right Hon. ARTHUR MEIGHEN (Leader of the Opposition):: Mr. Speaker, it will be borne home upon all of us that the passing of eleven of our number in the short space of three years and four months emphasizes the uncertainty and the hazardous character of human life. I do not think that within any period of our history so many have been called in the duration of a single parliament. All of the hon. members who have gone were men of quiet, unpretentious demeanour and, with the exception of two, took no very ostentatious part in the affairs of this parliament. If they had infirmities they kept them to themselves. This was very em-
Customs Act

phatically the case as respects the hon. member for West Middlesex who, with tragic suddenness, was taken from us just yesterday morning.
As he came from that portion of the province in which I was born and brought up, I can well understand the type represented by Mr. Drummond. He was of that hard-headed, firm-principled group of men of Scotch descent who mainly settled western Ontario and to whom that favoured section of Canada owes to-day its greatness and its wealth. Mr. Drummond gained early in his career the confidence of his fellows, and carried that confidence into a wider sphere. I am sure we all concur in the graceful tribute of the Prime Minister, and to-day I can only add that among his associates in the House the same opinion was formed of his character and attainments as that gained by him in the section in which he was born. We on this side join hon. gentlemen opposite in sympathy with our friends to the left and extend to them, and still more to his family and to his neighbours, the expression of our deep regret for his loss and our sincere appreciation of his valuable labours in this House.


Mr. R. A. HOEY (Springfield):: Mr. Speaker, in the absence of the leader of the Progressive party (Mr. Forke) I desire to associate myself with the words spoken by the Prime Minister and the leader of the opposition, and to join with them in their tribute to one of our number who has been called from our midst by death. The news of Mr. Drummond's death reached us with painful-shall	I say tragic?-suddenness.
Many of us were unaware until two days ago that he was ill; none of us realized that the illness was of a serious character, or one from which he might not speedily recover. The late member for West Middlesex was a quiet, sincere, unassuming man who undertook his work here seriously, and sought to accomplish it fearlessly and conscientiously. After years of service in the municipal sphere he entered this House at an age when a man less public spirited might think of retirement, ease and seclusion. He did so in an attempt to serve his fellow men. In that service he was stricken, and in the service of his country many miles from the home in which he lived, and many miles from his loved ones, he died. That the strain imposed upon him by his duties here in no small measure contributed to that physical collapse from which his strength did not enable him to recover no one will dispute. It is, with feelings of profound regret, mingled1 with that sense of 
sorrow and sadness inseparable from the severance of friendship's ties by death, that we, the members of the group to which he belonged, with those who have already spoken, ask you to convey to his sorrow-stricken widow, and to the members of the bereft family our most sincere and heartfelt sympathy.


Mr. SPEAKER:: I shall convey to the
hon. member's family the regrets that have been expressed by hon. members on his death.



RAILWAY ACT AMENDMENT

[Stage Direction]
Hon. GEORGE P. GRAHAM (Minister of Railways and Canals) moved for leave to introduce Bill No. 142, to amend the Railway Act, 1919.
He said:	The object of this bill is to
deal drastically with those found guilty of false billing of goods on the railway.
Motion agreed to and bill read the first time.

[Stage Direction]
Hon. GEORGE P. GRAHAM (Minister of Railways and Canals) moved for leave to introduce Bill No. 143, respecting the Toronto Terminals Railway Company.
He said:	This is a bill really introduced
on behalf of the Canadian Pacific Railway, as it gives some further latitude, I think, in financing operations which they find necessary in connection with the Toronto terminals.
Motion agreed to and bill read the first time.

[Stage Direction]
Hon. J. A. ROBB (Acting Minister of Finance) moved for leave to introduce Bill No. 144, to amend the Loan Companies Act, 1914.
Motion agreed to and bill read the first time.

[Stage Direction]
Hon. P. J. A. CARDIN (Acting Minister of Customs and Excise) moved for leave to introduce Bill No. 145, to amend the Customs Act.
He said:	This bill provides that the
smuggling of goods of the value of over $200 be made an indictable offence and punishable by imprisonment. The other section of the bill provides that the goods be forfeited without any power of remission on the part of the minister.
Motion agreed to and bill read the first time.

Questions


[Stage Direction]
Bill No. 141, from the Senate, for the relief of James Hooper Robbins.-Mr. Clifford.

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

*Mr. SEGUIN:: 1.	Is it the intention of the government to amend the Income Tax Act, thus creating an exemption on the assets of the tax payer so as to afford greater security to the purchaser or lender in good faith?
2.	Owing to the injustice which results from the fact
that, under the Quebec provincial laws, the consorts married under the clause of separation of property are not on an equal footing with the consorts married under the clause of community of property, in regard to statements concerning the Income Tax Act, is it the intention of the government to do away with this anomaly by giving to the consorts married under the clause of community of property the same advantage as that given to those married under the clause of separation of property?	[DOT]


Hon. Mr. CARDIN:: This matter is under consideration and the policy of the government will be made known in due course.


PUBLIC INVESTMENT IN PORT OF VANCOUVER
Hon. Mr. STEVENS:: 1.	Having reference to sessional paper No. 165 of the present session, page 22 has the government taken note of a statement signed by K. A. Blatchford, dated October 3, 1924, to the effect that certain eastern interests are putting up a big fight to blacken the port of Vancouver and no doubt succeeding to some extent?
2.	If so, have any steps been taken by the government to protect the huge public investment in the port of Vancouver?
3.	Has the government noted a further statement on the same page of the said return, indicating that the grading of grain east and west is carried on in a manner to discriminate against the Western route?
4.	If so, will the government institute immediate in-quries to determine who is responsible for same?
5.	Under the Canada Grain Act, are certain grades of grain fixed ?
6.	If so, are the said grain grades uniform throughout the whole of Canada?
7.	Is the government aware that the writer of the said letter, Mr. K. A. Blatchford, held at the time the responsible office of mayor of the city of Edmonton?
8.	Will the government institute necessary inquiries to determine responsibility for the condition charged as existing by Mr. Blatchford?


Hon. Mr. COPP:: 1.	The government has observed the statement alluded to in communication signed by K. A. Blatchford dated October 23, 1924, addressed to the Secretary of the Vancouver Harbour Commission.
2.	The government will continue its policy of protecting the public interest at the port of Vancouver.
3.	In the return as brought down by the government there is no statement to this effect at page 22 or elsewhere.
4.	Answered by No. 3.
5.	Yes. The Canada Grain Act defines certain grades of grain which are known as contract grades. Other grades not defined are established in accordance with sections 47 to 51 inclusive, and are called commercial grades.
6.	No. Grades of grain are not uniform throughout the whole of Canada, as the Grain Act provides separate and distinct definitions for grades of grain generally. Reference may be made to section 105 of the act. Section 107 of the act specifies the grades which apply only to grain grown in the western inspection division. Standard uniform samples are distributed to each inspection point and every effort is made to grade all grain in accordance with such samples.
7.	Yes.
8.	The government will institute necessary inquiries whenever definite and specific charges are made.


TOPOGRAPHICAL SURVEYS
Mr. KELLNER:: 1.	What are the grades of surveys engineers in Topographical Surveys of Canada?
2.	What are the duties attached to each grade?
3.	What are the principal determining factors in grading the employees?
4.	What are the salaries attached to each grade?


Hon. Mr. COPP:: 1.	There are six grades, 1 to 6.
2.
Grade 1. Under direction, to act as an assistant to the chief of a survey party; on occasion to have charge of a sub-party in the field; in the office, to check, compute and plot surveyors' notes and refums, and to perform other related work as required.
Grade 2. Under direction, to have charge of a minor surveying operation; to act as senior assistant on major survey parties, and to assist in the supervision and direction of field work; to make astronomical and other observations and accurate measurements; to check and make difficult computations from surveyors' notes, and in some cases to supervise employees engaged on computation work; to assist in the preparation of maps, plans and reports; and to perform other related work as required.
Grade 3. Under direction, to have charge of one or more major survey parties; to supervise the compilation of data obtained by the surveys, and the computation and preparation of maps, plans and reports to assist in the training of field assistants; to be responsible
Questions

for the transportation of men and supplies and to perform other related work as required.
Grade 4. Under direction, to have charge of one or more major parties engaged in making legal surveys; or to be in responsible charge of a number of major survey parties in an assigned area; or to have charge of one of the smaller divisions of a large surveying organization; to be responsible for the organization, equipment and maintenance of survey parties, the transportation of men and supplies, and the preparation of notes, maps, plans and reports comprising the final result of the survey; and to perform other related work as required.
Grade 5. Under direction, to have charge of a large division of a large surveying organization; or to have charge of a special section of surveying work; to be responsible for the inspection of the work of field parties in a large surveying organization; to prepare instructions for parties engaged in field work connected with the division; to be responsible for the accuracy of plans and reports submitted by field parties, and for the preparation of statistics and the compilation of plans, maps, reports and other publications of the division; to make special inspections of difficult phases of field surveys; and to perform other related work as required.
Grade 6. Under direction, to have charge of one of the largest divisions of a large surveying organization; to prepare instructions for parties engaged in field work connected with the division; to be responsible for the accuracy of plans and reports submitted by field parties, and for the preparation of statistics and the compilation of plans, maps, reports and other publications of the division; and to perform other related work as required.
3.	The qualifications as fixed by the classification of the Civil Service of Canada are:
Grade 1. Education equivalent to high school graduation; ei her graduation in engineering from a school of applied science of recognized standing, with two years of experience in surveying, or four years of practical experience in surveying; supervisory ability; good physical condition.
Grade 2. Education equivalent to high school graduation; either graduation in engineering from a school of applied science of recognized standing, with three years of experience in surveying, two years of which shall have been subsequent to graduation, or six years of practical experience in surveying; in some cases a commission as Dominion land surveyor will be required; tact, good judgment, and ability to handle men; good physical condition.

Grade 3. Education equivalent to high school graduation; either graduation in engineering from a school of applied science of recognized standing, with five years of experience in surveying, at least three years of which shall have been in a position of professional responsibility, or seven years of experience in surveying, at least three years of which shall have been in a position of professional responsibility; in some cases a commission as Dominion land surveyor; ability to organize and manage large field parties; to deal with involved problems of transport; tact, good judgment and ability to handle men; good physical condition.
Grade 4. Education equivalent to high school graduation; either graduation in engineering from a school of applied science of recognized standing, with six years of experience in surveying, at least four years of which shall have been in a position of professional responsibility, or eight years of practical experience in surveying, at least four years of which shall have been in a position of professional responsibility; for legal surveys a commission as Dominion land surveyor will be required; ability to organize and manage large field parties, and to deal with involved problems of transport; firmness, tact and good judgment; good physical condition.
Grade 5. Education equivalent to graduation in engineering from a school of applied science of recognized standing, with at least seven years of experience in important surveying work, at least five years of which shall have been in responsible charge of such work in the field; preferably a commission as Dominion land surveyor or Dominion topographical surveyor; a thorough knowledge of higher mathematics as applied to surveying, and of surveying and mapping methods; ability to organize and manage men in the field and office, and to direct surveying operations; familiarity with modern office practice; firmness, tact and good judgment; good physical condition.
Grade 6. Education equivalent to graduation in engineering from a school of applied science of recognized standing, with at least eight years of experience in important surveying work, at least six years of which shall have been in responsible charge of such work in the field; preferably a commission as Dominion land surveyor or Dominion topographical surveyor; a thorough knowledge of higher mathematics as applied to surveying, and of surveying and mapping methods; ability to organize and manage men in the field and office, and to direct surveying operations; Jamiliarity with modern office practice; firm-

Questions
ness, tact and good judgment; good physical condition.
4.
Minimum Maximum
Class 1	
$1,740	$2,040Class 2	
2,100	2,580Class 3	
2,580	3,120Class 4	
2.700	3.300Class 5	
3.000	3,600Class 6	
3,300	3,900


TAX ON EXPORT POWER
Mr. CHURCH:: 1.	Will the government afford the House an opportunity to discuss the tax on the export of power ? If so, when?
2.	Has any decision been given on the Carillon power project by the government, and has any application been received to date in this connection, and from whom?
3.	Has any protest been received from the government of Ontario protesting against the export of this power?
4.	Will the government secure the opinion of the Supreme Court of Canada as to the powers of this parliament and the government of the provinces on the whole question of the export of power, and also as to whether the export tax is ultra vires or not?
5.	Will the Justice department be asked for such an opinion, or has one been given by the said department in the matter, and what is it?
6.	Did the government recently promise a hydro deputation to secure such an opinion?
7.	Have any protests been received regarding the export tax? If so, from whom and on what grounds?


William Lyon Mackenzie King: The answers to these questions are as follows:
1.	This question was on the order paper on the 8th of the month, and I would answer it by saying, that opportunity has already been afforded.
2.	I think the discussion we had in the House brought out the fact that applications had been made to one of the government departments, but that so far as the government itself was concerned they had not been before the government for consideration.
3.	I laid on the table of the House two or three days ago a letter from Premier Ferguson, which, I presume, is in the nature of a protest against the export of power.
4.	The Department of Justice has expressed the view that the export tax is not ultra vires. It is not the intention of the government to secure an opinion from the Supreme court. '
5.	I have just answered this question by the answer to the one before it.
6.	Some members of the government I think did make a promise when a deputation came before them that the opinion of the justice department would be obtained.
7.	Protests have been received based on various grounds.


Sir HENRY DRAYTON:: Will the Prime Minister table the opinion of the Department of Justice?


Mr. LAPOINTE:: My hon. friend knows
that opinions given by the Department of Justice to other departments have always been treated as confidential.


Henry Lumley Drayton: If my hon. friend wants to take that position, there is an end of the matter.


CANADIAN NATIONAL RAILWAYS-TRANSFERS, RIVIERE DU LOUP TO ST. MALO
Mr. POULIOT:: 1.	What are the names and the values of each of the twenty-two pieces of machinery which were transferred from the workshops of the Canadian National Railways at Riviere du Loup, to St. Malo?
2.	On what date did said transfer take place?
3.	What are the names and the respective occupations of the employees of the Canadian National Railways who were transferred from Riviere du Loup to St. Malo?
4.	On what date did each of said transfers take place?


Hon. Mr. GRAHAM:: 1 and 2.
Article-Value-Date
1 90 inch boring mill, $6,500, January 26th, 1920.
1 locomotive quartering machine, $3,000, January, 14.
1 locomotive wheel press, $1,800, January 14.
1 driving axle lathe, $700. January 14.
1 30 inch upright drill, $450, October 23.
1 18 inch travelling head shaper, $300, January 26.
1 48 inch x 48 inch x 20 feet planer, $5,500, January 15.
1 36 inch x 36 inch x 7 feet planer, $1,900, February 5.
1 28 inch lathe, $1,200, March 17.
1 6 foot radial drill, $3,500, March 16.
1 emery grinder 14 inch x 2 inch, $75, January 14.	'
1 4 spindle drill, $1,200, January 20.
1 24 inch cold saw, $900, January 20.
1 18 inch brass lathe, $500, January 20.
1 16 inch lathe, $400, January 31.
1 3 spindle test hole drill (staybolt), $250, January 20.
1 No. 8 Beaudry power hammer, $900, Jan-
1 1,200 pound steam hammer, $1,800, January 31.
1 shear 36 inch throat, capacity J inch plate, $1,800, January 14.
1 flange punch, $2,000, January 14.
1 26 inch x 6 feet centre lathe, $600, January 14.
Questions

Article-Value-Date
1 22 foot HS. lathe, $1,200, January 26.
1 Small lathe and planer tools, $100,_____
3 anvils 400 pounds each, $90, January 31. 3 sets blacksmiths' tools, $40, January 31.
3 and 4.
N ame-Occupation-Date Desrochers, J. B., machinist, January 13. Thivierge, J., machinist, January 13. Thivierge, Alp., machinist, January 13. Meunier, J. A., machinist, January 13. Boulet, J. D., machinist, January 13. Lavoie, J. E., machinist, January 13.
Roy, Ludger, machinist, January 13. Perron, Leder, machinist, February 2. Hebert, C. E., machinist, February 2. Mountain, Jack, machinist, February 28. Carrier, Ovide, machinist, March 1. Belanger, Sylvia, machinist, March 1. Lemieux, Gaston, machinist, March 1. Ouellet, Romeo, machinist, March 1. Langevin, Laureat, machinist, March 1 Fortin, J. H., machinist, March 1.
Fortier, Albert, machinist, March 1. Belanger, Sylvio, machinist, March 1. Soucy, Louis, machinist, Mareh 1.
Claveau, J. A. L. G., machinist, March 1. Morin, C., machinist, March 1.
Turgeon, Joseph, machinist, March 1. Samson, Ed., machinist, March 2.
Ouellet, F. E., machinist, March 16. Chenard, Arthur, machinist, March 16. Pelletier, Joseph, machinist, March 16. Plourde, E. J. E., machinist, March 16. Marquis, J. E., machinist, March 22. Plourde, J. L. A., machinist, March 22. Plourde, Sylvio A., machinist, April 5. Samson, J. A. D., machinist, June 14.
Sirois, J. P., machinist apprentice, January 13.
Lacombe, Claude, machinist apprentice, January 13.
Casista, J. H., machinist apprentice, March
1.	'
Tremblay, J. B. S., machinist apprentice, March 1.
Berube, J. A., machinist apprentice, March
1.
Levesque, J. H. L., machinist apprentice, March 1.
Bernier, E., machinist apprentice, March 16. Plourde, J. E., machinist apprentice, March 16.
Pineau, C., machinist apprentice, March 16. Levesque, J. E., machinist apprentice, March 22.
Fraser, C. E., machinist apprentice, March
22.

Name-Occupation-Date Turgeon, J. A. L. G., machinist apprentice, May 17.
Morrisette, J. N., machinist apprentice, October 25.
Plourde, J. G. L. E., machinist apprentice, October 16.
Blanchette, J. R., machinist helper, January 13.
Guy, J. L., machinist helper, January 13. Lapointe, Freddy, machinist helper, January 13.
Parent, L. O., machinist helper, January 13. Senecal, S., machinist helper, March 16. Fortin, C. E., machinist helper, March 16. Gervais, L. P., craneman, January 26. Theriault, H. G., staff clerk, May 16, 1919. McKinnon, J. E., assistant foreman, February 16.
Ouellette, L., steamfitter, March 1.
Slight, A., steamfitter, March 16.
Morin, Louis, boilermaker, January 13. Desrochers, L. A., boilermaker, January 13. Desrochers, A., boilermaker, January 13. Desrochers, J. W. E., boilermaker, February
Tabara, J., boilermaker, February 28. Charrier, Edgar, boilermaker, March 1. Anctil, Emile, boilermaker, March 1.
Lebon, W. L., boilermaker, March 16. Deschenes, J. C., boilermaker apprentice, January 13.
Sylvain, L. M., boilermaker apprentice, January 13.
Page, M. A., boilermaker apprentice, March
1.
Soucy, J. C. H., boilermaker apprentice, March 1.
Ouellette, J. H., boilermaker apprentice, March 16.
Couturier, Victor, boilermaker helper, January 13.
Masse, F. X., boilermaker helper, January 13.
Desrochers, H., boilermaker helper, March
1.
Morin, Antonio, boilermaker helper, March
1.
Tardif, Omer, boilermaker helper, March 1. Beaulieu, C. E., boilermaker helper, March 16.
Poney, J. I., boilermaker helper, March 16. 1920. '
Marcotte, J. B., boilermaker helper, March
22.
Dufour, R., boilermaker helper, March 22. Dube, W., boilermaker helper, March 27. Ouellet, J. C., blacksmith, March 1.
Dube, Ernest, blacksmith, March 1. Deschenes, F., blacksmith, March 16.

Questions
Name-Occupation-Date
Morin, J. E. A., blacksmith helper, March 1.
Lapointe, C. E., blacksmith helper, March 1.
Pelletier, T., blacksmith helper, March 16.
Richard, J. B., locomotive painter, March 1.
Levesque, Sylvia, locomotive painter, March
1.
Gagne, J., locomotive painter, March 17.
Rioux, Albani, locomotive carpenter, March
1.
Deschenes, Arthur, locomotive carpenter, March 1.
Laforest, Francois, carman helper, March 1.
Beaulieu, Joseph, carman helper, March 1.
Dionne, Abraham, carman helper, March 1.


ST. LEONARD CUSTOMS AND EXCISE EXAMINER
Mr. DOUCET:: 1.	When did the position of Customs and Excise Examiner at St. Leonard, Madawaska County, New Brunswick, become vacant?
2.	When were applications called by the Civil Service Commission for the filling of this vacancy?
3.	How many applications were received?
4.	What is the name of the successful applicant?
5.	Was an order issued by the commission to one Joseph Desjardins to report for duty and on what date?
6.	Was that order withdrawn? If so, on what date and why?
7.	When does the Department of Customs and Excise propose appointing a permanent official to that position?


Hon. Mr. COPP:: 1.	December 1, 1294.
2.	The position was advertised September 26, the time limit for receiving applications was October 10, 1924.
3.	Two.
4.	Joseph Desjardins.
5.	Yes. A certificate was issued by the Civil Service Commission April 3, directing Mr. Desjardins to report for duty upon instructions from the department.
6.	The department rejected Mr. Desjardins by letter of May 5, 1925, stating that he was not suitable for the position.
7.	A requisition has been received by the commission for a permanent appointment and the position is being advertised.


KRAFT CHEESE
Mr. STEWART (Leeds):: 1.	Have any applications been made since the 1st of January, 1924, for rebates of duty paid by importers of New Zealand or other cheese used in the manufacture of Kraft cheese exported from Canada?
2.	If so, who are the applicants, and what is the amount of duty claimed by way of drawback or refund in each case?
[DOT]	3. Have any other applications been received for
drawback or refund of duty on imported cheese during said period ?
4. If so, by whom, what is the amount claimed in each case, and what payments have been made on account of such applications?


Hon. Mr. CARDIN:: 1.	Yes.
2 and 3. One application for drawback, amount claimed $11,719.60. It is contrary to the practice of the Department of Customs and Excise to give information which would disclose the business of an individual concern. 4. No payments made.


CANADIAN NATIONAL RAILWAYS-CREOSOTE TIES
Mr. KENNEDY (Edmonton):: 1.	Has the Canadian National Railways used any creosote ties?
2.	If so, how many and on what parts of the system?
3.	Is the creosoting of ties done by contract?
4.	What is the cost per tie?


Hon. Mr. GRAHAM:: 1.	Yes.
2.	3,561,858-Atlantic and central region.
3.	Yes.
4.	The cost varies depending on the fluctuations in market price of petroleum, cresote oil, coal tar and other preservative materials used in the treatment of ties.


WELLAND SHIP CANAL
Mr. KNOX:: 1.	In what year was the new Welland ship canal started ?
2.	What is the total cost up to the present time?
3.	What is the estimated cost to complete the project?
4.	When is it estimated the project will be completed ?


Hon. Mr. GRAHAM:: 1.	Surveys, 1908; actual construction, 1913.
2.	To March 31, 1925, $51,203,488.15.
3.	Approximately $100,000,000, including amount already expended.
4.	If appropriations are available yearly to full capacity of contractors and no set-backs occur, it is expected that the project will be completed during the year 1929.


PRE-EMPTIONS HUDSON BAY RAILWAY
Mr. HUDSON:: 1.	What was the total area of land disposed of as pre-emptions under the provisions of the Dominion Lands Act, passed in the year 1908?
2.	What was the total price for which these lands were sold?
3.	What amount has actually been received in respect of the sale of these lands?
4.	What is the total expenditure to date, (a) for the construction of the Hudson Bay railway, (b) for the harbour works at Port Nelson?


Hon. Mr. COPP:: 1.	12,763,040 acres, approximately, including entries since cancelled.
2.	$38,289,120, approximately.
3.	To 31st March, 1925, $16,312,959.95.
Questions

4.	The expenditure to March 31st 1925, for the construction of the Hudson Bay railway was $14,902,571.17, and for the harbour works at Port Nelson $6,244,599.49.


AUDIT ACCOUNTANTS
Mr. GARLAND (Bow River):: 1.	What are the qualifications required for Grade 5 Audit Accountant?
2.	What are the qualifications for Grade 4 Audit Accountant ?
3.	What are the qualifications for Grade 4 Audit Accountant, as advertised in list 269, civil service positions ?
4.	Are there any clerks in the office of the Auditor General who are both university graduates and chartered accountants? If so, how many?
5.	How many clerks of the Auditor General are eligible to try the examination for Grade 4 Audit Accountant, as advertised?
6.	What is the nature of the work that requires such qualifications?


Hon. Mr. COPP:: 1.	There is no such class.
2.	Education equivalent to university graduation; at least nine years of experience in a post of responsibility in auditing work in the Dominion service or in work of equivalent character and standard; thorough knowledge of the fundamental principles of double entry book-keeping and accountancy; thorough familiarity with the functions and work of the Auditor General's department and wide knowledge of the Dominion government's accounting system; administrative ability; mature judgment.
3.	Education equivalent to university graduation; at least nine years of experience in a responsible position in auditing work; qualification by examination as a member of a recognized Canadian Association of Accountants; at least six years' subsequent experience in public accounting; knowledge of the law affecting the functions and work of the Auditor General's office; knowledge of the government accounting systems; administrative and supervisory ability; mature judgment; ability to prepare and construct high grade accounting organization procedure and practice, and to conduct and report upon inspections and examinations. While a definite age limit has been fixed for this competition, age may be a determining factor when making a selection.
4.	No.
5.	None.
6.	One to have charge of the audit of revenue and the other audit of stores.



BUSINESS PROFITS WAR TAX ACT

Mr. GOOD:: 1. Under the Business Profits War Tax Act: (a) How many taxpayers have requested an appeal to a board

of referees;	(b) how many of these pressed their
appeals and were heard before a board of referees?
2.	Did any taxpayers appeal to any other tribunal than a board of referees?
3.	If so, to what tribunal or tribunals, and how many appeals were thus heard?


Hon. Mr. CARDIN (for Minister of Customs) :: 1.	(a) The majority of so-called appeals are protests to keep the cases open for discussion.
No record has been kept of the number of such cases; (b) none.
2.	No.
3.	Answered by No. 2.



INCOME WAR TAX ACT

Mr. GOOD:: Under the Income War Tax Act: (a) How many taxpayers have requested an appeal to a board of referees; Cb) how many of such appeals have been heard before boards of referees; (c) how many taxpayers have appealed to the exchequer court; (d) how many appeals either to a board of referees or to the Exchequer court have yet to be disposed of?


Hon. Mr. CARDIN (for Minister of Customs) :: 1. (a) The majority of so-called appeals are protests to keep the cases open for discussion. No record has been kept of the number of such eases, (b) None, (c) Seventeen, (d) Eight.



ARMENIAN IMMIGRATION

Mr. ELLIOTT (Waterloo):: 1.	How many Armenians have come to Canada since May, 1924?
2.	Through what sources and to whom were the various permits issued?
3.	Did those entering Canada fulfil the required regulations with regard to passports?


Hon. Mr. ROBB:: 1. 257.
2 and 3. To furnish the evidence in detail in reply to Nos. 2 and 3 would involve an endless amount of work including a search of our indexes for eleven months, the selection therefrom of all applications relating to Armenians and the examination of every file, in order that those, where admission had been granted, could be separated from the unsuccess-full requests. In view of this, I wonder what good purpose could be served by my hon. friend persisting in bis question, but if he does, I shall have to ask that it stand as an order for return.



CANADIAN NATIONAL RAILWAYS-WAIN- ' WRIGHT OIL TESTS

[Stage Direction]
Mr. SPENCER;
1.	Has there been a test made by the Canadian National Railways officials of crude oil taken from the British Petroleum Well No. 4 in the vicinity of Wain-wright, Alberta?
2.	If so, what were the results obtained?

Animal Contagious Diseases Act
George Perry Graham: I am not sure whether this question ought to be answered or not until we make further inquiries. If it is a private company that had officials of the Canadian National Railways make a test of its well for its own purposes, I would not think it would be right, without the consent of the parties who requested that the test be made, to reply to this question.



VANCOUVER GOVERNMENT PROPERTY

Hon. Mr. STEVENS:: 1.	Is it the intention of the government to pay the city of Vancouver the sum of $15,000 per year in lieu of taxes on government property in that city?
2.	Will the government bring down an estimate this session covering said amount, or, in what manner will the said amount be paid?
3.	Did Mr. George E. McCrossan corporation counsel for city of Vancouver, discuss this question with ministers of the crown during his recent visit to Ottawa?


Hon. Mr. CARDIN:: 1.	No.
2.	No.
3.	Mr. George E. McCrossan on behalf of the ciity of Vancouver urged that the Vancouver Harbour Commission should make a reasonable contribution to the city for services rendered in lieu of taxes on its property.



QUESTION PASSED AS ORDER FOR RETURN


[Stage Direction]
Mr. HOCIvF.N:
1.	How many translators are employed by the Senate and House of Commons, respectively?
2.	How many translators are employed by the public departments in Ottawa, or branches of the government service ?
3.	What are the duties of the blue book translation staff of the House of Commons?
4.	Has the blue book translation staff been relieved of the duty of translating the annual departmental
reports.
5.	If so, why and upon whose authority.
Hewitt Bostock: The answer of the department of the Speaker is ready, but I understand the question covers all other departments, so it will stand as a-n order for return.



WAR IMPRISONMENT OF DR. BELAND

Mr. H. A. STEWART (Leeds) moved:: For a copy of all correspondence, cablegrams and other documents passing between the government or any member thereof and Sir George Perley, the British government or any department thereof, the representatives of any foreign power charged with the conduct of the affairs of Germany during the war, and between any of the above the one with the other, relative to the illegal detention and imprisonment of Dr. Beland, M.P., during the late war.


William Lyon Mackenzie King: I am not sure to what extent it may be possible to furnish the information requested. Such material as there may be in the departments of the government here, I can see no reason why the . government should not bring down provided that the British government have no objection. The motion calls for papers between this government and the British government or any department thereof. It is possible that the British government may have reasons for not wishing to produce the correspondence at the present time. If my hon. friend is agreeable to let the motion pass on the understanding that papers will be brought down only with the consent of the British government and in so far as we are in a position to bring them down, that will be satisfactory to the government. My attention is drawn to the fact also that the motion refers to correspondence with representatives of any foreign power charged with the conduct of the affairs of Germany during the war. I should think it would be essential to obtain also the consent of all the powers concerned before bringing down the correspondence.


[Stage Direction]
Motion agreed to.


Mr. BLACK (Halifax):: For a copy of all specifications and contracts made regarding the new Halifax elevator.



ANIMAL CONTAGIOUS DISEASES ACT AMENDMENT

[Stage Direction]
Hon. W. R. MOTHERWELL (Minister of Agriculture) moved that the House go into committee at the next sitting to consider the following proposed resolution:
That it is expedient to repeal subsection one of section six of the Animal Contagious Diseases Act, as enacted by chapter seven of the statutes of 1922, and amended by chapter three of the statutes of 1923, by which it was provided that the minister may order compensation to be paid to the owners of animals slaughtered under the provisions of the act at the rates of valuation therein prescribed, and subject to the limitation that the said subsection should only remain in operation for three years from the first day of July, 1922; and in lieu thereof to re-enact the said subsection with the same rates of valuation for compensation but without the said limitation as to operation.
He said:	His Excellency the Governor
General, having been made acquainted with the subject matter of this resolution, recommends it to the favourable consideration of the House.
Motion agreed to.
Canada Temperance Act

[Stage Direction]
Hon. J. A. ROBB (Acting Minister of Finance) moved that the House go into committee at the next sitting to consider the following proposed resolution:
That it is expedient to introduce a measure to provide authority for the raising, by way of loan, under the provisions of the Consolidated Revenue and Audit Act, by the issue and sale or pledge of securities of Canada, in such form, for such separate sums, at such rate of interest and upon such other terms and conditions as the Governor in Council may approve, such sum or sums of money as may be required, but not to exceed in the whole the sum of one hundred and sixty-four million dollars, for paying or redeeming or otherwise retiring the whole or any portion of loans or obligations of Canada and for public works and general purposes, and to provide that the principal so raised by way of loan and the interest thereon shall be a chcarge upon and payable out of the Consolidated Revenue Fund.
He said: His Excellency the Governor General, having been made acquainted with the subject matter ot this resolution, recommends it to the favourable consideration of the House.
Motion agreed to.

[Stage Direction]
Hon. P. J. A. CARDIN (Minister of Marine and Fisheries) moved that the House go into committee at the next sitting to consider a certain proposed resolution with regard to advances to the Quebec Harbour Commissioners.
He said1:	His Excellency the Governor
General, having been made acquainted with the subject matter of this resolution, recommends it to the favourable consideration of the House.
Motion agreed to.

[Stage Direction]
Hon. ERNEBT LAPOINTE (Minister of Justice) moved that the House go into committee at the next sitting to consider the following proposed resolution:
That it is expedient to amend the Canada Temperance Act, chapter one hundred and fifty-two of the Revised Statutes of Canada, 1906, by the addition thereto of Part V, to provide for the prohibition of importing, sending, taking or transporting of any in-toxieating liquor into any province in which such prohibitions are in force; to further provide penalties for the violation of the proposed legislation, and to provide for the revocations when such have been declared revoked by an order in council of the Lieutenant-Governor of a province affected.
He said:	His Excellency the Governor
General, having been made acquainted with the subject matter of this resolution, recommends it to the favourable consideration of the House.
Arthur Meighen: It is not usual to discuss a motion of this kind at this stage, but so far as I can see the present motion is identical with one which the minister has already on the order paper and' which has been before the House for some time. I should be glad if the minister would point out now the difference between the two and, as well, how each of them differs from the legislation which passed this House one or two sessions ago and which the Senate defeated.


Ernest Lapointe: This resolution precedes the introduction of a bill identical1 with the one that passed this House in 1923, but which was modified by the Senate in such a way that it was rejected upon its return to this House. It applies particularly to British Columbia. The other bill which is on the order paper at the present time applies to the provinces that come under part 4 of the Canada Temperance Act, that is to say, those provinces in which the provincial legislature has passed a resolution asking the Secretary of State to hold a plebiscite therein on the question whether the imports of liquor should be prohibited or not. When such plebiscite is voted in the affirmative the Governor in Council passes an order in council prohibiting such imports into those provinces. That legislation applies to Manitoba, Alberta, Saskatchewan, Ontario, Nova Scotia, New Brunswick and Prince Edward Island, the only two provinces in which such a plebiscite has not been held being British Columbia and Quebec. This bill will apply to those two provinces if they care to take advantage of it.


Arthur Meighen: Will this bill if it passes, have the same effect exactly upon British Columbia and Quebec as the other bill, if it passes, will have on the other seven provinces?


Ernest Lapointe: No, this bill does not go as far as the other. The other bill prevents all importations of liquor into those provinces in which the p'ebiscite has been held, except as regards liquors for-sacramental, medicinal, manufacturing and commercial purposes. The present bill, which was agreed to by the provinces to which it will apply if it passes, does not go so far. For instance, it will permit the importation of alcohol by brewers and distillers *for the purpose of blending in the course of the manufacture of liquors, while under part 4 of the Canada Temperance Act even such importation is prohibited except through the province.


[Stage Direction]
Motion agreed to.﻿MAY 25, 1925
Empire Day

[Stage Direction]
Hon. J. A. ROBB (Minister of Immigration and Colonization) moved that the House go into committee at the next sitting to consider the following proposed resolution:
That it is expedient to amend the Soldier Settlement Act, 1919, and amending acts, and to provide that notwithstanding anything in the acts, in the case of any settler who has not repaid his indebtedness to the board, or who has not abandoned his land, or whose agreement with the board has not been terminated or rescinded, the board shall credit his account with an amount, in reduction of his indebtedness to the board, determined as follows:-
Forty per centum of the purchase price of all live stock advanced to the settler and purchased prior to the first day of October, 1920;
Twenty per centum of the purchase price of all live stock advanced to the settler and purchased on or after the first day of October, 1921; and
The settler's account shall be credited with the total amount, determined as aforesaid, as on the standard date in 1925.
He said:	His Excellency the Governor
General, having been made acquainted with the subject matter of this resolution, recommends it to the favourable consideration of the House.
Before asking the House to adopt the motion I desire to point out that in paragraph 3 of the resolution an omission has occurred either on the part of the officers having charge of it or on the part of the Printing Bureau. The paragraph should read:
Twenty per centum of the purchase price of all live stock advanced to the settler and purchased on or after the first day of October, 1920, and prior to the first day of October, 1921.
If the House will accept this correction, I beg to give the customary notice that at the next sitting I shall move the resolution.
Motion as amended agreed to.

[Stage Direction]
Right Hon. W. L. MACKENZIE KING Prime Minister): Mr. Speaker, in the absence of the Postmaster General (Mr. Murphy) I beg to give notice that to-morrow he will move the following resolution w-hich appears in his name:
Resolved, that it is expedient to amend the Civil Service Act, 1918, as respects certain Post Office employees, and to provide, (1) That when it has been determined by the Governor in Council that any post office, the employees of which do not come under the Civil Service Act, is to be brought under the said act, any person then employed in such office who has had at least two years postal experience, one of which was in the office in question, and who was, at the commencement of his service, within the limits of age prescribed by the Civil Service Commission, and who satisfies the Civil Service Commission that he possesses the necessary qualifications, shall be considered eligible for appointment to any position in such office without competitive examination, provided, however, that any
person employed in any such post office on the date of the coming into force of this provision shall be eligible for appointment, even though he was not at the commencement of his employment within the limits of age prescribed by the Civil Service Commission;
(2) That upon an appointment being made, the person appointed shall receive the same salary as he was receiving immediately prior to such appointment, except that if the salary prior to appointment is less than the minimum rate of the position to which he is appointed, his salary shall be increased to such minimum rate, and if the salary prior to appointment exceeds the salary of which he would have been in receipt had he entered the service at the minimum rate of the class and had been allowed a number of annual increases equivalent to the number of years of his service, the salary to be paid to him upon appointment shall be fixed by the Civil Service Commission.
I am informed that His Excellency the Governor General has been made acquainted with the subject matter of this resolution and recommends it to the favourable consideration of the House.
Motion agreed to.


[Stage Direction]
On the Orders of the Day:
Mr. L. J. LADNER (Vancouver South):: Mr. Speaker, I desire to draw to the attention of the government the deplorable absence of flags on the government buildings in this capital of Canada on such a memorable occasion as Empire Day. While flags are flying on the Connaught and Hunter buildings, as well as the two flags on these buildings, the bare flag pole in front of the Queen Victoria monument is a poor tribute to the memory of that great sovereign, and the bare flag pole in front of the monument to Sir John A. Macdonald is also a poor tribute to one of our outstanding statesmen. Although we may hold our sittings to-day, I think we could do so with greater propriety under the flags of our nation on such an occasion as this, and I think I am expressing the opinion of the great majority of the people of Canada in regretting that apparently no official authority has taken notice of this omission. In fact it was drawn to my attention by visitors from Montreal. May I ask the government if we cannot have our flags flying for the remainder of this day, or at least some time before sundown?


Hon. J. H. KING (Kootenay, Minister of Public Works):: Mr. Speaker, I will make inquiries respecting the matter complained of. Of course, the flag on the Commons side of these buildings is flying half mast to-day on account of the death of one of our members. When the tower is constructed the main flag will fly from its summit. In the meantime
Marine Insurance

two flags are flown when parliament is in session, one on the Senate side and the other on the Commons.


Leon Johnson Ladner: Mr. Speaker, the flags on the parliament buildings are always flying while the Senate and Commons are in session. I am referring to the flag .poles in front of t)he monuments to Queen Victoria and Sir John A. Macdonald, and to those on the whole row of public buildings opposite this structure. No doubt the matter has been overlooked, and now it has been drawn to the attention of the government, I hope the omission will be made good without delay.


William Lyon Mackenzie King: It will be attended to.
PRIVILEGE-Mr. McBRIDE


Mr. T. G. McBRIDE (Cariboo):: Mr. Speaker, I rise to a question of privilege. It has been circulated, both through (the press and otherwise, that the member for Cariboo (Mr. McBride) has been canvassing the government for a seat on the Harbour Board of Vancouver. I diesire to state most emphatically that the member for Cariboo has never canvassed any member of the government directly, or indirectly, for sulch a seat; nor would I be in a position to accept the honour if it was offered to me.



MARINE INSURANCE RATES

[Stage Direction]
On the Orders of the Day:
William Lyon Mackenzie King: Mr. Speaker, the hon. member for St. John City and Counties of St. John and Albert (Mr. MacLaren) asked me on Friday last if the government had received a report from the Imperial Shipping committee dealing with marine insurance as affecting Canada, and if so, would I state to the House in a general way the terms of the report. I mentioned at the time that a report had been received dealing with the subject and that I would look it over and advise him later. I have in my hand an interim report, dated last year, which the government received and which I will put on the table so that my hon. friend may peruse it himself. I think, however, that what he has in mind is a second report, possibly the final report on this matter. I am informed that the final report is now almost ready for signature, but that it has not as yet been signed. I am therefore not in a position to reveal its contents.
Mr. MURRAY MaoLAREN (St. John City and Counties of St. John and Albert):	Mr. Speaker, I have had an opportunity of seeing the report that has just been placed on the 
table by the Prime Minister. As it happened, I had information, which I think was very reliable, that a further report had been forwarded to the Canadian government. That information came from England, consequently it must go back at least ten or twelve days. It may be that this final report will be received at ,an early date; or is it possible that the officials have not yet laid the report before the Prime Minister?


William Lyon Mackenzie King: No, my hon.
friend has doubtless been correctly informed from the Old Country as to the report having been, forwarded, and I have in my hand what I think is the document he refers to. It is marked "secret", as it is simply a draft, but it was accompanied by a communication stating that it was receiving further consideration. I shall cable to England to ascertain whether the report has as yet been signed. As soon as I am advised that it has been signed I will endeavour to see that my hon. friend is favoured with a copy.



BUSINESS OF THE HOUSE


[Stage Direction]
On the Orders of the Day:
Arthur Meighen: Mr. Speaker, we are now in the last week prior to the month of June and close to the end of the fourth month of this session of parliament, but the chief business of the session is not yet before the House. I refer to what has been announced as the main public business of this session, namely, the disposition of the troublesome freight rate situation. I did rather hope that this motion of the Minister of Railways dealt with it, but his explanation disabuses my mind of that anticipation. It seems to me there is no reason why legislation of this character should be rolled in on the House when we are on the last lap of the session. If there was any that should have been first, it is this, for the reason that the rate situation in the country in the meantime is chaotic; gross discriminations are prevailing and gross injustices ensuing. I call the attention of the government again to this matter, which seems to me of paramount consequence. As a matter of justice to parliament it should have been down before and should now be down without further delay. The same remarks, with only less force, apply to legislation respecting the Home Bank. I do not see how that legislation could be difficult of preparation, whatever other difficulties may be entailed in it. There is no notice of that yet. These two are the paramount pieces of business of this session.

Business of the House
While I am on my feet may I call attention also to another matter, the reason for the delay in connection with which we know -that is, the Australian treaty. Previously I have urged upon the government that if they could not introduce their legislation- and I am unable to comprehend the force of the reason for that, although it has been given -I cannot see what possible objection there would be to placing on the taible a memorandum embodying the proposals jointly agreed to, so that this House at least could have the advantage of studying those proposals and being prepared for such legislation as later may be submitted.
Hon. GEORGE P. GRAHAM (Minister of Railways and Canals):	The remarks of my
right hon. friend in reference to what is known as the railway rates question are in accordance with the views of the government and, I imagine, with those of all hon. members- that is, as to its being a question of paramount importance. As he has pointed out, the rates question is now in a chaotic state, and I presume no member of the House has that called to his attention with greater regularity than the Minister of Railways. I hope to be able to bring down next week at the latest a bill dealing with this question.


Mr. E. J. GARLAND (Bow River):: In view of the fact that the government intimated not long ago that they hoped to see prorogation reached by about the 15th of June, and as the leader of the opposition (Mr. Meighen) has already pointed out the shortcomings of the government, or the delay at least on their part, with regard to freight rates, it might not be amiss if I should suggest that there are still outstanding such important pieces of legislation as rural credits, revaluation of soldiers' land, and several other matters which are of paramount importance at least to the west. If the government intend to get through any of this legislation during the present session most of it should certainly be before the House now.
Hon. J. A. RjOBB (Acting Minister of Finance) :	Answering my right hon. friend (Mr
Meighen) regarding the Home
4 p.m. Bank, while I make no commitment in the matter I fully expect that the legislation in that respect will be brought down this week.


Arthur Meighen: I would remind the minister that the last hope expressed in that matter was dashed to pieces long ago. Is this hope more reliable?


Mr. ROBB:: Oh, I would not admit that
any hopes I have held out to my right hon. friend have been dashed to pieces. Regarding the question of the hon. member for Bow River (Mr. Garland), had he been in the House he would have observed that I gave notice of a resolution to-day regarding the revaluation of the stock of soldier settlers.


Edward Joseph Garland: I suggest
to the minister that this is the least important of the problems facing the soldiers. It is land revaluation they want, far more than the mere revaluation of stock; and that is what I referred to. May I also say that we received an assurance from one of the members of the government not long ago that legislation in this connection would be brought down this session?


Arthur Meighen: I want to call the attention of the Acting Minister of Finance to the fact that he has not made reference to my request as respects the Australian treaty.


James Alexander Robb: In this chamber so many
times I have given the answer to my right hon. friend regarding the Australian treaty that I have nothing to add to what I have already said.


Arthur Meighen: Why not lay on the
table a memorandum embodying the arrangement so far as arrived at?-because I believe an arrangement was completed. Why can *rfe not have the memorandum so that we may know what we are going to have to face?


Hewitt Bostock: Orders of the Day:


Arthur Meighen: No answer.



EXPORT OF POWER

[Stage Direction]
On the Orders of the Day:
Henry Lumley Drayton: I
would like to ask the government if they have come to any conclusion as yet with regard to the request of the municipalities of Ontario in connection with the long term contract for power export which is now burdening them.


William Lyon Mackenzie King: (Prime Minister):	The matter is still under
consideration.



GERMAN SECURITY QUESTION

[Stage Direction]
On the Orders of the Day:
Mr. WILLIAM IRVINE (East Calgary):: I want to ask a question of the government-arising out of a brief report in this morning's Citizen. The report is as follows:

3488	COMMONS
Canada-Netherlands Convention
The Canadian Press understands that the reply from France on the questions asked by the British government in regard to the meaning of some portions of the French draft of the reply to Germany on the security question has been received in London.
Some surprise was expressed in authoritative quarters at the suggestion that the British dominions were not kept continuously informed with the discussions on this subject, the fact being that in this, as in all other matters, the overseas dominions are kept fully informed of all developments.
If that is so; if we have been kept fully informed of all developments, can the government tell us what was the import of the answer of France to Germany on this question?


William Lyon Mackenzie King: The statement that the
government is being kept informed is quite correct. I have before me at the moment a despatch, dated at London on Saturday and received at my office to-day, with respect to this matter, but it is marked "confidential." From the nature of it I can see that it is quite confidential and that it would be improper to communicate any portion of it to the public at the present time. It contains some matters to which the British government wish to give further consideration before making a public pronouncement. As soon as the British government is in a position to make a public pronouncement, we shall be in a like position.



CANADA-NETHERLANDS CONVENTION OF COMMERCE

[Stage Direction]
The House resumed from May 18, consideration in committee of Bill No. 129, respecting a certain trade convention between His Majesty and the Queen of the Netherlands-Hon. Mr. Robb-Mr. Gordon in the chair.
The CHAIRMAN:: All the sections of this bill have passed except the schedule.


James Alexander Robb: The schedule was held over
at the request of the leader of the opposition who had some doubt as to the applications of the tariff regarding the British preference. I have a letter from the Consul General of the Netherlands in Canada, dated May 21, 1925, confirming a telegram which I also have and which I will read to the House. The letter, which sets forth the telegram, is as follows: Consulaat General	511 St. Catherine Street W.
der Nederlanden.	Drummond Building R. 823.
Montreal, May 21st, 1925.



No. 1652

[Stage Direction]
Dear Mr. Robb,-With reference to my conversation with Mr. Russell, Commissioner of Tariff, I have the honour to inform you that I have just sent to you the following telegram:
"With reference to the point raised in Canadian House of Commons that article one of the Canadian Netherland convention of 11 July, 1924, might be inter-
preted to give to the Netherlands the benefits of the Canadian British preferential tariff and to my conversation on the subject with Commissioner Russell, I have the honour to inform you that according to a cable dated May 20th received from the Minister of Foreign Affairs at the Hague, the Netherland Government has not at,all the intention to claim the benefits of the said British preferential tariff under article one of the said Canadian Netherland Convention, and, furthermore, that in the opinion of the Netherland Government the claiming of the benefits of the said British preferential tariff would not be justified under the text of the said convention. Confirmation of this telegram follows by letter.
Yours faithfully,
Th. H. de Meester,
Consul General of the Netherlands in Canada
I hope this explanation will satisfy mj right hon. friend.
Arthur Meighen: Will the minister take similar steps to see that the other treaty is likewise protected? I am satisfied with the assurance given in this case; if I caught it correctly I think it covers the ground. Perhaps, now that we have emerged from the dignified atmosphere of the orders of the day, the minister would tell us whether he will not give us a synopsis of the arrangements with Australia, and let the House have the advantage of knowing it. I cannot see how he would be prejudiced by doing this.


James Alexander Robb: I should like to oblige my right hon. friend. I do not like to start on Monday refusing him anything, but no good purpose can be served by a continuation of the discussion of this question in the House. Let us wait until Mr. Ross, the Trade Commissioner, arrives in Australia, and then perhaps within a day or two afterwards the necessary facts will be available.


Arthur Meighen: I have never suggested that there should be any discussion until the government brings its policy down; I know that would be quite improper. What I am asking for is merely information. Surely the minister does not think it is best for parliament that all these matters be loaded in upon us in the last few days of the session?


James Alexander Robb: It is not best for the minister in charge. I admit that.


Arthur Meighen: I am afraid there is something wrong there.


[Stage Direction]
Schedule agreed to.
Bill reported, read the third time and passed.

[Stage Direction]
Hon. W. R. MOTHERWELL (Minister of Agriculture) moved that the House go into committee on Bill No. 72, to amend the Dairy Produce Act.

Dairy Produce Act
Motion agreed to and the House went into committee, Mr. Gordon in the chair.	[DOT]
On section 1-Regulation.
Henry Lumley Drayton: Has the minister considered the question of amendment there?


Mr. NEILL:: Has this section been amended on the report of the committee on Agriculture?


George Newcombe Gordon: No, apparently not.


Alan Webster Neill: I understood it was.
Mr. MOTHERWELf,: No. The bill was very fully discussed in committee and no change was suggested-in fact the committee was unanimous in endorsing the measure.


Alan Webster Neill: The bill was very fully discussed in this House before it went to the committee, and there was a very strong expression of feeling that it required amendment by the leader of the opposition and others. With the general intention of this bill there is no complaint to be found. That is, if it is to prevent the exportation of inferior butter. But that could be arrived at by changing this section so that it would only apply to prevention of export. As the section is worded, however, the department takes the power to refuse to grade anybody's butter under any condition whatsoever. Now, that is not the right way to go about it. It is not right to prevent a man from caryying on his business. It is not right to say that because a man has once done wrong he should be put out of business altogether; that would be interfering with individual liberty in a free country, so to speak. If a man has done wrong he should be punished; if he continues to do wrong he should be punished again; but why say arbitrarily to that man. "Because you have once or twice exported bad butter we will never again grade your produce?" That is not compatible with-I was going to say-freedom of action; the object of the government could be well achieved by making this section gfve it power to refuse to give export certificates for bad butter, which is really the object aimed at according to the explanation furnished by the department itself. I should like to ask the minister what objection he has to making such an amendment?


Mr. MOTHERWELL:: That is all the
proposed legislation does apply to; we have no provision for grading butter for home consumption. The provision applies entirely to butter intended for export. If anybody wants 223i
his butter graded for home consumption such action on his part is entirely voluntary. The illustration given on the page opposite to the clause we are considering is only one but there are half a dozen reasons why we should refuse certificates in the case of butter for export. Some of the factories and creameries, for example, have been very dilatory in taking out th,eir registration numbers. It is absolutely necessary that they should register and be given a number so that if anything goes wrong in the case of butter on the export market we can trace it right back to the very factory from which it came, and the very vat in which it was made.


Henry Lumley Drayton: I think the hon. member for Comox-AIberni (Mr. Neill) is absolutely correct. All he wanted, and all that any of us wanted, at the time the discussion took place, was to make it clear that while this grading should apply to butter or other products which ought not to be exported, in a word, to bad produce, a certificate should not be refused on any other ground except that the produce was bad. We suggested at the time that the provision should read:
For refusing to grade dairy produce deemed unfit or unsuitable for export.
That was the only ground on which the minister himself thought the grading should be refused. This amendment is simply for the purpose of showing clearly that this grading shall only be refused in connection with butter which should not be exported.


William Richard Motherwell: Let me repeat, Mr. Chairman, that the reason I have given is only one illustration [why we should have the power to refuse to grade. In committee we went very fully into all the other reasons. For instance, suppose the producer refused to subscribe to the Requirement in regard to the character of the boxes or the hoops to be used, or any other provision of the law and so tend to prejudicially affect our dairy products in the Old Country market, how are we going to get at him? A mere nominal fine will not bring him to time. We must in some way protect the rest of the dairymen; those who observe the law should not suffer from the odium incurred by reason of the conduct of one or two offenders. This is a power which we are exercising now, and we exercise it quite frequently in the case of cheese sent to Montreal, or any other point where there is cold storage and where we have graders.	If the cheese is only three
or four days old we refuse absolutely to grade it until the product is sufficiently
Dairy Produce Act

ripened to be worthy of the name of cheese. We are exercising this power now, but we really have no legal authority for doinig so. If some person challenged our right to refuse to grade green cheese it would be found that we do not have that power under the law. However we are acting on the assumption that we have the power; and we reserve to ourselves the discretionary right not to grade green cheese until, at least, it is ten or twelve days old. Therefore we are only asking, in this section, the right to do what we are actually doing at the present time. As a matter of fact nobody has taken exception to our exercising that authority. However, supposing they did object and brought suit against us for not grading this green cheese when it was three or four days old, seeing that we are without any authority, we might lose the case before the courts. And yet it would be quite unfair to the legitimate makers of cheese that the grade should be issued when cheese was green. You cannot give a grade to cheese when it is green; at that time it is not cheese but simply pressed curd. It took about a year to get our creameries to register. The committee will remember that about two years ago a certain sample of butter was put on the market in Great Britain and was reported in the press as having made people sick. Doctors were called in and they discovered bacteria in it. Do hon. members mean to say that a creamery should be allowed to turn out a product that was going to prejudice the entire trade of Canada?


Henry Lumley Drayton: Certainly not.


William Richard Motherwell: No. We should
have the discretionary power. When the whole trade of the country is in danger we should have the power, not only to fine a man and correct the difficulty, but we should be able, if a man persisted, to stop him altogether. This provision only applies to export butter. Occasionally a man voluntarily comes to us and asks for a grade for butter for home consumption. We have very rarely given it; if we have time we give the grade, but if not we do not grade it.


Alan Webster Neill: The minister's explanations
are entirely apart from the line of argument I am trying to present. I am not objecting to his refusing export certificates for any product whatever. He does it every day in the week, and it is quite all right, so far as I am con-cemed'; but I object to the department taking arbitrary power to refuse to grade the dairy products of any man because they do not like the colour of his hair or the place he comes

from. If they do not like a man they can Say to him, "I will not grade your products." The minister reads into the act something that is not there. He says we are only going to apply this provision to a man who habitually breaks the law and going to say to him, "Now we are tired of you, and will not grade your butter." But the act will also apply to the man who never had any produce graded. They may give some extraordinary reason, or none at all, and say to the man, "I will not grade your butter." That is not compatible with our ideas of justice. The remedy is to refuse to give him an. export certificate. The minister says that is no punishment, because he will pay the fine; but if the man cannot export his product, he will very soon get tired of producing it, because if he cannot ship it he will have to take it home. There is nothing profitable to him in that. Paying the fine is not the principal thing, it is the loss of the shipment and being compelled to dispose of it in some other way; and if his product is continually rejected on account of being an inferior grade, he will stop trying to export it in a very short time.
Then another point: How is a man to know why his produce is rejected, if you refuse to grade it? They may say it is rejected because it is not a good product, but how do they know that? The product should be graded, and if it is inferior it should be rejected. That will penalize a man far more than a fine. But it is not fair to say "I will refuse to grade your product." Suppose a man, through the carelessness of his servants, has made one or two inferior shipments and they have been rejected. That is no reason why he should be put out of business. If a man reforms, intends to do better, and to exercise more care, he should be allowed an opportunity to go on. I observe a great deal of the legislation proposed by the Department of Agriculture is framed along the same lines and extremely arbitrary; they take upon themselves a power which no other department ever assumes. It may be that there js a lack of co-ordination between the Legal branch and the Department of Agriculture. Time and again we have had occasion to protest against the arbitrary powers assumed by some branch or other of the Department of Agriculture.


William Richard Motherwell: We are endeavouring to raise the quality of good exportable farm products, and in doing that we increase the temptation to people to try to export inferior goods, and that means that we must have more restriction. There is not one-half

Dairy Produce Act
the arbitrary provisions in this law that you will find in the Australian or New Zealand laws.


Alan Webster Neill: It is not a restriction; it is a prohibition.


William Richard Motherwell: We do not say that we do not propose to grade anything because it is bad. We will grade the butter, as long as it is what it pretends to be. But if a man sends over adulterated butter, we have to prosecute him, and if he persists-and only under those circumstances-we decline to grade.


Alan Webster Neill: That is not put in the act.
Mr, MOTHERWELL: That is the fact. Take the other illustration in regard to cheese. I submit that you cannot specify all the offences imaginable. If you try to do so, something else crops up and you cannot deal with it. I was illustrating that with regard to cheese that was found to have certain bacteria existing in it which allegedly endangered the life of certain parties who ate it. We have a bacteriologist who has been placed in charge to look after such things. If the man who sent the allegedly dangerous cheese had been allowed to continue his shipments he might have hurt our cheese trade, and if we are going to do justice to the cheese men of the country we must have this authority; there is no question about that.
Then with regard to registration: It was with the greatest difficulty that we prevailed upon the creamery and cheese faetor:es to register. No registration fee was charged an;! all they were asked to do was to send their address and location and we would allot them a number. Having the number, it is possible to trace any cheese or butter back to the factory. If the factory persists in not having itse'f numbered or identified, we say, " All right, you persist in the refusal to register, ' and we will have *to decline to grade your produce ", That is not unreasonable. If my hon. friend thinks it would be providing any safeguard to say that this does not apply to butter for home consumption, I have no objection, but there will be a danger in that.


Henry Lumley Drayton: I think we all agree with everything. the minister says, except the application he seeks to make of what he says to the subject before him. He does not want to do any injustice to anybody, and only desires to refuse grades for produce which is not a good quality, and to refuse certificates to those who habitually break the law. But why does he not say so? That wou'd be the easiest thing' in the world. We
have the two points before us, and I think the protest of my hon. friend (Mr. Neill) is absolutely right. I do not know why the minister objects to it because what he asks is simply to put in writing what the minister says in words.


William Richard Motherwell: We have it.


Henry Lumley Drayton: No, what we
have here is something which would enable the department to withhold a certificate without any conditions, for any possible earthly reason, or for absolutely no reason at all. Surely that is not good legislation.


William Richard Motherwell: Would my hon.
friend suggest that we enumerate the number of offences?


Henry Lumley Drayton: No. In the first place two things came up. The first was the article itself. As regards the refusal to grade dairy produce, the word "grade" there, I assume, is not the testing of the butter but is used in the technical sense that after testing the butter, you give it an appropriate grade?


William Richard Motherwell: Yes.


Henry Lumley Drayton: Of course, unless we use the word in that sense, the sentence would have no real meaning, because refusal to grade would mean refusal to consider, and I apprehend that is not what is meant. What is meant is that after the inspection is made and the test made, the appropriate grade is to be given. After the minister says that after that is done, they should have the right to say there shall be no grade at alii and refuse all grades. He says: they should have that right because, if not, unfit produce may be exported to the harm of our whole export business. He is absolutely right. The claim is made that .we should show what we are doing in using the word "grade" in the sense the minister uses it in his draft bill. He will get around that point entirely by inserting after the word "produce" simply the following amendment:
Deemed unfit or unsuitable for export.
Paragraph (g) will then read:
For refusing to grade dairy produce deemed unfit or unsuitable for export.
That is all he says he wants. I am taking him at his word. Then again he says: "But there is another case than the grading of the article itself. We want to be in a position to police people who will not properly carry on business. They may have a good article that ought to be graded, but they may do this, that or the other thing which renders it dangerous for us to give them a grade at all."
Dairy Produce Act

He says: That applies in the case of a man who habitually pays no attention to our regulations. Again that can be clearly shown. If clearly shown, the sentence would read thus:
And for withholding grade certificates to any person habitually guilty of disregarding the regulations under this aot.
That is what my hon. friend says he wants to do. He says he wants to be fair to the trade. Why not do that? It covers both of his points.


Alan Webster Neill: I think the situation can be met by a simpler amendment than that suggested by the hon. member. If we strike out the first seven words in paragraph (g), that will meet the whole situation. The minister will then be given power to withhold export certificates because the certificates are for export. A man cannot export butter unless he has an export certificate. If that is withheld the whole situation is met. The minister does not need power to refuse to grade. Such power might be used in a very arbitrary manner and there is no necessity for it. The explanation given on the right-hand page reads:
If such butter and cheese is not graded, and no certificate issued, it cannot be exported.
Let me read this again in a different way:
If such butter and cheese has no export certificate issued, it cannot be exported.
Refusal to grade is not needed at all So long as you keep it from going out of the country, that will settle the situation as regards export. It will punish the man and prevent him from committing the offence again.


William Richard Motherwell: Does my hon. friend suggest that the word "export" be inserted?


Alan Webster Neill: I would strike out the first seven words of paragraph (g) and make it read like this:
For withholding export certificates.


William Richard Motherwell: There is not very much difference. I have tried to assure my hon. friend1 that this is only for export but if he would feel better satisfied if the words "for export" were inserted, there will be no objection.


Alan Webster Neill: Insert the word "export"
instead of "grade."


William Richard Motherwell: Why not make it read:	"For refusing to grade dairy produce and for withholding grade certificates for export"?


Alan Webster Neill: My whole case is my
objection to giving power to refuse to grade butter for any man. That is an arbitrary fSir Henry Drayton.]
power. The minister says that he will not exercise it except under certain conditions, but those conditions are not stated in the legislation. He is taking full power to refuse to grade perhaps an honest man's honest butter because, he says-this power is sometimes required. That is not the way to handle the situation. The object is to prevent bad butter from being exported and this can be met by making paragraph (g) read:
For withholding export certificates.


William Richard Motherwell: Again I assure my hon. friend that the question is not whether the butter is bad or good. The British market will consume anything that is fit for human consumption. When a man finds it more profitable to continue to commit an offence and to pay the fine so long as he can export, we want to say that he cannot export. There may be a dozen offences of this nature. We are exercising this power now and1 unless we have this legislation, somebody is going to challenge our power and we shall find that the door will be open to all kinds of exportable stuff. No arbitrary power has. been or is being exercised in this matter, and the law is not one-half as strict as the laws of either New Zealand or Australia. Unless we tighten up our laws in many other respects, we are going to find our export in many other commodities will be gravely jeopardised by dishonest exporters.


Alan Webster Neill: What more power could
the minister need than when he has full arbitrary power to withhold a certificate for export? We have not the laws of New Zealand here for purposes of comparison. It is a standard argument. that something else is done somewhere else. So long as we give the minister or his agents precise power to forbid any export, surely he does not want any more than that. He has the power to refuse any export certificate. Is that not sufficient? No, he says, in addition to that I will say to Tom Jones:	"I will not grade your
butter." Is that fair?


William Richard Motherwell: We threshed this
matter out pretty fully in the Agriculture committee and there was not a single dissenting voice. If the matter were otherwise, I would be disposed to ask that the committee rise and we discuss this further with my hon. friend because I do not think he understands the question at issue. But in view of the unanimity in the Agriculture committee and the fact that we are exercising this power now, I think that we should proceed with the bill. It is simplicity itself-the right to withhold a certificate from offenders of the law, as for instance, men who deliber-

Meat and Canned Foods Act
ately refuse to register their factories. There are probably half a dozen other reasons. The thing is so elementary in its rightness. We should know now whether the department should have that power or not. If we cannot get that power and are assuming the right to exercise a power we do not possees, what will happen? We shall be unable to prevent goods being sent abroad that will do harm to our export business. I do not want to see that, and I do not think the committee wants it. No specific power is given now and we are merely exercising it without legislation. There is no complaint of abuse. Why should we abuse it? We are, if anything, erring on the side of leniency.


[Stage Direction]
Section agreed to.
Bill reported, read the third time and
passed.

[Stage Direction]
Hon. W. R. MOTHERWELL (Minister of Agriculture) moved the second reading of Bill No. 116, to amend the Root Vegetables Act.
He said: I desire merely to have this bill given the formal second reading and referred to the select standing committee on Agriculture and Colonization.
Motion agreed to and bill read the second
time.	.


[Stage Direction]
Hon. GEORGE P. GRAHAM (Minister of Railways) moved the second reading of and concurrence in an amendment made by the Senate to Bill No. 41, respecting the publication of the statutes.
Henry Lumley Drayton: What is the nature of the amendment?


George Perry Graham: The only amendment pro-PQsed by the Senate relates to paragraph (a) of subsection 3 of section 10. The bill as it went to the Senate read:
The members of the two Houses of Parliament respectively, who shall each be entitled to receive such number of copies as is, from time to time, directed by the Governor in Council,
The amendment proposed inserts, after the word "by" in the last line of this provision, and between the words "the Governor in Council", the following words:
-joint resolution of the said Houses, or, in default of such resolution, as is directed by.


Henry Lumley Drayton: What the Senate
has done is to preserve the present rights of parliament under the existing law.


George Perry Graham: Yes.
Motion agreed to; amendment read the second time and concurred in.
MEAT AND CANNED FOODS ACT '	AMENDMENT
The House resumed from May 11 consideration in committee of Bill No. 73, to amend the Meat and Canned Foods Act-Hon. Mr. Motherwell-Mr. Gordon in the chair.
On section 1-"Canned foods".


Alan Webster Neill: Does this apply to canned salmon?


William Richard Motherwell: It was my under standing, and I think I am right in saying that it does not.


Alan Webster Neill: "Canned foods", according to this section, includes "foods that have been pre-heated, cooked, preserved, condensed", and so on. If that does not cover salmon I should like to know why, how or where it does not.


William Richard Motherwell: I understand that there is another act relating to salmon. My hon. friend (Mr. Stevens) asked me the same question on a previous occasion. I wonder whether he has looked the matter up.


Henry Lumley Drayton: Would it cover
canned sardines?


William Richard Motherwell: It does not apply to fish at all.


Mr. STEVENS:: The minister will recall that on two previous occasions I drew his attention to this matter, not for the purpose of interfering with the passage of this legislation but because this is of some importance. We are passing a good deal of legislation of this character, some of which is regarded as harassing to business, although I am not saying that this is. We shall wake up to find, if this bill passes that under its powers the inspectors will be dealing with canned salmon as well as with canned foods generally. The section clearly refers to foods of all kinds.


William Richard Motherwell: I will let the section stand.


Henry Herbert Stevens: The pure food law is the one to which the minister refers.


Mr. LOGAN:: Would the section apply to canned tomatoes?


William Richard Motherwell: I think we had better let it stand.
Section stands

Meat and Canned Foods Act
On section 2-Canned fruit or vegetables or foiod to be offered for sale in prescribed containers only.


William Richard Motherwell: Heretofore the containers have been specified by dimensions but the specific gravity of the contents varying, the weight would vary, so that although a tin by measurement might be supposed to contain four pounds, the contents would not be quite up to that weight. It was therefore necessary that the containers should bear a label indicating that the weight was so much, less so many ounces. Now, instead of having the containers conform to a certain size, we are providing that the contents must weigh so much net. In the case of grain, a bushel of wheat might weigh more or less than a bushel of some other product; just the same as a bushel measure of potatoes will hold a very different weight from a bushel measure of wheat. So a four-pound syrup container, while it will hold this weight when the syrup is thick, will not when the syrup is thin. Consequently, with the specific gravity of these commodities varying so much, we find we cannot protect the public by specifying a certain size of tin; the only way is by prescribing that the tin must contain so many pounds net.


Henry Lumley Drayton: I wonder, Mr. Chairman, what the minister says about the meaning of the term "food or food products." If the question is open under the first section, it must also be open under the second1.


William Richard Motherwell: The principle
embodied in the second section is the size.


Henry Lumley Drayton: Yes, but it
applies to any food or food products just as much as the preceding section does.


Mr. CAHILL:: Why should it not apply to all foods?


Henry Lumley Drayton: I am not
answering my hon. friend's question; I had not anything to do with the preparation of the bill, and that was not the subject of my inquiry. Recently an hon. gentleman interested in the fish business-probably my hon. friend1 was not here-wanted to know whether the previous section covered salmon or not.


Frank S. Cahill: I was here; but this section refers to canned foods.


Henry Lumley Drayton: This is the
same thing. Is the article salmon covered under the term "food or food products?"


William Richard Motherwell: I think that that
is very largely a technical objection.
[Mr. Motherwell. 1


Henry Lumley Drayton: It is no more
technical in one place, Mr. Chairman, than it is in the other.


William Richard Motherwell: Oh yes, I think a
real question was raised the other day by the hon. member for Vancouver Centre (Mr. Stevens).


Henry Lumley Drayton: The definition
we have here is the definition under which this act is going to be administered. Of course, I may be making a violent assumption in thinking so. There is your definition, that "canned foods" includes "foods that have been preheated, cooked, preserved," and so forth, and this very next section says "all canned fruit or vegetables, or products thereof"-there is no trouble about that- "or any food or food products which may be named by the Governor in Council," and so forth. It is perfectly clear that if in the opinion of the minister this section ought not to apply to fish it is no good our considering it now. Why not let the whole thing stand?


William Richard Motherwell: We might make a little progress, that is all.


Henry Lumley Drayton: I do not know that it makes a bit of difference letting it through while the other stands.


William Richard Motherwell: If we find the
interpretation clause has to be changed to exclude all kinds of fish, we can attend to it.


Henry Lumley Drayton: If you make the change in the first section it will have the effect of taking it out of this other section; there is' no question about that.


William Richard Motherwell: If we except fish,
which we may have to do, then section 2 will be subject to the interpretation clause.


Henry Lumley Drayton: My hon. friend is quite right; that is how it should be, but it is not so drawn. It is another evidence of the careless way in which these amendments are drafted. This section is to apply to any food or food products, and everybody knows that fish is a food product. But I do not know that it makes very much difference so long as the whole matter is held over.
Mr. MOTHERW'ELL: I do not think it does either, but I should like to have the opinion of the committee as to the principle of selling the contents by weight rather than by measure.


Henry Lumley Drayton: I think every, one would say that that is right.


William Richard Motherwell: All right, Mr
Chairman, I move that the committee report progress and ask leave to sit again.

Supply-Trade and Commerce


Mr. HUGHES:: Mr. Chairman, before the committee reports progress, I should like to ask the minister a question. I heard him say that he might introduce an amendment excluding canned fish from the act. Now, is lobster fish or meat? I do not think the question has been settled.


William Richard Motherwell: I do not know.


James Joseph Hughes: It is supposed by some
people to be meat, and I think it is classed under that head.


Mr. COOTE:: Why should not salmon be included in this act?


William Richard Motherwell: I am under the impression that fish is dealt with in another act, and I must accept responsibility for neglecting to look it. up so I could give the committee that assurance. I will certainly have that information ready the next time this bill is dealt with.
Progress reported.



TRADE AND COMMERCE

[Stage Direction]
Hon. J. A. ROBB (Acting Minister of Finance) moved that the House go into committee of Supply.
William Lyon Mackenzie King: Before y(?u leave the chair, Mr. Speaker, I would refer to the question raised the other day by the right hon. leader of the opposition (Mr. Meighen) as to the Minister of the Interior (Mr. Stewart) having gone into supply while we were in supply of some other department. I just wish to make it clear to my right hon. friend that to-day we are going into supply in the name of the Minister of the Interior, although we may take up, between now and six o'clock, some supply of the Minister of Trade and Commerce, and go on with supply of the Department of the Interior this evening.
Motion agreed to and the House went into committee of Supply, Mr. Gordon in the chair.
Trade and Commerce-Honorary Advisory Council for Scientific and Industrial Research (including the collection and distribution of information; fellowships, studentships and bursaries for the training of scientific researchers for service in Canadian industries and technical departments of the government service; grants in aid of scientific and industrial researches; special problems; salaries of the staff; printing and stationery), $120,000.


Hon. T. A. LOW (Minister of Trade and Commerce):: Mr. Chairman, there is no
change in this vote, which is for the purpose set out in the estimates.


Henry Herbert Stevens: Mr. Chairman, this item is of very much more importance than is indicated by the amount voted, although that is considerable. It deals with a subject which I know commands the interest and consideration of a very large number of the citizens of this country, particularly those engaged in educational and industrial affairs.
Parliament has from time to time given consideration to this matter; in 1918 or 1919 a very important committee of parliament studied it in considerable detail. It has been the view of many that the scope and usefulness of the research council should be extended and that their work should be recognized by larger support from the country. So far as I have been able to learn, the work they are carrying on is deserving of the highest commendation. Unfortunately I do not think the people generally either adequately appreciate the value of that work or are sufficiently acquainted with what is being accomplished, and parliament might very well spend an hour or two in the consideration of the activities of this very important branch of the public service. For myself I would like to see every member of the House become fully seized of the necessity and value of this work. As to the personnel of the council, presided over, I believe, by Dr. Tory, I think it is deserving of recognition; at least the efforts of the council deserve such recognition as parliament can give by a consideration of the work undertaken, the results accomplished, and the researches in prospect. Personally I would like to have seen the vote increased. I would like to see this type of work seriously taken up by parliament and the great educational institutions of the country, with a co-ordination of all activities to bring about the best possible results.
There is, for instance, the great question * of the natural resources of Canada, to which I know the research council have given a great deal of study and in regard to which they have compiled some exceedingly valuable information-information which, if parliament were fully siezed of its importance, would have a great influence upon its decisions in various lines as regards bills presented, estimates passed, and so forth. I would ask the minister to give the committee an outline of the work of this important body.


Thomas Andrew Low: I agree with the hon. member that the work being carried on by the research council is of great value to all classes of industry. It is carrying on a number of important investigations; I might give the committee some idea of the work by citing

Supply-Trade and Commerce
a few of these from the list of researches being conducted at present:
New process in the treatment of the separation of silver, lead, zinc, in the concentrates of complex ores.
Investigation on ball milling and rock crushing with rolls.
Utilization of Canadian iron ores.
Certain phases of the destruction of piling by marine boring animals.
Research on the cereal grain rust problem of
western Canada.
Deterioration of concrete in the alkali soils of western Canada.
Nature of winter hardiness in crop plants, alfalfa, clover and winter wheat.
Possibility of economically cultivating several essential oil and drug yielding plants in British Columbia.
Reforestation in New Brunswick
A co-ordinated and concentrated attack on tuberculosis in man and animal.
Relation of soil acidity to nitrogen-fixing bacteria.
To ascertain the food relation of certain minute organisms in the cultivation of fresh water fishes.
Number and kind of bacteria found in frozen fish obtained from the Atlantic and Pacific seaboards of Canada with a view of obtaining information that will be of service to the fishing industry.
The laws governing the sizing of crushed minerals on sieves.
Artificial propagation of the sturgeon.
Investigation of plant extracts containing ghikokinin.
Best methods for obtaining accurate results in testing varieties, strains and treatments of grains.
The isolation of vitamin B and the determination of the chemical constitution by this compound.
Investigation of the life history and economic importance of the onion maggot in the Montreal district.
Processes in evergreen plants whereby they are rendered capable of growing and forming their organic compounds during the very low temperatures of the winter season.
Variation with frequency by the power loss in dielectrics.
Channel interference in wind channel testing.
Investigation into the distribution, life history, amount of damage caused by, and the best methods for reducing losses from wireworms.
These are some of the researches being carried on at present by the research council.


Henry Herbert Stevens: That is an interesting index, but it is not a very full or satisfactory description. May I ask the minister a few questions based upon the list he gave? He referred to matters affecting various phases of agriculture, such as soil bacteria, the question of rust, of winter hardiness in crop plants, such as clover, and so forth; tuberculosis in animals, and some investigations regarding grains, onion maggots, and wireworms. These are subjects directly connected with agriculture. Does the Department of Agriculture cooperate with the research council in this work, or is there duplication? We had a very lengthy dissertation of about an hour the other day on the part of the Minister of Agriculture on the subject of rust, in which, I must say, he displayed a good deal of personal insight into the question. Is the

information he gave in that connection based on the researches of this body, or are the two bodies, the research council and the Department of Agriculture, carrying on separate investigations into the same subjects? We ought to bring all these investigations on each subject under one control so that there will be no waste of public money. It would be better, for instance, for the research council not to touch a question at all if another department is spending a considerable sum of money on the, same line of research. That query is applicable not only to such matters as have been referred to, but also, for instance, to the fisheries. For example there is the sturgeon fishery, and other fishery ressources-are these being investigated by the officers of the Fisheries branch as well as by the industrial research council?


Thomas Andrew Low: lam unable to speak authoritatively as to that, but I do know that each department co-operates to t)he very fullest extent with the research council. Whether in the particular instance my hon. friend refers to the investigation has been conducted separately by the research council, or jointly by the council and the department. I am unable to say. I understand that a very complete report on all these items has been placed in the hands of my hon. friend, and I have no doubt he has read it.


Henry Herbert Stevens: I rather regret the
minister's suggestion that my questions to him are influenced by a desire to indulge in captious criticism.


Thomas Andrew Low: Not at all.


Henry Herbert Stevens: I am not influenced by
any such desire. I am deeply and honestly interested in the subject; I desire to support it and I want to see the vote passed. I should like to see this work enlarged, but I think it is due to parliament that we should have a very complete outline of what is being accomplished. I also think it is due to the industrial research council to have that done. As I have already stated I do not think their work is half appreciated by parliament owing to a lack of complete information as to what they are doing,


Mr. STEWART (Argenteuil):: As one who, like my hon. friend (Mr. Stevens) is deeply interested in research work and who has had some opportunity to see the advantages obtained by the co-ordination of effort along this line I think I can assure my hon. friend that the desired co-ordination is going on just as rapidly as possible. I do not think the Department of Agriculture, and the officers

Supply-Trade and Commerce
of that department, should be robbed of any credit due to them with respect to their investigations into tuberculosis; but as my hon. friend will admit a solution of the evil of tuberculosis is, perhaps some distance away yet. The bringing together of the activities of the research council and of the officers of the Department of Agriculture and the Mines branch is with the idea of effecting co-ordination ; and at the moment I can assure my hon. friend the work is going on in a coordinated way. My hon. friend will also admit that our universities should be given a great deal of credit for what has been accomplished in the past. They have inaugurated research work in a great many directions but in each case the investigators worked along particular lines, and possibly there may have been some overlapping in Toronto as compared with the work carried on in the universities of Alberta, or British Columbia. The effort of the research council is to interest scientifically trained men from one end of the Dominion to the other in these investigations, and they are succeeding in that object. Not only that but, they are also bringing about co-ordinated effort in those departments of the federal government where work of a scientific character is in progress also. This is a matter in which I have been chiefly interested myself, and I agree with my hon friend (Mr. Stevens) as to the necessity for co-ordinated effort along such lines. With respect to the results so far achieved one needs only to mention the discovery of marquis wheat which has been so frequently referred to in this House. No one can over-estimate the importance to Canada of the introduction of this particular variety of wheat. Nor can one over-estimate the value-whether we consider human beings or the animal kingdom merely,-of the discovery of a cure for tuberculosis. It is only by continued experimentation, and by thoroughly exploring every avenue which offers a possibility of success, that such a desirable end can be accomplished. Of course there are difficulties in the way of securing co-ordination on the part of all those interested. Nevertheless we are succeeding, and we hope to accomplish even greater results in this direction. The Mellon institute in the United States is an admirable illustration of what can be accomplished for example, by private enterprise. It seems to me that so far as the government of Canada is concerned no opportunity should be left to encourage the work of scientific and industrial research of, and through the money voted annually by parliament provide such facilities as will
enlist the co-operation of the best scientific minds available. I agree with the hon. member for Vancouver Centre (Mr. Stevens) that we know far too little about, and that we appreciate insufficiently, the tremendous value to humanity and to industry likely to result from work of this character when properly carried on.


Alan Webster Neill: While this vote appears not
to be reduced, in reality it is, inasmuch as I understand it is the intention of the government to have this appropriation furnish the money for the assistance previously given to the Standardization Association of Canada, as I think it is called. I understand that the vote under that heading has now been withdrawn, and the association in future will either have to obtain funds under this particular vote or else will have to cease its activities altogether. Should this prove to be the case I think it is a matter very much to be regretted. When the House opened I placed a resolution on the order paper dealing with this question and although it is not likely to be reached now the subject it deals with is worthy of great attention. Perhaps I may be permitted to read the resolution in question as expressing briefly my views of the matter. It would almost look as if I had taken this step as a result of being prompted by the officials of that particular association because they found their vote had been cut off and consequently were appealing to members of parliament to give them some backing. I can assure the government, however, that I never heard of the association until I had placed my resolution on the order paper. I was prompted, to do so by seeing the measures Australia is adopting in this regard. I have not got my notes on the subject here, but if I recall rightly they were spending a large sum of money-if I am not wrong in the neighbourhood of S50.000-on the improvement and development of this branch of work. They realize apparently that it is going to be a very great thing for the industrial life of every country, and especially of every country that takes it up quickly. They have gone ahead on that line also in the United States, and as my resolution suggests it resulted in the saving of millions of money to the United States government and that only in its capacity as a purchaser because it was enabled to buy so much cheaper by standardizing its requirements. If the committee will allow me I will just read my resolution through. It is as follows:
Whereas, standardization in engineering, manufacturing. and other allied activities is becoming increasingly necessary in order to stop the huge economic loss

Supply-Trade and Commerce
now occurring, and the subject is now engaging the attention of all the leading nations of the world.
And whereas, those countries which are advanced in national industrial standardization will have established a great commercial ascendancy over those that are not so organized.
And whereas, the progress already made in this direction in the United States has resulted in the saving of millions annually to the United States government alone in its capacity as a purchaser.
And whereas, some of the advantages of standardization are:-
Makes mass production possible.
Stabilizes production and employment.
Eliminates indecision in production.
Stimulates research and development as to the best types, and encourages the adoption of the best standards.
Helps to eliminate practices which are merely the result of accident or tradition and which impede development.
Provides a truly competitive market in which to buy material and equipment, giving accurate definitions to enable the purchaser to know what he is buying and whether he is getting what he bargained for.
Makes it easier to repair and replace equipment.
Reduces the cost of manufacture.
Simplifies the keeping of cost accounts.
Increases the production and efficiency of industry.
Will go far to eliminate disputes and litigation as to whether the product is in accord wtih the sample.
Or, otherwise expressed, standardization means to the producer increased production, better quality at reduced cost, and to the consumer a better article for less money.
Therefore, this House is of the opinion that the' government should be asked to investigate and encourage the development of standardization in Canada.
I was not aware at that time that we had any association handling it, and I would earnestly urge the minister to consider the possibility of giving, in the supplementary estimates this session, sufficient money to carry on these activities. At present they have only a small grant. I think it is a retrograde step to do away with their investigations, and if you place the expense upon this vote now under consideration, it just means that some other necessary investigation has to go without sufficient funds. I submit the Minister of Trade and Commerce might well consider whether he could not see his way to give assistance to this very necessary work.


Thomas Andrew Low: It is true as my hon. friend says that the vote for $10,000 included in last year's estimates has been dropped this year. This work will be earned on by the research council, and I will be very glad to take into consideration the recommendation of the hon. member that possibly an amount might be placed in the supplementary estimates.


Robert Alexander Hoey: What amount was voted for standardization last year?


Thomas Andrew Low: The amount voted was $10,000.


Mr. MANION:: I should like to offer my endorsation, for what it is worth, of the expenditure of money on scientific and industrial research in this country. It is one of the subjects we should all be interested in, because every industrial country in the world to-day is going into it to a greater degree than we are. Before the war Germany made many of her advances because of the high type of research in which she took part. There are in the northern section of Ontario two subjects upon which research will undoubtedly bring a great deal of value. I do not know that they are subjects-one of them at least is not-which the government should deal with; but at any rate any subject which would mean wealth to the country might be well considered by the government or by its staff of officers. The first subject I was thinking of-and I believe that a certain amount of work is now being done with regard to it in the Mines branch-is in regard to discovering some method by which the types of iron ore in Canada can be used economically. I know there has been a certain amount of work done in this matter, and if Canada could develop some method by which the magnetite ores in Canada-which are not of such a high grade as in the United States- could be developed, then Canada would have the greatest iron resources of any country in the world, because we have scattered all over the country hundreds of millions of tons of ore. So far, outside of the Helen mines, there have not been discoveries made of the hematite and the other types of ore which are most useful, but if we can discover some method, either by electric smelting-and we have great electrical possibilities in the northern country-or some other means of utilizing these magnetites in some portions of Canada, it would be of great value to the country. There is another subject-and this is the one which perhaps the government might say it was not their duty to deal with-and that is the question of pulp and paper. I remember on one occasion, speaking to Professor Ma-callum, who was chairman of the Industrial Research Commission, and he informed me- and the statement was concurred in by prominent men in the pulp and paper industry-that at the present time in that industry there are very valuable products which have been allowed to go to waste out of which great value will ultimately be taken. I do not know if I could go into an analysis of the subject, but he made the statement to me before a prominent pulp and paper man. who admitted it was correct, that that industry was merely in its infancy. I believe

Supply-Trade and Commerce
those subjects are of such importance-and there are many others in Canada perhaps of like importance-that they might well be made the subject for research by the Dominion, even if ultimately the profits which came from those investigations go into the hands of private individuals; at least it would mean the development of the Dominion of Canada. I wish to endorse all that can be said in favour of this development in Canada at the present time, so long as the government sees its way clear to spend money to carry on this work. Could the minister tell me how much money was spent last year in scholarships to students?


Thomas Andrew Low: The amount was $37,548.


Robert James Manion: And how much of the wholle
item was spent? Was the whole $120,000 spent?


Thomas Andrew Low: Yes, practically the whole
amount. With reference to the investigation being carried on in connection with the low grade iron ores, I might read a paragraph from the report. The report says:-
Utilization of Canadian low grade iron ores.
A very great part of the iron ore smelted in Canada is imported amounting in some years since 1915 to as much as 96 per cent. The utilization of the vast deposits of Canadian ores under suitable treatment would help in reducing the adverse balance of trade and would establish a valuable industry.
The National Research Council has investigated this problem through its associate committee on mining and metallurgy -and has issued a report on the findings of the committee. The facts established by the committee bring the utilization of Canadian ores within immediate sight of realization.


Robert James Manion: I am very pleased indeed to hear the report as read by the minister, because it would be of very great value to this Dominion if the provisions of the report were carried out.


Leon Johnson Ladner: My hon. friend has referred to the mines. I dio not know whether the research work in connection with forestry comes in any way under this item. The forest pathology work of the government here has been carried on for some time, but in British Columbia, where we have such extensive resources in forestry, there is quite a sentiment among the people that more research work should be carried out. The destruction of the forest by diseases, and the study of the causes and effects of diseases of trees, I think are about as important to the people of Canada, as the preserving of the natural wealth of the country and other natural resources, and I should like to ask the minister whether or not this vote applies in any resipeot to the encouragement of the study of the diseases of
trees and the causes and effects of these diseases.


Charles A. Stewart: May I
answer my hon. friend, because this happens to come in my department? We are endeavouring to co-ordinate scientific research work under the auspices of the council of scientific research in Montreal at the moment. As my hon. friend knows, at McGill we have established a laboratory in which the chemists of the department have been working. In answer to the hon. member for Rainy River, I will say that this work has been proceeding for years. We have a special laboratory dealing with the pulp and paper problem, and the work is being co-ordinated with the work of the scientific research council. What we have been endeavouring to do there is to utilize the jackpine, for example, which carries a large percentage of pitch, by working out the problem of elimination of the pitch and making the product useful for the manufacture of pulp and paper. So much has this appealed to the pulp and paper manufacturers that they are voting us this year $20,000 to assist us in this work. WTe are co-operating with the pulp and paper industry throughout Canada in this way.
As regards the diseases of trees, work of this character has been carried on in the eastern provinces. But again we have it in the different departments. In the Department of Agriculture the Entomological branch is carrying on work on that particular problem. Our own foresters are working on the question of the age of forests. What I tried to impress upon the committee was that the endeavour was to co-ordinate the efforts being made in regard to all these different problems because, as a layman, it seems to me, if we are going to get results, the thing to do is to bring the scientific men in council together to discuss these problems. The chemist may be dealing with the problem of iron, and he may supply the missing link that the man working on forestry has missed, because he is a scientifically trained man. That is why it is important to get the work co-ordinated by bringing the men together to discuss these problems. In that way we are going to receive value for the money invested and reap the greatest advantage.


Leon Johnson Ladner: Have the officials of the Department of Agriculture-and I know some of them who are highly competent men. forest pathologists, engaged in forestry work -come into contact with the research body which is referred to in this vote, because I think it is highly important that they should.

Supply-Trade and Commerce
In fact, I would urge upon the government, in view of the tremendous resources of timber in this country, the need of extending that kind of work. From inquiries I have been able to make and records of public accounts and estimates, I do not think enough research work is being carried on in forest pathology, because now that American capital is coming into Canada and acquiring our forests and the general development of that industry is under way in a very decided manner in British Columbia, the interests of the country would be furthered if more of that kind of work were carried on and if, as the minister has said, the different departments engaged in research work were coordinated so that their efforts would be unified.
Expenditure, April 1,
1.	Fellowships	
2.	Studentships	
3.	Bursaries	
4.	Assisted researches	
5.	Fees, etc	
6.	Administration:
Committees	
Travelling, members of council	
Travelling staff and advisory committees	
Library	
Printing	
Office supplies	
Salaries of staff


Charles A. Stewart: That is the point. But I do not want m}' hon. friend to go away with the misapprehension that the Department of Agriculture were studying any other problem than that of the destruction of the forests by what is known as the spruce bud worm and other insect life. The other problem, that of diseases attacking trees, is being undertaken in the Forestry branch itself, but it so happened that the entomological wrork was being carried on by the Department of Agriculture.


Mr. MacLAREN:: Will the minister give the details of the vote of SI20,000? I think that will give us a better idea of the work it is proposed to accomplish.


Thomas Andrew Low: The figures are as follows:
1924 to January 31, 1925

$	696 96
3,389 05 1,986 48 1,137 90 374 26 1,086 67
14,434 33	23,105 65

 158,146 86
Fixed charges and estimated expenditure, February 1, 1925 to March 31, 1925
1.	Fellowships	
2.	Studentships	
3.	Bursaries	
4.	Assisted researches:
Grants authorized but unpaid	
Applications under consideration, and to be considered,
5.	Administration:
Committees	
Travelling, members of council	
Travelling, staff and advisory committees	
Library	
Printing	 ,
Office expenses	
Salaries of staff

3,000 00	$8,650 00


Henry Herbert Stevens: There is just one item
that will come out of last year's vote, and that is applications under consideration, $36,450. If these have not been paid, under the law as I understandi it, they lapse at the end of March and payment will have to come out of this year's vote.


Thomas Andrew Low: I have no doubt that some of
this has been paid out since this statement was prepared, but I do not know just what 
amount. The statement was compiled as quoted and was made up three months ago* 1 2 3 4 5.


Henry Herbert Stevens: If it is not paid within a week or two after the end of the year, the vote lapses.
Mr. LOW':	I quite understand that.


Leon Johnson Ladner: In reference to the fellowships, studentships, and bursaries, are these provided for in Canadian universities, and

Supply-Trade and Commerce
what do they refer to? For example; in the University of British Columbia, would fellowships and scholarships be provided? Have they been provided?
Mr. LOW- I think we have a list. I am sending for it.
Mr. EVANS; I should once again urge on the government the importance of carrying on investigations regarding the standardization of parts. Particularly is this of importance to those engaged in primary production whether it is in agriculture or other vocations. Perhaps one of the greatest object lessons to us today is the Ford car, repairs for which can be had in practically all parts of the world, and we know they are all the same and fit. Millions could really be saved every year in this country by the standardization of parts of implements of production in agriculture. Some two years ago when I attended the meetings of this council, they could not report any more progress than that they had standardized in that line only some plough bolts. That is about the	only	thing we	have	on the farm thatwe	are	sure will	fit	all shares.	Thereare hundreds of parts which could, with profit, be standardized if the different machinery companies would deem it to be in	their	interest	to	standardize	them,such as	mower knives, sections,	binder
knives, guards, keepers and all those things. It could be done without very much expense to any implement company and it would be a great step forward in economy in every direction if we had some system of standardizing all implement parts in Canada. I should not like to see the work curtailed by reducing the grant by SIO.OCO, and if anything of the kind is contemplated I think it would be well for the government to consider spending money for this specific purpose.
Mr. SPEAKMAN; I want to associate myself with those who support such expenditures as this. I think it is manifest to most of us who have given any serious consideration to the subject that practically the greatest hope for future prosperity in this country lies in the development and utilization of our own natural resources, many of which now lie latent and are therefore of no immediate value. I might refer to two of outstanding importance, which I understand would come under the purview of the research council; these are the tar sands of Athabaska and the oil shale of northern Alberta. The possibility of utilizing these tar sands and of extricating the oil on a commercial scale presents almost a boundless view of what may be achieved in the future. Few people in this country realize the enormous extent of these resources. When we read the opinion of noted geologists, that the oil shale in that province contains the greatest exposure of petroleum known to the world at the present time; when we'Consider the gradual depletion of the present sources of oil; when we hear that many of the oil fields will in a few years be totally inadequate to meet the increasing consumption; and when we know it is estimated that these sands themselves contain sufficient oil to supply the world, at the present rate of consumption, for over 3,000 years, it will be realized what an enormous source of wealth we shall have there when we have discovered the secret of extraction at a sufficiently low cost to make it a commercial possibility. I believe that if this work were properly carried on and full attention were paid to these resources the result would be a production of wealth that would represent a return, not at the rate df a hundred per cent (but of thousands per cent on the expenditure we are now proposing. I concur of course in the opinions that have been advanced along various lines of research, but in my own opinion the examination into this particular subject with a viewT to utilizing these latent resources affords the greatest scope for activity on the part of the research council and the greatest possib'e hope that this country will be finally put upon a prosperous and paying basis.


Mr. WARNER:: I do not believe that the
public generally know just how to get in touch with the research council. Is there any official of the department in Ottawa to whom one may refer any subject in which he is interested?
Mr. LOW; There is a staff in Ottawa to whom inquiries may be directed, but if the matter is of considerable importance it must be referred to the whole council.
Mr. W'ARNER:	I have not tried to
become familiar with the work of the council and for that reason it may seem ignorant on my part to have to ask these questions. But I do not believe that the public generally are any better off in this regard than I am. I have in mind a matter of some importance to my own part of the country. At Tofield during the last winter something happened in the lake that killed practically all the fish there; at any rate, millions of them have floated to the edge of the lake since the ice has gone. Would a matter of this kind come

Supply-Trade and Commerce
within the scope of the council, or would the Department of Marine and Fisheries look into it?


Thomas Andrew Low: I think the hon. member
might refer a matter of that kind to the Department of Fisheries.


Daniel Webster Warner: No one seems to know
what the trouble was and I have been trying to get some information as to how we might get the matter investigated. Probably the Fisheries department would deal with it. I am quite satisfied that there is a igreat work for the council to do, and I was pleased when I heard that there was such a body.


Henry Lumley Drayton: The minister
said something that interested me very much when he referred to the report that was made to him by the council. The statement was made that, judging by another report, the irons of Ontario can be so treated as to be made of commercial value. I cannot remember the exact words that were used, but that was their effect. I remember that some years ago a proposition was made to the then government which, if I recollect rightly, was referred to the council for investigation. The idea was to treat by electricity the ores in the province and to reduce them to a sort of iron briquette. It was claimed that if ore were treated in that way and freed from impurities it would bring a better price than not only ordinary ore but pig-iron as well. I wonder if this report deals with that question and, if it dotes, whether there is any proposition before the government in that direction.


Charles A. Stewart: The in-,
vestigation is not complete.


Henry Lumley Drayton: How far has it gone? This is a matter of greater importance than any other single thing I can think of. If something practical could be done in chis matter it would render of considerable value a very large part of the province which is now looked upon as a barren connecting link between one part of the country and the other. I should very much like the minister to tell us what was in the other report, or perhaps he can refer us to it and we can look it up for ourselves.


Charles A. Stewart: I doubt if
the report is published. I have not yet seen it, and I can assure my hon. friend that I have been watching for the result of the investigation with keen interest. I thought it was of so much more importance to press into the service all the technical minds to

work on the problem than to encourage the industry by bounty or other means.


Henry Lumley Drayton: Quite right.


Charles A. Stewart: Let us first, if we can, discover a process by which our low grade iron ores can be transformed into pig which will make their mining a profitable undertaking. Therefore I have urged my officers, who are working in close harmony with the officers of the Honorary Advisory Council for Scientific and Industrial Research, to devote their energies to a solution of this problem. But to say that it i3 completed or nearing completion would be perhaps venturing into the realm of prophecy.


Henry Lumley Drayton: I understood
the minister to say that.


Charles A. Stewart: Yes; but I have reports so frequently that only one more process is required to do the trick that I am inclined to wait until that final process is discovered. But I feel confident that by the electric process the difficulty will be solved, and that it will be possible to transform our low grade iron ores into the desired product.


Henry Herbert Stevens: If there is no objection
to the publication of this report, I think it should be published as one of the government publications. I am sure it would be very interesting to the mining industry of Canada. Of course, I am not asking that it be published if there is sound reason for not doing so.


Charles A. Stewart: There can
be no reason why it should not be published. I think I said, when the mining estimates were up, that on this problem we have been consulting the American mining institutes, the United States Department of Mines and outside resources, including Germany, wherever they were working on problems of this character. So there is no desire for secrecy; rather the desire is to throw as much light as possible upon the solution of the problem of transforming these low grade iron ores into a commercial product.


Henry Lumley Drayton: I would point
out to the Minister of the Interior (Mr. Stewart) in connection with this idea that electricity is the one thing which is absolutely essential, and I think that so far all the scientists are agreed that high potential electricity is probably the only way in which we can at all economically rid our ores of their impurities and give them the necessary beneficia-tion. I would also point out to him that if we ever do make anything with these low grade ores-and I cannot for one minute

Supply-Trade and Commerce
think that we will not-he will find that instead of exporting our electricity he will be at his wits' end to get enough of it; and that he will also find in this connection that electricity which is available at the other side of , the divide, or waters draining into the Hudson bay and the Arctic ocean-which is all very carefully set out in the survey of electrical power available in this country-will be absolutely useless for the purpose, being too far away, and that there is a commercial circle outside of which electricity cannot be handled.


Charles A. Stewart: It is always
widening, however.


Henry Lumley Drayton: Yes. I remember when it started out at eighty miles with a potentiality of 30,000 volts; it is now two hundred and fifty miles with a 'potentiality of 110,000 volts. It may be we will arrive at a higher potentiality and transmit electricity further, but there is an end to it all, and the location of water power convenient to the mine is the one all-important thing for us to remember. We still have a few water-powers available in northern Ontario. But it is only necessary for me to draw this to the minister's attention, that for work of this kind you have to have a large quantity of power, that the available water-powers of this country shown in the resultant totals of water-powers available in Canada cover all water-powers of 50 horsepower and up, and that nothing but a large development is really of any use at all in connection with electric smelting. And the minister will also agree with me that we have very few large possible developments left within reasonable distance.


Leon Johnson Ladner: Mr. Chairman, the minister has been good enough to send over to me details of the fellowships, studentships and bursaries which are awarded under this item.
I find there are four fellowships, one for $1,500 and three for $1,200; twelve studentships of $1,000 each and thirty bursaries of $750 each. In addition there is provision for assisted researches. Seventeen of these grants are awarded to McGill University, fifteen to the University of Toronto three to the University of Manitoba, three to the University of Montreal and the Ecole de Montreal, one to Macdonald College, two to Queen's University, one to the University of Saskatchewan, one to the University of Alberta, and one to the University of British Columbia. The grant to the University of British Columbia refers to mines. I find that assisted researches are given for the study of the diet of foxes in captivity, the life and habits of the horsefly, 224
in western Canada, the life and habits of onion maggots, and radio. Now, my purpose in referring to these in detail and segregating them is to suggest to the minister that, so far as western Canada is concerned, where the potentiality of natural resources is great and the need of research is about as acute as in any portion of the Dominion, perhaps the Honorary Advisory Council might consider the wisdom of granting fellowships or studentships with greater liberality than they have done heretofore to the universities of the west for the study of those things which are indigenous to that country. For instance, in British Columbia we have mining, lumbering and fishing industries, and even agriculture is carried on on a considerable scale. It seems to me it would be only fair to have research work carried on in these western universities as well as in the universities of McGill and Toronto, because I know from personal connection with the University of British Columbia that the men at the head of the various departments of research are of a calibre and possess facilities that would enable them to handle this kind o f work most efficiently. In fact the government has already a Forestry branch there which has some relationship with the university. Has the minister any control over these awards, and if not is he disposed to suggest to the council that the distribution of fellowships should be on a more equitable basis? I know that McGill and Toronto universities have a very high standing; I happen myself to be a graduate of the University of Toronto. But when they take thirty-two of these awards out of forty-six, and when western Canada has only five out of the total, it would seem that the distribution could be more equitably arranged without in any way interfering with the scientific purposes for which such awards are given.


Thomas Andrew Low: The grantees are allowed to select the university in which the post graduate work shall be carried on.


Leon Johnson Ladner: Is it entirely in their
hands?


Thomas Andrew Low: Yes.


Leon Johnson Ladner: If a grantee decided that he wanted to study in South America, would he be entitled to do so?


Thomas Andrew Low: Preferably a Canadian university, but wherever it was possible to carry on his research.


Leon Johnson Ladner: Some of them go to Eng-glish universities. I notice one fellowship in the Department of Physical Chemistry at the University of Cambridge, England.



Supply-Trade and Commerce


Thomas Andrew Low: I understand that 15 out of 103 have selected foreign countries, but the selection of the university rests with the grantee.


Murray MacLaren: The point brought up by the hon. member (Mr. Ladner) is worthy of consideration, namely, an extension of the distribution of these scholarships and studentships in the general interest of scientific research itself and with a view to creating a wider field of interest. I notice that one bursary or scholarship was given to British Columbia. It would appear from the list that a fortiori there is an even more striking want of recognition in the east, because no name was read from the east at all. I do not mean that the research council are not considering various portions of the Dominion, because they are: I had an incident under my own observation in connection with the carrying out of investigations as to the growth of trees on burnt lands by methods of seeding. But there is a great deal in stimulating scientific work among our younger men in all portions of the country, and there would be more fairness and equality in a more general distribution of these studentships, bursaries and scholarships.


Henry Lumley Drayton: From an examination, during the brief time it has been in my hands, of the report the minister so kindly sent over to me, it is apparent that the question of the utilization of ores has oeen solved. Take, for instance, the first contusion of the committee. It reads:
The building up of an iron mining industry in Canada in the near future can be accomplished at a reasonable cost.
There are large deposits of iron ore in Canada which under present conditions are lying idle because the ore cannot be profitably marketed, but which can be utilized to supply central Canada with iron ore if deemed advisable.
The desirability of establishing an iron mining industry in Canada should be impressed upon the government.
The most promising method of utilizing Canadian ores is to prepare them by beneficiation, if not naturally suited, for treatment in blast furnaces by the present blast furnace process.
Special processes, including electric smelting, which have been devised to treat iron ores, are not under present conditions likely to be a big factor in building up the industry in Canada.
During recent years good progress has been made in methods of beneficiating iron ores, prior to reduction by the blast furnace process, and these methods are applicable to Canadian ores.
I have had a chance only of glancing at this report, and my hon. friend will correct me if I am wrong, but it would appear that this ore can be commercially turned to immediate account, and that in order to get it turned to immediate account steps have to

be taken by the government. Take, for example, recommendation 12:
A bounty of fifty or seventy cents per ton of merchantable ore or concentrate would encourage operators to proceed with attempts to utilize Canadian iron ore. This bounty would be insufficient to warrant expectation of immediate profits from operation of the known deposits, but would perhaps be sufficient to warrant the operation of some mines now idle and the installation of plants for sintering the ores, and the carrying on of further large scale investigation which must be at least partly paid for from proceeds of the sale of iron ore and concentrates.
The great desirability of this being done in the interests of our railways is also pointed out, also the earnings we would make out of it. Then, of course, there would be a saving on account of our not having to buy so much ore, as we now do, from the United States. I observe that we have a direct recommendation in that respect. In the preface the committee say:
The committee believes that if a small bounty of say fifty cents a ton was paid on the beneficiated Canadian ore, or any natural ore of equal grade and quality which might be discovered in Canada, for a period of about ten years, this would go far tc even up the price difference-
That is, the price difference between this ore and the cheap American ore.
-and would stimulate the miners of Canada to increase their efforts to cut down costs and deliver to the Canadian furnaces an ore which would replace the imported ore and thus not only save for Canada the $5,000,000 annually sent out of the country to pay for imported iron ore but also greatly increase the income of the Canadian railways through the transportation charges on the great tonnage of ore which would be handled.
So apparently in respect to this particular matter the work of the scientists is finished They say that this can be done if the government will take the necessary action. I understand that the government of Ontario are prepared to look after their share of it. What action has this government- taken in regard to these recommendations?


Charles A. Stewart: I have not
seen the report myself, but it quite coincides with my understanding of the matter. A year ago the Ontario government voted, I think, twenty-five cents a ton-I speak subject to correction-for the purpose, and this year-I speak again subject to correction-they have doubled the amount, which would correspond with what is contained in the report as to the amount to be offered as a bounty. Ontario is especially interested in this problem. But I assure my hon. friend that the electrical process that he and I were discussing a few moments ago has not yet reached the stage of finality. I am hopeful, however, that in due course it will not be necessary to provide

Supply-Trade and Commerce
any bounty in order that the transformation of low grade ores into iron may be made profitable. It is to that end that we are bending all our energies.


Henry Lumley Drayton: What is the date of this report?
Mr. STEW'ART (Argenteuil):	I do not
know.


Henry Lumley Drayton: It is recently
published?


Charles A. Stewart: Just out, I
imagine.


Thomas Andrew Low: For the benefit of the hon. member (Mr. MacLaren), I would like to cite one instance of the work being done by the research council. I quote from a memorandum I have before me:
It has been estimated that the lobster packing industry was suffering a loss of $700,000 a year not only through spoilage in the cans but also because of the fact that no methods have been devised which would make it possible to can lobsters so that they would keep their colour, flavour and texture for a year or eighteen months, the period required to market them. Through an investigation undertaken for the National Research Council by Dr. F. C. Harrison of Macdonald college, the council has succeeded not only in discovering the cause of the discoloration, smut, or blackening of the lobster in the cans, but has also been able to issue instructions to the lobster packers, which, if carefully followed will solve the problem.


Murray MacLaren: I think that work was
done in connection with the biological station in St. Andrews. I mentioned certain instances of what they are doing, anid no doubt there are many cithers. My point, 'however, is that these scholarships and student prizes might well be distributed over a much wider area than they are at present.


Thomas Andrew Low: I have already informed the
hon. member that the grantee names the university to which the scholarship shall go.


George Newcombe Gordon: Shall the item carry?


Henry Lumley Drayton: No, Mr. Chairman, I want an opportunity to read the report on this matter.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
At six o'clock the committee took recess.
After Recess
The committee resumed at eight o'clock.
International Customs Tariffs Bureau, $660.
Edward Joseph Garland: Will the
minister tell us something about this item? There is quite a reduction this year. What is the nature of the tvork carried on by the tariff bureau, and why is there a falling off?
224i


Thomas Andrew Low: It is a permanent organization located in Brussels, which translates all the tariffs of the world. The reduction, as will be noticed by the vote, is considerable. This vote is $1,140 less than last year, owing to the decrease in the cost' of management of the bureau. This is the amount which was provided for this service before the war.
Owing to the marked increase in the expenses connected with the bureau, a few years ago Canada as well as other countries was requested to increase its normal allowance by four times the pre-war rate, in order that the work of the bureau might be performed with full accuracy and speed, and that full satisfaction might be given to the various states comprised in the agreement. Canada increased her contribution as requested.
Last year our estimates were reduced to three times the pre-war rate, but after they were prepared we were advised by the Under Secretary of State for External Affairs that the regular contribution of Canada for the thirty-fourth period, April 1, 1924 to March 31, 1925, was exactly 3,106 gold francs, which worked out to the amount stated.


Edward Joseph Garland: Was the total amount voted spent last year?


Thomas Andrew Low: Last year $659.29 was spent.


Edward Joseph Garland: Did the minister say that the function of this international customs bureau was merely the translation of the customs tariffs of the various countries? Do I understand the minister to mean the translation from the language and terms of the other country into the language and terms, shall we say, of the bureau of Canada?


Thomas Andrew Low: My hon. friend is right in his understanding.


Edward Joseph Garland: How many countries are engaged in that?
Mi-. LOW: Thirty-nine different countries.


Edward Joseph Garland: Are any important countries not members of the bureau? For example, is Russia a member of the bureau?


Thomas Andrew Low: I am unable at the moment to say whether Russia is included. All the important countries of the world are in it.


Edward Joseph Garland: Germany?


Thomas Andrew Low: Yes, Germany.


Edward Joseph Garland: The minister does not know whether Russia is included or not ?

Supply-Trade and Commerce


Thomas Andrew Low: No, I am unable to say.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Motion Picture Bureau (salaries of temporary employees; travelling expenses of officials; photographic supplies and chemicals: printing and stationery; repairs to instruments; sundry expenses), $25,000.
Henry Herbert Stevens: Will the minister give us some indication of the usefulness or otherwise of the work being carried on by this bureau? I am not quite certain in my own mind that it is worth the vote. It may be. I am not in a position to criticize it too strongly. At the same time I think we ought to scrutinize this vote with some care, with a view to ascertaining whether or not we are actually getting value for the work that is alleged to be performed.


Thomas Andrew Low: The motion picture bureau
under the Department of Trade and Commerce was established for the purpose of advertising abroad Canada's scenic attractions, agricultural resources and industrial developments. It performs work for all the departments of the government. Some revenue is derived [from the project. It is not altogether self-sustaining yet. but splendid success has attended the efforts of the bureau in recent years, in the production of a series of one-reel film subjects which are now widely known as the " Seeing Canada " series. These " Seeing Canada " one-reel films have been circulated throughout the world. So successful has been the work carried on by the bureau that the Ontario government has adopted the policy of the Dominion government by opening up its own motion picture bureau in Trenton, Ontario.
The motion picture film as a medium of advertising, with special reference to the encouragement of tourist traffic has proved an invaluable aid in the work of spreading abroad a knowledge of Canada's attractions and opportunities. The National Railways recognized the power of the film for this type of advertising and the Canadian government motion picture bureau, as in former years, has co-operated closely with this transportation company in this respect.
The bureau has continued to co-operate closely with all federal departments requiring its services. The following list enumerates the various departments of the Canadian government which have availed themselves of this service :
Canadian National Railways.
Department of Immigration and Colonization.
House of Commons.
Department of Agriculture.
Department of Insurance.
Department of National Defence.

Post Office Department.
Department of Railways and Canals.
Department of Trade and Commerce.
Department of Marine and Fisheries.
Department of Mines.
Department of Public Printing and Stationery.
Department of the Interior.
Soldiers Settlement Board.
Thus the work has been accomplished at a great saving to the various federal departments. The work has also been produced in an efficient and satisfactory manner, to judge from the many commendatory letters on file, and the many repeat orders which we have received.
Mr. STE'VENS:	Will the minister give
the distribution of the item under the various departments?


Thomas Andrew Low: Film production activities.
The following new "Seeing Canada'' one reel film subjects have been produced since the commencement of the present fiscal year:
The Romance of the Rockies.
Where Beauty Dwells.
City of the Foothill.
Canada's Farthest North City.
Amid Alpine Snows.
Owing to the general slump in the short subject market in the United States, the bureau has not been able to invade this territory on as broad a basis as was anticipated. A contract was made some time ago with Bray Productions, Incorporated, but this organization has had rather difficult times lately. However, in a letter addressed to the director of the bureau, a few days ago, they state that they are again in the market to consider our product for theatrical distribution. There are thirty or forty companies in the United States to whom our films are sold, and we receive a great deal of advertising in that way.


Henry Herbert Stevens: What is the revenue?
Would the minister respond to my previous request for the distribution of this item?


Thomas Andrew Low: The revenue for the past five
years is as follows:
1920-	21	
*11,917	061921-	22	
15,773	291922-	23	
16,141	101923-	24	
17,090	981924-	25 to January 31	
21,159	25
That shows a very marked increase each year, particularly last year.


Arthur Meighen: When was this policy,
which the Ontario government has adopted, first initiated in Canada?


Thomas Andrew Low: I think within the last year
or two.

Supply-Trade and Commerce


Arthur Meighen: I mean by the federal
government?


Thomas Andrew Low: In 1914. I understood my right hon. friend to ask about the Ontario government.


Arthur Meighen: This government has
adopted it as well as the provincial government?


Thomas Andrew Low: Yes, the Ontario government
inaugurated it within the last year or two.


Mr. WOODSWORTH:: At the request of
the city electrician of Winnipeg, I took up with the department the question of the supply of a film that was not safe to be used in the various places where it was shown in that city. I' think the particular film objected to at the time was explained, but the city electrician still complained that very dangerous films were being shown by this department. The minister was good enough to show me a copy of a lengthy file of correspondence, but so far as I could see, the object of the city electrician was not fully met. He wrote them with regard to this as . follows:
Under date of February 9, 1922, I addressed Mr. T. Grove Smith in reference to a number of nitro-cellulose films that were being shown in the churches in this city by a representative of the Dominion government Forestry department. This gentleman gave me to understand that when he got back to Ottawa he would endeavour to get these pictures printed on slow-burning film as he admitted that he had had a succession of objections made to the use of the films at different points throughout Canada, in fact, he was barred from using these in Toronto. Subsequently an official of the Dominion government Water Power branch came through the west with another series of films, these also being printed on nitro cellulose stock and he exhibited these at several points.
And so on.
You will gather from the above that there have been numerous cases where we have definitely pointed out that various officials of the Canadian government departments have been touring Canada with nitrocellulose films and that your department has in various cases furnished this product; that the Canadian Pacific railway were in ignorance of their own regulations in carrying this dangerous product in sleeping cars and lending these films to all kinds of parties for use in churches, etc.; further we find that the Canadian National Railways are obtaining through the medium of a film exchange in Winnipeg full width nitro-cellulose film issued by your department and that we have been obliged to refuse permission to this company to show these films in Winnipeg, all of which goes to show that your department is, or has been, whether you realize it or not, instrumental in distributing one of the most dangerous products, from a safety to life point of view, that is known to-day.
There follow certain statements substantiating this contention. It would seem quite obvious that if any kind of film is being used that is dangerous to be exhibited under conditions in which it is frequently exhibited, this department ought to take such steps as are necessary to substitute the proper kind of film. I do not know whether this is being done or not. We ought to have some guarantee that such is the case.


Thomas Andrew Low: I think I showed the hon. member a very full report from the director in charge of the bureau. We comply with the regulations of the different provinces so far as it is possible to do so. There is no duobt, as my hon. friend has said, that some of these films are inflammable,, but as long as we meet the requirements of the provinces, we feel that we are within the law.


James Shaver Woodsworth: This is a distinct
statement that the requirements of the city of Winnipeg electrical department are not being complied with. That is why I am protesting. Although the minister was kind enough to show me this file of correspondence, I could not see that it met the objections of the city electrician.


Edward Joseph Garland: Probably a good deal of valuable advertising is passing through this bureau. I have indeed seen many of the magnificent scenes in the Muskoka lake district, Windermere district, Banff district and so on and I have appreciated them very much. When there was such confusion in this House some time ago over certain conditions in a particular area in this country, it might have been a good idea if the bureau had sent down some operators to take moving pictures of conditions in Cape Breton, shall we say? While one section was occupied at that business, another one could have been taking moving pictures with slowed up machines of this government going into action to improve the condition of affairs.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Printing of parliamentary and departmental publications, including cost of Canada Year Book, $90,000.
Mr. WARD:: Is the Canada Year Book published in the Printing Bureau?


Thomas Andrew Low: We turn the year book over
to the King's Printer who arranges for its printing. Sometimes it has been' given to outside printing firms but what was done in the last year or two I do not know.


Henry Herbert Stevens: Surely the minister can
tell us who printed the Canada Year Book last year. I think his answer is rather thin. This is an important publication and if it is paid for out of this vote parliament is entitled to know where it is printed.

Supply-Trade and Commerce


Thomas Andrew Low: My deputy tells me that he
turns it over to the King's Printer.


Henry Herbert Stevens: Does the minister mean
to say that neither he nor his deputy can tell us who printed the book last year?


Arthur Meighen: The head of the whole
enterprise is sitting behind the minister. It is inconceivable that he could not inform the minister on a second's notice.


Henry Herbert Stevens: The minister does not
expect parliament to allow this item to pass without any information at all. I do not think that is reasonable.


Thomas Andrew Low: I shall be glad to give the information to-morrow if the hon. member will allow the item to pass.


Henry Herbert Stevens: Let it stand.


Thomas Andrew Low: I have no objection.


Mr. LUCAS:: How many copies are
printed?


Thomas Andrew Low: The estimate for this year is 9,500.


William Thomas Lucas: Is any revenue derived from it?
Mr. LOWSome are sold but I cannot say offhand just what the revenue is.
Item stands.
Weights and measures inspection-
Salaries of staff	 $196,970
Contingencies, including rent, travelling expenses of director, his staff at Ottawa, district inspectors and inspectors; postage, stationery	 102,630
International Bureau of Weights and Measures	 400


Henry Herbert Stevens: This is a very large item and no details are given in connection with it. I think we should have a complete statement from the minister as to what the whole item comprises. We have $196,000 for salaries of staff. That is a considerable sum and it is en bloc. I do not suppose there are any details in any other part of the estimates as regards this sum. If there are I want to find out; if not the minister might be good enough to explain the whole thing.


Thomas Andrew Low: For the year 1923-24, the
following were the expenses:
Salaries	
$192,243	28Rent	
280	00Travelling expenses	
90,246	11Sundries	
10,946	55

The revenue for the same year amounted to $290,450.18. For the ten months ending

January 31, .1925, the expenditures amounted to $255,456.03 and the revenue to $263,450.23. That will leave a surplus of $7,994.20, which I think is the first surplus in the history of this branch of the department.


Henry Herbert Stevens: There seems to be a drop in the revenue. Does the revenue keep pace with' the degree of inspection?


Thomas Andrew Low: There has been a gradual increase in the revenue.


Henry Herbert Stevens: But the revenue which the minister gave for the year before was some $290,000.


Thomas Andrew Low: The revenue for the last year,
as I have just quoted it, is for ten months only. *


Henry Lumley Drayton: Where are these offices?	-


Thomas Andrew Low: They are all over the country
from the Atlantic to the Pacific, about 20 in all.


Arthur Meighen: Is there a head office
for each province?


Thomas Andrew Low: No, these are district heads.


Arthur Meighen: Is not some of this work also under the Customs department?


Thomas Andrew Low: Not now.


Arthur Meighen: Take the weights and
measures office at Regina.


Thomas Andrew Low: It used to be under Inland
Revenue; they are all under the Department of Trade and Commerce now.


Arthur Meighen: When did they come
under that department?


Thomas Andrew Low: In 1918, when the Inland Revenue department was abolished.


Arthur Meighen: Were they never under
Customs?


Thomas Andrew Low: Other parts of the department
went under Customs but this came under the Department of Trade and Commerce.


Arthur Meighen: Is there not still a
Weights and Measures branch of the Customs department?


Thomas Andrew Low: No.


Arthur Meighen: Will the minister say
that there has not been since 1918?


Thomas Andrew Low: My deputy informs me that
the change was made in 1918.


Arthur Meighen: Is there no scale inspection under the Customs department now?


Thomas Andrew Low: No.

Supply-Trade and Commerce


Henry Herbert Stevens: I read in .the report of
the grain commission which was submitted a few weeks ago that at a number of elevators in the prairies an extra notch had been filed on the beam into which the balances would fit, and that by this means those using the scales were enabled to defraud the persons faking wheat to these country elevators. I gathered from the report that officials of this department did make some investigation, and if I remember rightly two prosecutions were said to have been made. The offence was of such a vicious and, to my mind, unpardonable character that we should know whether or not these prosecutions were vigorously pursued in order to ascertain who were the responsible parties and to mete justice to them. I cannot conceive of a more heinous offence than a weighmaster actually filing a notch in the scales for the deliberate purpose of defrauding the farmer who was bringing his grain to the country elevator. It is worse than burglary, for a burglar does take some chance, but a wretch of this character is robbing more or less under cover. Can the minister tell us to what extent an effort was made to bring these offenders to justice?


Thomas Andrew Low: My deputy informs me that we prosecute every case that comes before us.


Henry Herbert Stevens: Pardon me, Mr. Chairman. I really cannot think the minister is serious in giving an answer of that kind. I wish he would dismiss from his mind the idea that in bringing up this question we are simply trying to embarrass him.


Thomas Andrew Low: I do not think so at all.


Henry Herbert Stevens: Everybody knows that
the department is supposed to prosecute; but I am, asking whether in this case of deliberately doctoring the scales to defraud the farmer of the correct weight of his grain any action was taken by the department. I give him the reminder that to the best of my recollection some twelve or fourteen cases are reported by the royal commission; there may have been others so far as I know. If my memory is correct, there were only two prosecutions up to the time the report was filed. I want to know what happened in those two cases, and why the others were not prosecuted.


Thomas Andrew Low: Our inspectors visit the elevators periodically and inspect the scales, and when they find anything of the kind referred to they prosecute under instructions from the department. Unfortunately my deputy has
not the list of prosecutions with him to-night, but it can be very easily furnished, and I shall be glad to supply the information to my hon. friend.


Henry Herbert Stevens: Does not the minister
recall these very serious incidents?


Thomas Andrew Low: No, it would be impossible for me to carry in my mind the names of the firms who were prosecuted; but there have been a number of cases.


Henry Herbert Stevens: But these are specific
cases mentioned in the report of the royal commission. I want to impress upon the minister and upon the government the seriousness of these cases.


Charles A. Stewart: My hon.
friend is referring to the report of the Royal Grain Commission?


Henry Herbert Stevens: Yes, to Mr. Justice Tur-geon's report. I have not a copy of it under my hand, but as I recollect, he says that the attention of this branch of the Department of Trade and Commerce was called to the matter. What impresses me is that an offence of that kind would amply warrant the government making some special effort to prosecute. It is not like an inspector going into a country store and finding the scales a little out; that is not a parallel case at all. I know that this branch of the minister's department is, through its inspectors, daily inspecting scales that may not be true; but the case I am referring to was one of deliberate fraud, and I am surprised that the minister does not recall the cases mentioned in this royal commission's report. The matter should not be allowed to rest here. If the minister is not aware of it, or if his department has not prosecuted the offenders to the limit, then I think the government is open to censure, or at least these cases should be dealt with and an effort made to bring the criminals tp justice.


Thomas Andrew Low: The department is fully seized of the seriousness of any attempt to tamper with grain scales, and I am informed that in all such cases we have prosecuted to the limit.


Henry Herbert Stevens: I am telling the minister that this report of the royal commission distinctly states that only two cases were prosecuted.


Thomas Andrew Low: I do not remember what is stated in the Royal Grain Commission's report.

Supply-Trade and Commerce


Henry Herbert Stevens: There were some twelve or fourteen eases scattered among different companies. But this is such a serious offence that I am surprised to see the minister is so indifferent, and I want to impress upon him the fact that this is too serious a thing to let slide.


Thomas Andrew Low: My hon. friend does not need to impress its seriousness upon me. I realize fully the heinous nature of such a crime, and I promise him that any of these cases brought to my attention have been and will 'be prosecuted to the limit. My deputy informs me that we have prosecuted every case to the limit.


Arthur Meighen: Can the minister tell us how many cases were prosecuted last year, 1924?


Thomas Andrew Low: I thought my deputy had that information with him, but he has not.


Arthur Meighen: Surely he can give us an estimate? Has he not got that with him?


Thomas Andrew Low: He tells me that he prosecuted every case that was brought to his attention last year. He thinks there were six or eight.


Arthur Meighen: If there were only six or eight, surely he can recall whether the dozen mentioned in the report of the Royal Grain Commission included1 them.


Thomas Andrew Low: My deputy informs me that he has nothing with him to-night respecting these prosecutions. I shall be very glad to send the information to my right hon. friend.


Arthur Meighen: Can the minister suggest any subject on which his deputy has any information to-night? We have not been able to get anything yet.


Edward Joseph Garland: Mr. Chairman, I must rise to add my protest to that of the hon. members who have preceded me respecting this matter. When I read the report of the Royal Grain Commission I was struck by that veiy aspect of the case presented by Mr. Justice Turgeon. When I read that out of the large number of cases of defrauding farmers that were shown to have occurred, only two were reported as having been prosecuted, I wondered who was responsible and why a little more activity was not shown. I am just as anxious as the hon. member for Vancouver Centre (Mr. Stevens) to have some information from the minister with respect to this, and I hope that when he brings the list down he will let me have a copy of it.


Thomas Andrew Low: I will.


Edward Joseph Garland: I should
like to know what the department is doing, and how many check-ups of frauds of this character have been made during the past year. In connection with this item, can the minister inform me whether the same inspector goes around and examines the same sets of scales every year?


Thomas Andrew Low: There are a number of inspectors for those districts.


Edward Joseph Garland: I know
that. But is each inspector kept in the same district annually?


Thomas Andrew Low: Yes.


Edward Joseph Garland: I think it might be just as well if .that system were discontinued and the inspectors changed1 from district to district each year. I am not prepared to make any charges at this time, but I submit that, realizing the frailties of human nature, we can readily understand the danger that lies in leaving the same man on the same route every year. In view of the disclosures made in the Turgeon report, and of many , other oases which no doubt the minister is aware of, I think he would be well advised to change his inspectors around from zone to zone every year so they would not always be in contact with the same men.


James Shaver Woodsworth: Mr. Chairman, I
should like to know whether the minister has considered the advisability of standardizing the ton weight. I am informed that in the coal ruining industry it is customary for the operators to pay the miners on the basis of what is known as the long ton. On the other hand the operators sell the coal to the consumer on the basis of what is known as short ton weight. The one is the English ton; the other is the American ton. In Canada we ought to have either one or the other, emd the same ton ought to apply to those who are producing the coal as to those who are consuming it. Has it been considered by the department whether we Should have one standard for weighing coal and other such commodities?


Thomas Andrew Low: It has not been considered by
the department. I will make a note of it, though, and look into it.


Edward Joseph Garland: I suggest
that the minister might go further than simply making a note of it and looking into it. He might seriously consider coming back to the House next session-if, indeed, he comes back -with a change in the regulations, if necessary with an amendment to existing legislation,

in order to prevent coal operators from defrauding either the public or the users of coal, or both. Let us have a standard ton weight. We have similar complaints with respect to the lumber business, but there are very plausible explanations for that; the condition is not quite the same. We buy two by four lumber and we get one and three-quarters by three and three-quarters, or something like that. However, that has been discussed already.


Thomas George McBride: The long ton is practically the standard weight in British Columbia. The miner mines the long ton, and the man who buys it gets a long ton, while the man who freights it from the mines figures on the basis of the long ton. There is always a certain amount of waste in the distribution of coal. It amounts to about 240 pounds to the ton, and when the merchant sells the coal he gets a very small price for what is practically dust.


James Shaver Woodsworth: I bought coal frequently in British Columbia. I have not mined it. But I always received the short ton, to the best of my knowledge.


Mr. BRISTOL:: I was present some years
ago at an inspection of weighing methods in Fort William. It was disclosed on that occasion that it was quite possible by pressing a certain thing to weigh less, or pressing it a little later to weigh more. It was said that that practice prevailed particularly in Buffalo and that a difference could be made of 200 pounds to the ton without difficulty by several manipulations of that character. It seems to me that who the inspectors are and when they are going to inspect ought not to be particularly well known when an inspection is to take place.


Mr. CARROLL:: In the vicinity of the
coal mines coal is sold on the basis of the long ton, but when it is transported some distance it loses in weight. Probably the wholesaler buys it by the long ton, but it loses so much of its weight in transportation that he would be put out of business if he sold it by the long ton. The deterioration or loss in weight during transportation over long distances, with shipment and re-shipment, exposure to the air and so on, may perhaps account for the difference between the long and short ton so far as coal is concerned.


James Shaver Woodsworth: I submit that that
does not solve the matter at all. If a certai.N amount of waste has to ibe taken care of, there is that surely in connection with the handling of every kind of material, and it ought to
Supply-Trade and Commerce
be recognized. We have it in the handling of grain, in the handling of stock, and everything else. But we ought to know exactly how many pounds the ton stands for. It ought to stand for a certain fixed number of pounds, and it ought not to vary from place to place as it is doing at present.


William F. Carroll: Anyway, you get what
you pay for, whether it be a long or a short ton.


James Shaver Woodsworth: We may or may not. One of the most serious aspects of the whole question is that when computations are made we do not know whether we are dealing with the long ton or the short ton. Again and again we have heard that the miners get so much a ton for mining the coal and that the consumer has to pay so much a ton for the coal that he burns, and we do not know ordinarily that we are talking about two entirely different standards. We should know that we are talking about the same standard everywhere.


Mr. GARDINER:: What do they do with the beams in grain elevators where they have been filed? Do they take them out or how do they dispose of them?


Thomas Andrew Low: The scale is seized.


Henry Herbert Stevens: One of the chief difficulties in western Canada is a lack of confidence in various processes that take place in connection with the handling of the crop from the farm out to the ocean port. There is a feeling that the shipper is not receiving a square deal, that something is taken from him that is not warranted. I have already referred to the fixing of the scale by deliberate filing of a false notch and the use of that instead of the correct one in weighing into country elevators. In this report of the grain commission, which is rather voluminous-I cannot put my finger exactly on the citation-it is stated that twelve or fourteen country elevators had scales of that charapter. The Chairman calling the item passed a moment ago forced me to abandon my search for the reference, but I will read a paragraph of the report with regard to weighing:	*
Elevators scales are now inspected officially, usually once a year. This inspection should be more frequent if ,possible, and the Board of Grain Commissioners should insist rigidly that all weights be taken on an even beam. We find the dissatisfaction from weighing very widespread and it is importatnt that all reasonable measures be taken to remove it.
I am aware that this does not refer directly to false beams, or doctored beams, or whatever you like to call them; it touches upon the

Supply-Trade and Commerce
method of weighing, and it makes reference to inspection. It is not only necessary that we should guard against falsifying the scales, but it is in the interests of the producer and vendor of the grain that he should have a righteous weight, and that is not what he has been receiving. I think, perhaps, one of the main features of this report-particularly that section relating to country elevators-indicates that the farmer has lost substantially all through the years by not receiving the full weight of his grain. And now they ask in this report, as I have already indicated, that these inspections should be more frequent than once a year, and I think in this regard they are justified. For instance the rush season lasts for what period?-three months, four months, perhaps-and then the scales may be comparatively idle for a long period. Certainly there would be an opportunity to inspect the scales at the commencement of the season, because a scale might easily get out of order without any criminal intent and still the vendor of the grain be defrauded. If the scales are inspected in the early part of the season, and1 then some time during the busy season, there would be greater safeguards. I am sorry the minister cannot give us some idea of the degree to which these criminal offences have been followed up. I think the minister would be justified in taking extreme measures to apprehend those who were responsible. Let me point out to him what the difficulty is, and then I want to make a further suggestion. The difficulty, I think, is that out of twelve or fourteen companies one company had two scales that were out of order and the remainder were scattered amongst the other companies, the indication being that the offender was not a company but the individual who had charge of the elevator. I think, one is justified in accepting that on the face of it. The excuse is now raised that without any positive knowledge of the time the notch was filed they cannot locate the operator who was in charge of the elevator when the offence was committed, and naturally everybody now connected with the elevator denies 'all knowledge of the offence. I want to say to the minister that to my mind the offence is so serious it should not be allowed to rest there. No one now in charge of the elevator is going to admit the commission of this criminal offence. I think the minister would be justified in getting the ablest operators in the Royal Canadian Mounted Police to go to work on these cases and if possible run these criminals down. Be-
cause the offenders are at large somewhere, and if not doing this thing they are perpetrating some other type of fraud; any man who would deliberately file a scale would perpetrate any kind of fraud it is possible for him to accomplish. Therefore I think the matter should not be allowed to rest until the last offender has been run down and put behind the bars where he properly belongs. If the minister, or some minister on behalf of the government, would give us an assurance that that would be done I would have nothing further to say. My hon. friend from Lunenburg (Mr. Duff) suggests that an assurance be given. If he were minister he would do it to-morrow, I know his type. But I want the minister to realize that I am serious about this matter, and that a great many other people are serious about it. What we want is an assurance that these individuals shall be followed to the uttermost limit, and not allowed to rest until they are brought to justice.


Thomas Andrew Low: I give my hon. friend that assurance at once.


Edmund James Bristol: I should like to ask the minister whether there has been any evidence before the department as to the matter of surpluses of grain? For instance after weighing in and out at Port Arthur and Fort William it has been found on many occasions that as much as 50,000, perhaps 100,000 bushels have been left in the government elevator in days gone by. I wonder if that practice is going on still?


Thomas Andrew Low: Of course from time to time all elevators have surpluses, more or less, at the end of the year when they weigh up. That is a well known fact.


Edmund James Bristol: It is the practice then to give the farmers the worst of it when their grain goes into the elevator and to give the elevator the best of it when the grain comes out?


Thomas Andrew Low: Those are the overages which are referred to in the report of the Royal Grain Commission. A case was decided a few days ago before the Supreme court in reference to that very same matter.


Mr. STANSELL:: Is there any provision
for inspecting the weight of coal in car load lots? My reason for asking the question is that I have received a number of complaints from coal dealers that it is practically impossible for them to get the full weight that they pay for when they buy the coal in car load lots, and they are unable to get any

Supply-Trade and Commerce
adjustment because if they make any complaint they are not supplied with coal the next time they need it. Therefore in order to get regular supplies of coal they have to accept a continual shortage and either take the loss themselves or pass it on to the consumer. Is there any provision for the inspection of car load lots, and will the minister look into these complaints?


Thomas Andrew Low: I may say that at the moment
the Board of Railway Commissioners are now investigating complaints of shortages of ooal in car load lots.


Arthur Meighen: Will the minister say
that he ever read that $200,000 report of Mr. Justice Turgeon and his associates?


Thomas Andrew Low: I have read a large portion of it.


Arthur Meighen: It seems to have passed
out of the minister's mind very rapidly. What I cannot understand is this: Here is a report -the most expensive report this country was ever called upon to pay for-and one of its chief findings is these frauds in respect to grain elevators and it finds ten or a dozen. The minister says "We have prosecuted all brought to our attention," and then his deputy says "that all that were prosecuted were six," and he does not know who the six were. On the other hand the royal commission finds that of the twelve cases they discovered only two offenders were prosecuted. These statements do not agree. Which is right?


Thomas Andrew Low: That may be in a period of
two or three years.


Arthur Meighen: Surely a report that cost that amount of money cannot be wrong.


Thomas Andrew Low: Will my right hon. friend say
that the twelve oases referred to were in the one year? My deputy informs me there were six or eight last year.


Arthur Meighen: That has nothing to do
with it. The revelation was last year. I presume the offences extend over many years but prosecutions take place at the time of the revelation. Now, where are the prosecutions following the revelation?


Thomas Andrew Low: The department has been
prosecuting every year.


Arthur Meighen: Then the report is
wrong.


Thomas Andrew Low: I have not the paragraph in
the Royal Grain Commission's report to which my right hon. friend refers 'before me.


Arthur Meighen: The deputy will remember it. Surely some one in the department has a digest in his mind of this report. The hon. member for Vancouver Centre will be more detailed.


Henry Herbert Stevens: We must enlighten the
minister a little I think in regard to this. If the Chairman will give me a moment I will locate that part of the report where 9 p.m. the matter is dealt with; the report covers quite a large field.
I do not want to read too much; I think I have the matter here:
In the case in question a former agent of one of the companies-
I am reading from the Royal Grain Commission's report, page 26-
-told us that in the year 1921 he tampered with his elevator scales-
This individual said himself he tampered with these elevator scales-
-by filing a notch in the shoulder of the beam behind the zero mark in such a manner that the poise could be pushed back of this zero mark-


Thomas Andrew Low: What year was this?


Henry Herbert Stevens: This is in 1921. Certainly 1921 is not this year; but let the minister dismiss from his mind whether it was this year, last year or the year before.


Thomas Andrew Low: What I want to know is
whether the offences cover one year, two years or three years?


Henry Herbert Stevens: If the minister will follow the matter through he will get the whole story. Simply to say that because it was in 1921 it is a long time ago-


Thomas Andrew Low: That is not the point at all.
I would like to know in what years the twelve offences referred to in the report were committed?


Henry Herbert Stevens: I am going to read this
again:
In the case in question a former agent of one of the companies told us that in the year 1921 he tampered with his elevator scales by filing a notch in the shoulder of the beam behind the zero mark in such a manner that the poise could be pushed back to this zero mark and thus cause the scales to register false weight, and that he used the scales falsely adjusted in this manner during part of the season. He alleged that he performed this manipulation on the instructions of the travelling superintendent of the company. This superintendent gave evidence denying the allegation in so far as he was concerned and disclaiming all knowledge of the illegal filing. It also appeared that this superintendent had dismissed this agent from the company's services on the grounds of incompetence and carelessness. Giving due weight to all the evidence adduced in this case, and which it is unnecessary for our purposes to review here, we cannot hold the superintendent guilty personally of the charge made against him but

Supply-Trade and Commerce
the scales were in fact found to have been tampered with in the manner described by the agent. The company has since removed this damaged scale beam and put in a new one. Under the rulings which have been given so far on this question the mere having for use in one's possession of scales in this condition, even without knowledge, is an offence under the provisions of the Weights and Measures Act rendering the defective beam liable to seizure and the owner to the penalty of a fine. This means that it is the duty of those who deal with the public in the buying and selling of merchandise to make sure that they have not in their possession and use scales which have been falsified.
In other words, it throws the onus upon the person who owns the scales.
We reported this case to the Department of Trade and Commerce recommending that it be followed up and that steps be taken by inspection to ascertain to what extent, if at all, the practice of tampering with elevator scales is being carried on.
I pause there to suggest to the minister now that the $200,000 royal commission has brought it to his attention, is it not extraordinary that he has not the information before him or in his mind? That is the point we are complaining of. Then I proceed to read:
We were informed that upon several occasions in the past beams containing a false zero notch, such as the one described in the case heard by us, had been seized by inspectors of the Weights and Measures branch, Department of Trade and Commerce. Upon receiving the report of the case brought before us at Moose Jaw in August, 1923, the department took immediate action to discover what elevator scales showed signs of having been manipulated, and twelve seizures and prosecutions have since taken place. In each of the cases the tampering was of the same nature as that described at Moose Jaw. A notch had been filed in the beam behind the zero notch so as to provide for the registering of an incorrect weight, the difference thus created in favour of the buyer ranging, in these eleven cases, all the way from thirty to a hundred pounds.
That is, thirty pounds in a wagon load, not in a car.
The wagon load is first weighed correctly, the poise being set at zero and a true weight given. Then after the grain is unloaded the poise is slipped back to the false notch, and the extra weight thus created is added to the weight of the empty wagon, thus increasing the deduction to be made from the gross to give the farmer the net weight of his grain.
Then the report continued:
In eleven of the twelve cases convictions were secured. In all these cases, however, nothing further was proved than that the companies had possession of the scales and were using them.
This is the point.
In each case the agents denied having used the false notch on any occasion. Some of them stated that they were unaware of the existence of the notch until it was pointed out to them by the inspectors. Others said they had found it on the beam when they took charge of the house. The superintendents of the companies likewise disclaimed all guilty knowledge of the condition of the scales. In some cases the company m possession had taken over the elevator only recently frorn a company now out of business, and the false notch might have been there prior to the change of ownership. Again the manipulation might have been 
the work of a guilty agent making a profit for his own purposes. Many explanations, of course, are possible besides that of guilt attributable to the company itself. It is worthy of note that these twelve cases affect ten different companies, one company being found to have two such scales in its possession the others only one each.
Which I referred to a moment ago.


Mr. VIEN:: Is my hon. friend not satisfied with eleven convictions out of twelve offences?


Henry Herbert Stevens: I am not and I will tell my hon. friend why. These convictions were merely formal convictions of a company having [DOT]in possession a scale with a notch in it, the company having disclaimed all responsibility, each individual in the company disclaiming responsibility, and there the matter stands. What I am saying to the minister is this: The offence is of such a contemptible and vicious character that it warrants the government following it up until it discovers who put the notches in the scale, and I think it could be discovered. I do not say it could be discovered by simply examining those who were involved, or taking their word. These commissioners, it will be remembered, were sitting simply as investigators of the grain trade. They were not investigating this specific thing and just happened to run across it. Naturally you could not expect them to put persons? on trial, but it was brought to the attention of the department.


Thomas Vien: My hon. friend says they were convicted.


Henry Herbert Stevens: I think my hon. friend will agree with me that the convictions under the act simply meant that the company was convicted of having in its possession scales that were false.


William F. Carroll: The law gets after the owner of the scales; but, is there nothing in the act by which the man perpetrating the fraud can be convicted?


Henry Herbert Stevens: I have not the act before me and cannot quote the section. Certainly anyone who is guilty of perpetrating a fraud under the Criminal Code can be prosecuted.
I do not want to appear to over-emphasize this matter but it is a case of deliberate and vicious fraud.


Thomas Andrew Low: I should like to correct a statement I made a few minutes ago. The deputy said he thought there were six or eight prosecutions last year. The correct number is fourteen.


Henry Herbert Stevens: That takes in prosecutions everywhere. I am trying to get the government and the minister to appreciate the desir-

Supply-Trade and Commerce
ability of hunting down these criminals, not the companies themselves, not punishing the companies for having the scales in their possession and disclaiming responsibility, but to ascertain who are the individuals responsible and to prosecute them.


William John Ward: A matter has been brought to my attention just recently, and if I am not in order in discussing it under this item then I will stand corrected. I have been informed that millers throughout Ontario who purchase wheat, say at points like Goderich, find that there is a systematic steal. One miller informed me that out of some forty cars milled last year, every 1,200 bushel car was an average of eight bushels short, and every 1,500 bushel car was an average of eleven bushels short. I am not sure that that is a matter for the Department of Trade and Commerce. It may be a matter for the grain commission, but if this systematic stealing has been going on as one miller put it, I think someone should look into the matter.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Thomas Andrew Low: I would like to revert to item 372:
Printing of parliamentary and departmental publications, including cost of Canada Year Book, $90,000.
The right hon. leader of the opposition asked if the Canada Year Book had been printed at the bureau. The information I have now is that it has been printed there for the last four years.. About 1,500 to 2,000 copies are sold at $1 each.


Henry Herbert Stevens: Will the minister give us the total of this vote, not only the items of the cost of the Canada Year Book, but the balance of the vote?


Thomas Andrew Low: There is an item of $22,000 for publications likely to be published in 1925-1926. I might give a detailed list:
Census:
Bulletins: We hope to have all bulletins out before April 1, but it would be well to allow, say $1,000 in case of failure.	[DOT]
Reports of 1921 census:
Vol. Ill: Families, dwellings, ownership of homes, rentals, earnings.


Vol. IV:: 
Mr. KELLNER:: Has the minister in those statistics any estimate of the cost of grain production per bushel or per acre in the west? If he has, what is that cost?


Thomas Andrew Low: I have no doubt that is given in some of the reports of the Dominion Statistician who issues a monthly bulletin. If my hon. friend will look through them, no doubt he will find them.


Arthur Meighen: If the minister has three or four years to spare, I would suggest that he do it. I will undertake that at the end of that time he will not have found it, and I never had charge of the Department of Trade and Commerce.


Henry Herbert Stevens: I notice the minister included in this item of $90,000 an item for agricultural statistics of various kinds. A few nights ago we were passing agricultural estimates, included in which were seiveral votes for printing. Are statistics, bulletins and reports issued by the Department of Trade and Commerce and also by the Department of Agriculture on similar topics?
Mr. L0WT:	We are endeavouring to
eliminate all duplication. I do not think the same statistics are issued in the Department of Agriculture as in the bureau.


Henry Herbert Stevens: I think there was a vote for printing for the Bureau of Statistics the other night in addition to this.

Supply-Trade and Commerce


Thomas Andrew Low: I do not think so.


Henry Herbert Stevens: I am sure of it. I think the minister will find there was a very considerable vote for printing under the heading of Bureau of Statistics.


Thomas Andrew Low: There may have been sotnething under the item of the census.


Arthur Meighen: Why is all the government printing not estimated for together and the detailed items given instead of being scattered around in this way? This, of course, is a mere fraction of what government printing is costing. Does this always appear in the estimates by departments? Are there not Printing Bureau estimates by themselves?


Thomas Andrew Low: Yes. I am sure my right hon. friend, who has been in this House for so many years, realizes that each department has its own expenditure in connection with these items.


Donald Ferdinand Kellner: Does the vote for "Dominion Bureau Statistics, including western census," cover printing?


Thomas Andrew Low: That covers the cost of the census and its publication.


Donald Ferdinand Kellner: It includes them, but there must be something else.


William John Ward: What is the cost of printing
the Canada Year Book?


Thomas Andrew Low: 'It is $23,000.


William John Ward: What is the balance of $90,-
000 made up of?


Thomas Andrew Low: I have just read a long list of
publications.


William John Ward: What is the system employed in arriving at the cost of production, say of manufactured goods of any kind?


Thomas Andrew Low: Any information of that kind
is gathered in from the different manufacturers of a particular line, similar to the procedure with agriculture.


Arthur Meighen: Does this include the cost to the Priming Bureau of distributing these parliamentary and departmental publications?


Mr. MURDOCK:: My right hon. friend
will find vote No. 264 for the distribution of parliamentary documents and other governmental publications, $40,000. That is carried in the Priming Bureau estimates.


Henry Herbert Stevens: What is the total bill for the printing of the Department of Trade and Commerce? There were sums under other items such as the Bureau of Statistics, In-

telligence service and so on. Under the i;em of public printing there are some items part of which no doubt come from the minister's department.


Thomas Andrew Low: This item, with the amount included in the census, covers almost, if not the entire expenditure of the department in connection with printing. In addition to that $90,000 for the year 1923-24 there was a further sum of $28,784.36, making a total of $118,000.


Arthur Meighen: Why is it that the
salaries paid- in weights and measures inspection work do not appear under civil government?


Thomas Andrew Low: They are all outside Ottawa.


Arthur Meighen: Should they not be
brought into the serivce and placed under the Civil Service Act? We have 120 officers all over the country and there is no excuse now for leaving them outside; they are a permanent service, although they were temporary for a while.


Thomas Andrew Low: They are all under the Civil
Service Commission but in the outside service. The same is true of other departments.


Arthur Meighen: But why should they not be brought into the permanent service so that we might have them in detail? It does not help us very much when they are lumped together in this way, because we do not know what anyone is getting.


Thomas Andrew Low: They have been so treated for
years.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Relief supplies for the Leeward islanders, $7,500.
Arthur Meighen: Are the Leeward
islanders the coal miners of Cape Breton?


Thomas Andrew Low: This is a grant to the relief
of the people of Antigua, the victims of a disastrous hurricane that swept those islands last August. This sum is required to pay for supplies purchased and shipped to the island of Antigua at the request of its governor, who sent out an appeal.


Arthur Meighen: Have the Leeward islands a governor of their own?


Thomas Andrew Low: Yes.


Arthur Meighen: What form did his request take?


Thomas Andrew Low: He sent a cable to the Prime
Minister.


Arthur Meighen: It came direct from the
Governor General?

Supply-Trade and Commerce


Thomas Andrew Low: He is merely the governor of
the island, not "governor general."


Arthur Meighen: How does this come
under the Department of Trade and Commerce?


Thomas Andrew Low: We supplied the building
material that went down; it went through this department.


Arthur Meighen: They are British islands?


Thomas Andrew Low: Yes.


James Shaver Woodsworth: Why is it that our own native Canadians are discriminated against in favour of outsiders? If the Department of Trade and Commerce can give relief to the people of the Leeward islands why can this government not give relief to the Cape Breton islanders?


Some hon. MEMBERS:: Carried.


James Shaver Woodsworth: May we not get
an answer to that question?


George Newcombe Gordon: I do not think it is
relevant to the item at all.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Prince Rupert elevator, towards construction of, $500,000.
Thomas Andrew Low: WThen this item was under discussion a few nights ago an hon. member asked for the engineer's estimate of the cost of the elevator. I was not then prepared to give it to the House but I may state now that the estimate is $960,000.


Arthur Meighen: How much will it go
beyond that?


Thomas Andrew Low: It will be below the engineer's
estimate.


Arthur Meighen: That is, the contract
price.


Thomas Andrew Low: Yes.


Arthur Meighen: By the time the extras
are paid for what will it likely be?


Thomas Andrew Low: The cost in connection with
the Edmonton elevator was I think within three or four thousand dollare of the estimate. I do not think there will be much greater difference in this case.


Mr. SPENCE:: The same contractors are
building both.


Thomas Andrew Low: Yes.


Henry Herbert Stevens: Has the contract been
let?


Thomas Andrew Low: It is now awaiting the Governor General's signature. An item has appeared in the newspapers in regard to this matter but I do not know how they got hold of it.


Henry Herbert Stevens: Who is the contractor
and what is the price of the contract?


Thomas Andrew Low: Until the Governor General
has signed the agreement I would rather not give that information.


Arthur Meighen: What is the name mentioned in the newspaper item to which the minister refers?


Thomas Andrew Low: The name I saw in one of the Vancouver newspapers was that of Carter, Halls & Company, of Winnipeg.


Arthur Meighen: Did they build the Edmonton elevator?


Thomas Andrew Low: Yes.


Henry Herbert Stevens: Well, the minister has
already told us that the same contractors are building both, so that, he might as well oome out and tell us that the firm are Carter, Halls & Company, notwithstanding that the Governor General has not yet affixed his signature to the document. And at the same time we might as well have the whole story as to the price and so forth.


Thomas Andrew Low: I would rather not give that.


Henry Herbert Stevens: Was that not given in
the newspapers too? Does this estimate of $960,000 cover the superstructure as well as the preparatory work, the foundation?


Thomas Andrew Low: This covers the elevator proper, not the foundation or the trackage.


Henry Herbert Stevens: The foundation has already been built under a separate contract. The minister therefore was safe in saying that the present contract for the superstructure would be below the engineer's estimate for the whole thing. What was the amount of the first contract for the foundation?


Thomas Andrew Low: I shall be glad to give the
committee the complete estimate of the engineer for the elevator, including everything:
Foundations (contract awarded to the Northern Construction Co., and J. W. Stewart,
at this figure)	 $222,000
Warehouse and trackshed	 540,000
Storage annex	   240,000
Drier and boiler house	 36,000
Office and sub-station.. .. *	 42,000
Galleries and shed	 106,000
Trackage, trestle, and fill	 60,000
Contingencies	 20,000
Engineers' fees and supervision	 63,300



$1,329,300 COMMONS

[Stage Direction]
Supply-Trade and Commerce
Henry Herbert Stevens: How does the minister
bring this within the engineer's estimate of $960,000 which he said covered the whole
thing?


Thomas Andrew Low: That estimate did not cover
the trackage.


Arthur Meighen: I asked the minister for
everything. How much is there that is not included yet?


Thomas Andrew Low: The whole thing will be within the estimate of the engineer.


Arthur Meighen: How much has been
spent?	.


Thomas Andrew Low: 1 understand the foundation work is just albout to 'be comip'leted for $222,000.


Henry Herbert Stevens: I have an item given in an Ottawa despatch of May 19-the day I think the tenders were opened-stating that Carter, Halls & Aldinger, contractors of Winnipeg, were the lowest tenderers for the Prince Rupert government elevator at $865,000. How did such information get out when it was denied the House?


Thomas Andrew Low: Is that from a Vancouver paper?


Henry Herbert Stevens: I presume it is.
Mr. LOW. Read the last portion of that despatch.


Henry Herbert Stevens: It says that the minister did not give it out.


Thomas Andrew Low: Yes.


Henry Herbert Stevens: The minister gets the most extraordinary notions when one is asking a question of this character. I am not suggesting that the minister gave out the information. I am asking how it was given out when it was denied to members of the House.


George Perry Graham: That is easy.


Henry Herbert Stevens: The Minister of Railways (Mr. Graham) says it is easy. Well, I think he will agree with me that it is scarcely fair to members of the House that information should be denied us, and then the very day the tenders are opened it is printed in a paper on the other side of the Dominion.


George Perry Graham: This is my experience of the way it. is done. The representatives of the contractors are here, and as soon as the tenders are opened .each contractor knows what the other tendered for, and the discussion is then right out in the open. But that does not mean the contract is awarded, although an hour afterwards each contractor feels at liberty to tell everybody about it.

As to giving out the information, it would not be courteous on the part of the government to divulge the contents of an order in council until it has been completed by the signature of the Governor General, and until it is completed there is no actual contract.


Henry Herbert Stevens: The minister's explanation is a very good one.


George Perry Graham: It is the right one.


Henry Herbert Stevens: Possibly it is correct. But there is another aspect to this question which I think merits some attention. There are' those in the commercial world who are desirous to sell goods, we will say legitimately, to the successful tenderer, and they are very anxious to get information so they will have an opportunity of getting in touch with him. and so forth. Now, a very positive statement of this kind would indicate that the contractor did have some encouragement to believe that his tender was successful. That would place him or his friends, or those who were favoured with the information, in a position of advantage over those who were honestly awaiting the official announcement. The order in council was passed, I understand, on May 19, at least it was ready for passing on that date, and I do think it ought to be possible in a very important contract of this kind to announce the letting of the contract some time earlier than May 25. Once tenders are called for, if the government intend to go on with the work, they should publicly announce the granting of the contract as early as possible, so everyone interested may have a fair and even chance to sell his'goods for the work.


Thomas Andrew Low: I can only say to my hon. friend that the contract was awarded to the lowest tenderer, and the order was signed within two hours afterwards. As soon as it has been signed by the Governor General the announcement will be made.


Robert Gardiner: What is the capacity of this elevator?


Thomas Andrew Low: It is 1,350,000 bushels.


Robert Gardiner: What will be the approximate total cost of the elevator without the trackage?


Thomas Andrew Low: I have read out the full details as given to us by the engineer. The cost of the trackage, trestle and fill is $60,000, so if the hon. member will deduct that from the total amount he will have the balance.


Arthur Meighen: The minister gave the total cost as $1,331,000.


Thomas Andrew Low: No, $1,329,000.

Supply-Trade and Commerce


Arthur Meighen: I thought the figure he gave was $1,331,000 for this elevator. Can he tell us what the corresponding estimate is for the new elevator at Halifax?


Thomas Andrew Low: The engineer's estimate was
$622,570. The contract has been awarded to E. G. M. Cape & Company, of Montreal, for $599,800.


Arthur Meighen: That is to say, the government is putting in an elevator at Prince Rupert at more than twice the cost of the elevator at Halifax.


Thomas Andrew Low: Not twice the capacity. The
Halifax elevator has a capacity of 1,032,000 * bushels.


Arthur Meighen: But at twice the cost, I say. Is the 'minister aware that his colleagues, in order to win the by-election, promised a two million dollar elevator in 'the most definite terms?


Mr. JACOBS:: They did not win the election.


Arthur Meighen: That is the explanation. If it was not for the member for George Etienne Cartier (Mr. Jacobs) we would get very little frankness from the other side of the House.


George Perry Graham: Last year the junior member for Halifax (Mr. Black) said ithey did not need an elevator there.


Arthur Meighen: The government estimate that it will cost $1,331,000 to elect 'their candidate for Prince Rupert.


Thomas Andrew Low: That is wrong.


Arthur Meighen: That is the way the member for George Etienne Cartier put it in his celebrated Winnipeg interview.


Samuel William Jacobs: You haw to allow for accidents.


Arthur Meighen: And a large allowance
must be made.


Henry Lumley Drayton: Mr. Chairman, when this matter was up initially last year I protested against the work, and I think I very fairly pointed out the traffic conditions at Prince Rupert. It would be such a good thing for this country if we could find some cheaper way for the government to look after its election expenses, some way in which a real benefit could be given to the people of Prince Rupert. Now we 'have this enormous expenditure of $1,329,000 for an elevator at a place where there is no business for it. Undoubtedly some of the government's friends 225
will make large profits in the supply of hardware, as they did in connection with the erection of .tihe warehouse there. This will help the gentlemen in the hardware business, but how does it help Prinqe Rupert? Again I ask, is there no cheaper way of doing it, if it must be done? Last session I asked what business there was to justify such an enormous expenditure, but I could not get any information. The government has now had in operation for some years an expensive warehouse at that point. There is one very distinctive thing about that warehouse-it is doing no business worth while talking about. Has the government ascertained what it is making out of its present facilities in Prince Rupert? It may be said that we cannot make money unless we have the facilities. Well, they have a great warehouse there, and they have a dock; what are they making out of it? The government never took the trouble to consider that aspect of it; a demand is made, the money is only the money of the taxpayer and it has to go. Surely the government will tell us what their estimate is of the business to be dope. Surely they will give us some reason why we should now throw away $1,329,000. They know what the loss is on the warehouse and they know what business is being done. They should give that information now.


Robert Gardiner: Deducting the cost of
trackage, the total cost of the elevator will be $1,269,000. I understood the minister to say the capacity would be 1,350,000 bushels, so that it will cost approximately 94 cents per bushel capacity to 'build this elevator. Why is there such a great difference between the cost of the Halifax elevator and that of the Prince Rupert elevator so far as bushel capacity is concerned?


Thomas Andrew Low: No doubt the conditions are very different as between Halifax and Prince Rupert-different as to foundation, trackage, and everything else.


Donald Ferdinand Kellner: I am afraid the minister must refer to political conditions. Last year when this matter was up we were told that an extremely favourable site was available at Prince Rupert on which to build this elevator. Beyond doubt there is not a better site on the western coast for the building of an elevator than at Prince Rupert, and if the figures were reversed and Prince Rupert were the cheaper point at which to build, there would be something in the minister's contention. As it is I think he should give us something further than the mere statement that the conditions are different.

Supply-Trade and Commerce


Mr. KENNEDY (Edmonton):: Last year in discussing this Prince Rupert elevator I think it was the Minister of Railways who said that Prince Rupert was a better port for the Peace river country than Vancouver, or a nearer port. I wonder how soon we shall be able to use it; how soon we shall have direct rail connection from the Peace river country to Prince Rupert to justify the construction of this elevator.


Edward Joseph Garland: This is an amazing situation. The ex-Minister of Finance criticizes the government for lack of information with regard to the estimated business to be done through this elevator after it is constructed. Every request for some information to justify the expenditure is declined, and not only declined, but no attention paid to it. The hon. member for West Edmonton gets up and asks the Minister of Railways if he will help to justify the construction of this elevator by building a line into the Peace river, but there is no answer from either minister in this connection. I am not opposing the construction of an elevator if there is need for it. I am not opposing the construction of this elevator if the promise of the Minister of Railways is carried out. If we get a line into the Peace river country there will be some justification for it.


George Perry Graham: My hon. friend will tell me, perhaps, when I made such a promise.


Edward Joseph Garland: The minister allows the press to attribute all these promises to him and does not bother contradicting them.


George Perry Graham: I do not control the press, I regret to say.


Edward Joseph Garland: He could contradict it very quickly.


George Perry Graham: I am too busy.


Edward Joseph Garland: Working up ways of getting Mr. Beatty and Sir Henry Thornton together? If this government ever wishes to justify the construction of an elevator at Prince Rupert it will have to put its own line into the Peace river, for this reason: Any grain that is grown there at present, under terrible conditions, is shipped south over the Canadian Pacific to Calgary and goes direct to Vancouver, and unless the Canadian National makes direct connection with the Peace river country there will be so little grain going to Prince Rupert that there will be no justification for the construction of this elevator. If the minister cannot give the committee some better reason-indeed, some reason; he has not given any yet-for

this construction and also for the difference in expense to which the hon. member (Mr. Gardiner) has referred, I am afraid I for one cannot feel satisfied.


William Lyon Mackenzie King: I have no hesitation in justifying this expenditure. Prince Rupert is one day nearer the Orient than any other port on the Pacific. There is an opportunity for the handling at that port of a very considerable quantity of grain from the prairie provinces. I think the most important feature of the development will be the stimulation of agriculture in that large hinterland in northern British Columbia, which is an excellent agricultural country. I(t will make it possible for the farmer in that area to produce wheat on his land and find a market at Prince Rupert. To-day he is precluded from anything of that kind. If he produces wheat it must be sold locally. It cannot get on the world's market, because it cannot be transhipped back to Calgary or Edmonton and thence on the Canadian National to Vancouver. This elevator will do more to develop that great hinterland in northern British Columbia, which is tributary to what is known as the Grand Trunk Pacific railway, than anything else this government can do, and I have no hesitation in justifying and advising this expenditure.


William Thomas Lucas: Perhaps the Minister of Public Works could tell why this elevator at Prince Rupert is to cost twice as much per bushel capacity as the one at Halifax.


William Lyon Mackenzie King: I cannot answer
my hon. friend's question. Unfair comparisons are very often made between the cost of elevator construction at Port Arthur and Montreal and the cost of similar construction on the Atlantic and Pacific coasts, and very often those who make such comparisons are not fully informed. Elevator construction in Vancouver harbour has been expensive and will continue to be so on account of the conditions in that harbour. At Prince Rupert I believe the same conditions exist. Earth filling had to be brought a considerable distance and dumped in in order to enable the piles to be driven for the foundation. These are conditions that do not apply to Fort William or Port Arthur. As to the other expenditures, I am not conversant with the contracts, though I know that tenders have been called and a number of contractors have tendered on the work. It should be remembered that in construction in the harbour of Montreal, for instance, you are dealing with fresh water where timber foundations will not be destroyed or affected by what is known as the toredo,

Supply-Trade and Commerce
which we have on the Pacific and Atlantic coasts. The construction on the Pacific has been expensive, largely in connection with the foundation.


Donald Ferdinand Kellner: The minister told us a
little while ago that the cost of the foundation was $222,000. Well, once you have your foundation in, I should think the rest of the elevator could be built just as cheaply at Prince Rupert as at Halifax-cheaper, in fact. There is, however, a difference of half a million dollars in the cost, regardless altogether of the foundations.


James Murdock: There is a material difference in wage rates as between Prince Rupert and Halifax. The fair or current wage for a carpenter at Halifax is fixed at 57 cents an hour; that is the agreed rate between labour and the employers in Halifax. At Prince Rupert and Vancouver the rate will be approximately thirty cents an hour higher than that. The rate has not yet been fixed for Prince Rupert, but in Vancouver the rate is $7 for an eight hour day. The comparative rate for labour would he from 33 to 35 cents at Halifax as against, say, 45 cents in Prince Rupert. We have not yet definitely determined the rate that is to be paid, but the same comparison as between other classes of labour can be considered.


Henry Lumley Drayton: Would the
Minister of Labour tell us what the percentage for labour is in the cost of this structure?	.


James Murdock: No, I did not give this particular elevator construction any thought from that viewpoint. I am giving my hon. friend a comparison between the carpenter's wage which is about 30 cents an hour higher in Prince Rupert than it would be in Halifax. I should judge the labourer's wage would be about 15 cents, maybe only 13 cents, an hour higher, and the same holds good generally for other classes of labour, which would run up to a material item during the course of construction; I could not say exactly how much.


Henry Lumley Drayton: My hon. friend sees, of course, that we cannot get any very useful result in regard to this structure unless we know what the percentage of the labour cost would be. I understand this is to be a concrete elevator. Has my hon. friend ever considered the proportion of labour cost as against the cost of materials in concrete elevator construction? I should not think the carpenter work would be very heavy, but I may be wrong. My hon. friend is the expert on this question to whom I am appealing.
225i


James Murdock: There would be considerable carpentering work in concrete construction. There would be many form builders even in the construction of a concrete elevator, and all the concrete mixers and pourers would get a proportionately higher amount. I would say now-but this is only a snap shot opinion at the moment-that the cost of labour would be 30 per cent, possibly 32 per cent, higher in Prince Rupert than in Halifax, and I am judging from the carpenters' and labourers' rates which I have in mind.


Mr. STORK:: I wish to deny entirely that this is in any sense a political elevator. The hon. member for West York (Sir Henry Drayton) has referred to it in those terms, but I may remind the hon. member that in 1917 I carried that constituency by a majority of six hundred without any reference to construction of an elevator. In 1921, without the benefit of an elevator, I again carried the constituency, and I am sure that the same result will be once more achieved even without the aid of the elevator. However, Mr. Chairman I have spoken in this House on many occasions in support of this project. Therefore it is unnecessary, I think, for me to go into all the details again; to again refer to the fact that Prince Rupert is some 480 miles nearer the Orient than any other port on the Pacific; that there is a harbour there which is economical and easy of access-very little being required in the way of insurance, or pilotage charges. It is unnecessary for me again to go into all the details of these advantages. Our terminal rates are the same from Edmonton to Prince Rupert as they are from Edmonton to Vancouver. Our rates are also the same from Prince Rupert to Liverpool, or to any other port in Europe, as they are from any other port on the Pacific. I know that objection has been taken to this elevator, but the results will justify its construction. The hon. member for West York put his finger on the situation when he said the probable reason for building the elevator was that the railroad would require traffic. That is exactly the whole point. This country has a tremendous capital investment in the Grand Trunk Pacific. That railroad, known to-day as the Canadian National is no more unsound to-day than it was in the days of Sir Wilfrid Laufier. It was a sound project then; it is absolutely a sound project to-day. But if hon. gentlemen opposite continue their attempt to destroy this railroad it will never get anywhere. It is serving one of the best districts in the Dominion. If hon. gentlemen opposite will take the time to go
Supply-Trade and Commerce

out and tour that country they will find that the northern part of British Columbia is one of the very best districts in Canada. But the road can only be made to pay when traffic can be hauled over it, and you will find, Mr. Chairman, that this elevator in Prince Rupert will be one of the revenue producing assets of the Canadian National Railway.


Henry Lumley Drayton: If I really
thought that we would have traffic here and that any useful result would come from the building of this elevator I certainly would not object to it. My hon. friend tells me to go and visit the country. I have been up and down it, and I know a good deal about the costs of operating in that country. In certain directions it has much ahead of it; it has nothing ahead of it as a wheat raising country. It is simply idle and ridiculous nonsense to so describe it. I have been through that country and I know the cost of clearing land there. It is well wooded country that no one need be ashamed of. A district is not a bad district because you cannot grow grain in it at once so that it will pay. It is a good country but it is not a grain country. I know that there are places in it where the clearing of the land will cost $150 an acre, and in some places a far larger sum has been spent. Years ago I went through the accounts of one of the different colonization 10 p.m. projects that I had to look into, a town site proposition-I am now speaking from recollection which is pretty nearly right^and at that time the biggest crop that was raised along the line of the Grand Trunk Pacific was town site propositions. Going into those accounts the cheapest clearing that I could find was at a place called Vander-hoof, where there is good soil and good agricultural possibilities; as I recollect it some forty-five miles west of Prince George. The clearing there cost-the trees were light, they were not the regular heavy British Columbia trees-only $35 an acre. In other words anyone that talks about raising grain in that country has got to start out with clearing h:s land at a cost of $35 an acre more than he can buy land for, that is land well adapted for grain raising, in a proper grain district. I still say that this scheme-you can only call it a scheme-is simply nothing else but another instance of political waste and political expenditure. Everybody knows that who knows anything at all about the matter. It is necessary that we should have traffic of course, but I should have thought that one of the things this government would want to do would be

to obtain traffic in a way that would pay the government system. What object is there, when the locality cannot and will not grow grain, to go into that country? They would lose money in doing so, and there are things in which they can make money, which they should go into. The grain comes from the prairie section to the east. What earthly use is there in this government turning round and making competition between their own terminals, Vancouver on the one side and Prince Rupert on the other? You have no grain in the latter district. You have to go east of that for your grain.


William Lyon Mackenzie King: We will have
grain there.


Henry Lumley Drayton: Yes, possibly
you will, when the time comes that our vacant lands on the boundless prairies are taken up and you can get in your first crop; you will have some grain then. My hon. friend from Kootenay thinks they will have grain there. Well you can, if you go far enough. If you do that, you will have to carry your grain further. My hon. friend knows it and knows it well.


William Lyon Mackenzie King: Has my hon. friend heard of the Ootsa lake country?


Henry Lumley Drayton: We are getting
to a district that must be at least sixty miles south of the line.


William Lyon Mackenzie King: No; it is south of the line, but not that distance.


Henry Lumley Drayton: I would have
thought so. It is a first rate thing to spend money for something which may perchance happen, if not the next decade, the decade after, while we have got any amount of land and any amount of districts that are now ready to hand which are suitable; but the real truth is-and the minister knows it perfectly well-that if he goes back to where the grain is grown, where the movement is, he goes to a point so far east that it is just as easy to go to Vancouver as to Prince Rupert.


Edward Joseph Garland: Is at not a fact that Vancouver is about 190 miles closer to Edmonton than is Prince Rupert?


Henry Lumley Drayton: I was about to give the figures. The mileage from Edmonton to Vancouver is 765.47, while the distance from Edmonton to Prince Rupert is 956. Of course if you are in the railway business for fun, and if you like deficits, carry your grain further than you need.

Supply-Trade and Commerce


Alfred Stork: Is it not a fact that the
Canadian National Railways had to absorb the charge of $13 per car from Fort Mann in to the elevator at Vancouver?


Henry Lumley Drayton: I do not know
exactly how that situation is to-day, but I do know if they have to do that it is very easy for the government to put up their own elevator and their own terminals, where they have first rate water and save these millions.


Edward Joseph Garland: May I
suggest to the ex-Minister of Finance that the hon. member for Skeena is evidently trying to mislead him? It is true that it costs $13 per car extra from Fort Mann to the elevator at Vancouver or approximately one cent a bushel, but we have to pay that, not the railway.


Henry Lumley Drayton: I think that
point is absolutely well taken. We have a cost now which is absolutely going to be a very serious thing. A question which has given the Minister of Railways a great deal of concern is the per mile cost of operation in Canada. Those costs now are so high that the system to-day, with railway freights that everyone is grumbling at, reports large deficits, and yet at a time like this we have an expenditure of $1,300,000, for what?-that so many more hundred miles of distance will have to be travelled at these high rates by this railway and its deficits multiplied. My hon. friend is in a great deal of difficulty in connection with it, and I sympathize with him in his difficulties in connection with the rate problem. I am only sorry that the government of which he is a member, and whioh he is bound to support, adds to the difficulties, multiplies charges and creates deficits by this sort of thing. What else can there be in it? There are the mileages. The mileages are 765.47 and 956, nearly 200 miles more, when every mile to-day is a most expensive operation. Why, to-day we had before the committee on Railways and Canals evidence to show that the cost of running a passenger car had risen to from 38 to 40 cents per mile. Of course the freight charges are less than that. There are more cars on the freight trains, but the upward trend is just the same. We have at present this situation; here we have an expenditure of $1,329,000, which, if it serves the purpose that its sponsors want it to serve, which if it carries grain, is simply going to add this much more to the present deficit by forcing the National Railways to carry that grain at the same rate just that much further and we had losses in this western territory of over $2,000,000 in the year when we had our
biggest grain crop. My hon. friend's own experts will tell him that if you carry grain at the present price over a given distance you absolutely lose money. Why, the grain rate used to be a paying rate, despite what the railways did say about the grain. It used to be a productive rate. It was low, it is true, but there was such volume, continuity and density that it paid. But if you get your underlying basis of expense up too high, remember that for every mile further you carry the goods you taper down your revenue, because you get to a point where, in connection with that tapering down, you are absolutely losing money for every extra mile you carry the goods. That is the situation here. Notwithstanding that situation this government of its own motion is going out of its way to add to the cost of the grain movement $2,000,000. Of course it will not do it. Hcxn. gentlemen are safe in that respect. That is what wouldl happen if the supposition on which all this is done were true, but it is not true. The grain elevator will not be used much more than the warehouse is used today. My hon. friend knows very very well the situation in connection with the warehouse. My hon. friend the Minister of Railways would not say the business in that warehouse to-day would justify its construction. There was one expensive thing to do. Having done that, having shown that the business was not there, in connection with commodities that that country can produce, it was the height of madness for the government to turn around and run into this expenditure in connection with such a thing as that country does not and will not produce.


Mr. McQUARRIE:: The Minister of Public Works (Mr. King) has referred to cheapness of construction on fresh water as compared with salt water, and he has also pointed out that the reason for that is that the toredo attacks the piles in salt water and does not do so in fresh water. That is something that we have been contending for a long time in New Westminster where the Fraser river has been coming into prominence from a shipping standopint in the last year or so. The Minister of Public Works knows all about the Fraser river; he knows about the available sites for elevators that we have there, sites that are already owned by the government or by the Canadian National Railways, sites at Port Mann, which have already been referred to, sites at New Westminster costing something like a million dollars, largely vacant at the present time, half a mile of water frontage at Woodward's landing 'a few miles below New Westminster. All
Supply-Trade and Commerce

of these sites are owned by this country or by the Canadian National Railways, which is the same thing. It has been stated that
this elevator is not a political one. Why is it that the Fraser river is being passed over and an elevator is being constructed at Prince Rupert? Where does the justification for that decision come in? It cannot be that men engaged in the grain 'business have recommended that the elevator be located at Prince Rupert in preference to the Fraser river. I do not believe you can get any grain expert who will say any such thing.
Another matter which has also been referred to and which has been pointed out from time to time to the Minister of Public Works and also to the Minister of Trade and Commerce (Mr. Low) personally is that there is a loss to the Canadian National Railways in having to haul grain to Burrard inlet when it might be shipped from Port Mann or some of these other sites on the Fraser river. Something like $13 a car is being absorbed by the Canadian National Railways for all grain which is shipped past the Fraser river, the Fraser river is the first point where ships can come in and get that grain. This matter has been put up to the Minister of Public Works many times by the citizens of New Westminster and the surrounding district. It has also been put up to the Minister of Trade and Commerce. If this is not a matter of political discrimination, what is it, and' why has the Fraser river been passed over in this way? The Minister of Public Works knows that one of the greatest authorities on grain elevators in Canada, Mr. Howe, has reported that the Fraser river is the proper place for the location of a government grain elevator.
Another matter to which I might refer is this. The Minister of Public Works will remember that when the citizens of New Westminster petitioned him and the government for the construction of a grain elevator at New Westminster, they were told that the government was going out of the grain elevator business; that the government was not going to construct any more elevators. Now we find the Prince Rupert elevator coming along. Why is that? I should like to have some_ reasonable explanation of the decision of the government to build this grain elevator at Prince Rupert rather than on the Fraser river, where the government owns sites and where it will be so much to the benefit of the Canadian National Railways to have elevator facilities.


David Spence: There might be some justification for building an elevator on the *

Fraser river, but there is absolutely no reason for building one at Prince Rupert. The hon. member for Skeena (Mr. Stork), in advocating the building of this elevator, says that it will develop trade along the Grand Trunk Pacific. If you do that, you take trade from the old Canadian Northern, which is the same thing. They all belong to the Canadian National. Wheat has to be hauled 200 miles further to get to Prince Rupert. The Minister of Public Works endeavoured to justify the building of this elevator by saying that a big hinterland will be developed in British Columbia. That is business that may not come for years and that may never come. We have been building railroads fifty years ahead of the times, and now the government is starting the same policy of building elevators ahead of the times. I would be the last one that would knock anything that would develop any port; in fact I am in favour of developing our ports; but I see no justification whatever for building this elevator at Prince Rupert. It is absolutely wasting the country's money to spend $1,300,000 at that point. If the government were spending their own money, they would not spend it in this way, and they should deal with the country's money just as they would deal with their own. I will not say this is a political elevator or anything of the kind, but it is an ill-advised expenditure. The government should wait until the country develops and an elevator is needed. There is no grain in British Columbia in the great hinterland the Minister of Public Works talks about, and he knows it will be a long time yet before grain is produced there to ship to an elevator at Prince Rupert.


Mr SPEAKMAN:: I have no intention of opposing the building of an elevator at Prince Rupert, for I gave it my tentative support last year in the belief, of course, that it was to form part of a general development of that part of the country including the Peace river district. I shall, however, leave the hon. member for West Edmonton (Mr. Kennedy) to deal with that phase of the situation. I want to call attention to another phase which, I think, is of some importance. I might say, by the way, the proper time, if I had wished to oppose the building of an elevator at Prince Rupert, was last year when the expenditure was undertaken. I did not oppose it then and I do not intend to oppose it now. I wish to call attention to the cost of construction. Last year we were given an estimate, and on that estimate was largely based our decision and the vote we cast. I admit, of course, that was

Supply-Trade and Commerce
a very rough estimate as given, but it was given as an estimate on which the House might base its decision as to the wisdom of building the elevator. May I quote just a few sentences from Hansard of last year from the statement made by the then Minister of Trade of Commerce, the present Acting Minister of Finance (Mr. Robb), which gives to the House exactly the suggested conditions under which that elevator was to be built and the suggested cost:
Mr. Robb: I cannot state the exact cost until the plans have been drawn in their entirety. My hon. friend lives in a country where they build elevators. Ho knows that elevators are built so that they can be enlarged. I imagine that the capacity of this elevator is not to exceed 500,000 bushels. My hon. friend has probably prepared contracts and doubtless knows that the cost of an elevator depends primarily upon the expenditure involved in building the foundations, the cost of getting stone and cement. It is estimated that these elevators can be built at around forty cents a bushel. That is the yard stick you start out with.
May I interpose? The yard stick by which we measured the feasibility of the project when it was first mooted.
But the expenditure depends primarily on the cost of the foundations.
Sir Henry Drayton: Your foundations should be cheap in that locality.
Mr. Robb: I imagine so.
I am not accusing the then Minister of Trade and Commerce of deceiving the House, but I am pointing out that it is a most unfortunate thing that in this House we should be committed to large expenditures in the face of such vague estimates as these. I think we had reason to suppose that the estimated capacity would approximate the capacity of the elevator as constructed, and that the real cost would be somewhere in the neighbourhood of the estimated cost as then given to us. And that is the point I wish to bring to the attention of the committee. I emphasize it because this is not the first time that we have found ourselves committed to an expenditure far exceeding our expectations, an expenditure based on rough estimates given apparently without any foundation in knowledge or fact.	For my part I protest against
such things.	Had I known that the cost
would actually be double the cost given to us at that time, had I known that it was doubtful whether the Peace river country would be opened up in the near future- which one would suppose to be one of the chief justifications for the expenditure-my vote at that time would have been very different. I would impress upon the ministers of all departments that they owe it to this House as well as to their own reputation for accuracy in the future to be careful when they enter upon any new project to give to the
House some intelligent idea of the approximate magnitude of the undertaking as well as the approximate cost of it.


Henry Herbert Stevens: I have no intention of
criticizing the government for constructing an elevator at Prince Rupert, but I want to point out that the Minister of Public Works (Mr. King, Kootenay) suggests as a justification for the work the development of the hinterland, the northern part of British Columbia, with particular reference to the district around Ootsa lake-Francis lake, Nechaco valley, Bulkley valley and Vanderhoof. There are some excellent agricultural lands in the northern part of British Columbia, but I want to tell the Minister of Public Works and the government that had they built an elevator at Prince Rupert at one-half the present cost it would have served the purposes of the locality and could have been enlarged later on to meet any development in trade. Had they done that and taken the balance of the vote, of $600,000 or $700,000, and devoted it to some demonstration farms for the assistance of mixed agriculture in the northern part of the province, they would have advanced the interests of that section. The elevator, if its success warranted an extension, could easily have been enlarged. But what is the government doing now? It is wholly disregarding the dairying and mixed farming possibilities of that great northern section; and the one thing that northern British Columbia requires is the development of mixed farming, for this is its basic agricultural possibility, rather than the growing of grain. Some grain may be grown in one or two districts but not to any great extent, while undoubtedly there are large possibilities in the direction of mixed farming. I suggest to the Minister of Public Works that as the chief adviser of the government from the province of British Columbia he certainly has not done the northern part of that province a good turn by advising the government to spend $1,300,000 in a new elevator. The government could have provided first rate elevator facilities at a cost of $500,000, and the structure could easily have been extended next year if the circumstances made such an extension imperative. Instead of that we are committed to a contract for $1,300,000, which I think it will be admitted will be largely experimental.
A word now with reference to the suggestion made by the hon. member (Mr. Stork), that it costs $13 a car to haul grain from New Westminster to Vancouver. That is true; the Canadian National Railways have to pay for the service when moving grain over the line from New Westminster to Vancouver.
Supply-Trade and Commerce

Furthermore, the New Westminster bridge has about reached its traffic capacity. I have no hesitation therefore m saying that the time is past when the government is warranted in longer delaying building on the Fraser river facilities for the export of grain from the terminals of the Canadian National. After many years of study of the whole problem, I do not hesitate for a moment to say that this expenditure on the Fraser river is more warranted1 than the expenditure of this $1,300,000. I do not want hon. gentlemen to go away with the impression that I am opposed to development at Prince Rupert; I want to see Prince Rupert developed and the harbour there utilized. I do say however that the Minister of Public Works has ill advised the government in neglecting the mixed farming possibilities of northern British Columbia while, so to speak, putting all his eggs in one basket.


William Lyon Mackenzie King: Oh no.


Henry Herbert Stevens: That is what my hon.
friend has done. The government could have spent half a million on this elevator and provided first-class facilities for some years, adding to them as the grain trade developed; and the balance of the money could have been devoted to developing other branches of agriculture more suitable to the district than that of grain growing.


Donald MacBeth Kennedy: A little
while ago I said to the Minister of Railways (Mr. Graham) that one of the reasons given for the construction of this elevator was the fact that there were great possibilities in the way of grain shipments frqm the Peace river country. The minister shook his head. Well, I should like to read from Hansard of last year what the minister had to say on this subject. At page 4318 he is reported as follows:
I know my hon. friend is not very friendly to the Prince Rupert scheme of the Grand Trunk Pacific, but so long as we oppose every proposition to give the Grand Trunk Pacific traffic, so long will the Grand Trunk Pacific give us a deficit. The Grand Trunk Pacific was not intended to be sawed off at both ends; the original scheme was to have a line of ships connecting at Prince Rupert with the Grand Trunk Pacific and the Transcontinental; and although conditions have somewhat changed, yet the fact stands, and cannot be controverted, that the route from eastern or from western Canada to the Orient via Prince Rupert is shorter than any other route by a good many miles. If we are to export our grain or other products by the shortest route at the lowest cost, Prince Rupert must be developed and utilized; there is no question about that. My hon. friend also forgets that there is a vast territory which, when opened up, will be tributary to Prince Rupert and will be many miles closer to Prince Rupert than to Vancouver. The grain shipments from the Peace river country to-day have to go around to Edmonton, which city is of course closer to

Vancouver than to Prince Rupert, but when that country is opened up, as it must be, it will be miles closer to Prince Rupert than to Vancouver by way of Edmonton.
Now, the Peace river country as a good grain growing district which is capable of producing millions of bushels of wheat of a high quality; and -the remarks which the ex-Minister of Finance (Sir Henry Drayton) made regarding the land along the Grand' Trunk Pacific certainly do not appl(y to the Peace river country.


Henry Lumley Drayton: You are right about that.


Donald MacBeth Kennedy: We shipped about 3,000,000 bushels in 1923, and altogether I do not believe that there is more than about ,one-tenth of the good grain growing land in the Peace river country which is under actual development. There are millions of acres of fertile grain growing land there that do not require any enormous expenditure to bring it under cultivation for the production of wheat. It seems to me that all the other arguments I have heard for this elevator are simply besidip the mark, and it was because I believed it was necessary to the Peace river country that I was in favour of voting this supply 'last session. The argument is advanced that Prince Rupert is four hundred miles nearer the Orient than Vancouver. Last year when arguments were brought forward regarding how far Prince Ruipent was from the Panama canal it was said: "Why, two hundred and fifty miles, and that distance on the sea does not amount to anything." But two hundred miles on land does amount to a great deal, and Prince Rupert being two hundred miles further away from the rest of the prairie country than Vancouver is, I do not think the grain traffic is going to move in any great volume in that direction until the Peace river country as tapped and made tributary to Prince Rupert, according to the statement of the Minister of Railways (Mr. Graham) last session. I have mentioned this Peace River railway quite a number of times in the House this session, but it seems to me I am justified in again calling this to the attention of the government, for the reason that we are here voting money to build an elevator that apparently will be absolutely worthless, even for the railway, without the necessary branch line connection between the Grand Trunk Pacific and the Peace river -country.


William John Ward: Mr. Chairman, we are faced to-night with an amazing situation. We have been- so faced1 on two or three occasions this session, and I notice by the estimates that we

Supply- Trade and Commerce
will be -treated to another huge anomaly one of these days. Here are we poor grain -growers in the west having an elevator forced upon us at Prince Rupert; another elevator -at Halifax forced upon us; the Welland ship canal, that will probably cost $125,000,000 to $150,000,000 before it is through, forced upon us, and' yet over a million people in the three prairie provinces have -been asking for the opening of the Hudson bay route for over thirty years without getting any consideration. What is the -matter? This looks to -me like the quintessence of gross discrimination, and I think the situation which is developing in th-is House will have to be -reckoned w-ith one of these days. This looks to me like another case of the Eequim&llt d-ry dock, forced upon ue for political considerations.
-Mr. OOOTE:	What about the Prince
Rupert dock?


William John Ward: That is another case of political expediency; while matters of real moment, matters that mean economic life and death to millions of our people, are passed over without any consideration whatever. I for one am certainly not satisfied to see this item pass.


George Newcombe Gordon: Shall the item carry?


Henry Lumley Drayton: I should think, Mr. Chairman, we might have got some reasonable explanation from the government, but any excuse they might make would have to be so lame, so pitiful and so halting that really I think they are adopting the course of wisdom in leaving the thing as it is. But there are just one or two considerations I am going to again draw to their attention. In the first instance, I entirely agree with the member for West Edmonton (Mr. Kennedy) that there is a first rate grain country in the Peace river district which may be served by Prince Rupert; it may never be. Undoubtedly the traffic from that district ought to be pulled in a westerly direction; there ought not to be a back haul east; but as to whether the line will come out in the neighbourhood of the Vermilion pass or not I do not know; if it comes out west of that pass I do not know exactly how far west it will come out, and even then I do not know whether it will come out so far west that the route will be cheaper than going to Vancouver. But in the meantime I am free to admit that there is a possibility that some day, when some policy has been evolved for the Peace river district, and when perhaps we have money to spend-because after all this thing relates to money, and even this government cannot
make political expenditures all over the whole map at once, and undoubtedly they remove the possibility of doing something in the Peace river country when they turn around and spend what they are spending here-but some day when perhaps we have money to spend this may be a better outlet for the Peace river district than Vancouver. We do not know. But we do know something about the conditions to-day, and I am just going to ask hon. gentlemen to turn up their Hansard at page 2059 of this session.


George Newcombe Gordon: Is the hon. gentleman referring to a debate that has taken place this session?


Henry Lumley Drayton: No, Mr. Chairman, fortunately I am not; if I were I would be clearly out of order. I am referring to information which I succeeded in getting from the government in connection with this very matter, namely, the amount of business which is carried on in this territory.


George Newcombe Gordon: May I ask is it contained in a debate that has already taken place this session?


Henry Lumley Drayton: It is in the form of question and answer, and I have great pleasure in referring the Chairman to it. It will be found at page 2059 of this session's Hansard. I asked this question:
What are the respective freight tonnages moved by the Canadian National System on the line running from Yellowhead pass to Vancouver, and the line running from that pass to Prince Rupert in each of the years 1923 and 1924?
This is the answer given by the Minister
of Railways (Mr. Graham):	1923	1924Tons of revenue freight received at Prince Rupert from points east..	33,052	26,237Tons of revenue freight received at Vancouver	336,501	676,942In other words, the business to	Prince
Rupert in 1923 is less than one-tenth of the business to Vancouver, while, in 1924 the percentage is a great deal less than that. The whole thing is just simply a pity. It is a great pity that my hon. friends last session were misled by, to say the least, mistaken estimates. It is a great pity that with deficits as they are we are committed to the expenditure of $1,329,000 for an elevator that at present, whatever it may have in -the future, has absolutely no justification.


Charles A. Stewart: Mr. Chairman, I think my hon. friend (Sir Henry Drayton) is unduly alarmed. If he will just think back to the year previous to last year-if he
Supply-Trade and Commerce

was then paying any attention to the movement of grain through the port of Vancouver, as most of us were-he will very well remember that an embargo was placed upon western shipments, an embargo that was continued for several weeks. Why? Because the port of Vancouver could not absorb the grain coming down from the province of Alberta; and the comparison he is making now is proof positive of the necessity for some other outlet being provided. True, last year we did not have the crop in the province of Alberta that we had the year before, but I would point out to him that the same argument is being used now that was used against the construction of the elevator at Edmonton. In spite of the short grain crop in Alberta last year the Edmonton efevator has been full, and it has been full for the last two or three months, showing conclusively that it was good business to build that elevator there. It is true that there is not the traffic on the Grand Trunk Pacific line from Red water junction to Prince Rupert that there is over the old Canadian National line down to Vancouver, but that is because there are no facilities to take care of grain shipments to Prince Rupert. The construction of an elevator at Prince Rupert is warranted quite apart from the development of the Peace river country. It is warranted on the ground that it will provide traffic for the Grand Trunk Pacific line to Prince Rupert. More than that, it is a shorter route to the Orient, and are we not trying to develop trade to the Orient every day in the week, and to bring trade back from the Orient, and to do something for the railway line we have already built? I am quite in sympathy with the hon. member for West Edmonton in his desire to get railway facilities out of the Peace river country, and I have advocated it on every occasion. But, I say, quite apart altogether from that, the expenditure on the construction of this elevator is justifiable. If this year we are favoured with a crop such as we had two years ago I make the prediction now that the elevator at Prince Rupert will be full. So far as the cost of construction is concerned, I am not prepared to deal with that because I do not know the details. But I do know that a considerable number of contractors have bid for the work and where there is very strong competition the construction costs must have been kept within reason. As to the location of the elevator at Prince Rupert, it will be needed to take care of the grain trade of Alberta, and undoubtedly there will be grain grown in British Columbia in that large area north of and along the Grand Trunk Pacific line. True, 
it is not a paying proposition now, but if we do not provide facilities it never will be a paying proposition. When that Peace river country comes into its own and has an outlet, then not only the elevator at present proposed but perhaps another one at that point will be required.


Robert James Manion: I come from a section of the country where there are a great many elevators-the greatest elevator centre in the world is at the head of the lakes-and I have been listening to the discussion here to-night with a good deal of interest. At the same time I cannot help remembering that nearly all the elevators comprising the 65,000,000 bushel capacity at the head of the lakes were built by private capital. In other words, according to my experience-and it extends over many years at the head of the lakes- wherever grain elevators have been required for the business of the country, private capital has been only too happy to build them. Therefore it seems to me that if there was really a demand for an elevator at Prince Rupert private capital would have been ready to come forward for that purpose. There is no doubt that there is no line of business that has done so well as the grain handling business; I admit frankly that it has done very much better than the grain growing business. My hon. friends to my left will agree with me there, if they do not often agree with me in other respects. I do not wish to be put upon record as opposing the building of an elevator at Prince Rupert if it is needed, but I am making these observations after having listened to the discussion for some time. The argument that the elevator at Prince Rupert gives a closer route to the Orient by 400 miles is of very little importance. You can carry freight from New York to Calcutta at the same rate as from New York to Bombay, although there is a difference of 2,000 miles, and many other instances of the same kind could be given. Once a cargo is on a ship, a matter of a few hundred miles one way or the other makes no difference in the rate at which the cargo is carried. The Minister of the Interior stated that the eievator at Edmonton justified itself. I am not sure as to that. I do not wish to dispute his word, but I do know that some of the internal elevators, the ones at Saskatoon and Moose Jaw, are stated by the report of the grain commission to have been of no particular use. Certainly we might well have allowed private enterprise to meet any demand for an expenditure of this kind. At any rate the sensible attitude would appear to have

Supply-Trade and Commerce
been, to build at first a small elevator at Prince Rupert and see if it could get any trade. The idea of building an elevator of a capacity of 1,300,000 bushels at Prince Rupert and then carrying the grain 250 miles further-


Thomas Andrew Low: My hon. friend knows that to build an elevator of a capacity of five or six hundred thousand bushels would cost within a hundred thousand dollars of an elevator with a capacity of a million bushels.


Robert James Manion: I hardly agree with that. Before the war the prices of elevators were graded according to the number of bushels storage capacity. I admit that a small elevator might cost a little more in proportion, but I should not think it would be anything like what my hon. friend suggests. So it might have been much wiser for the government to make the experiment by building a much smaller elevator, and then if very little traffic went through, there would not have been the same loss. However, I presume the vote will go through and1 I suppose it is our duty to make the best of it. But it seems to me in these times of heavy expenditure in all lines we might, well spend some of this money in the carrying out of better methods than those we are now following.


Mr. EVANS:: The argument of the Minister of the Interior is not very good. The grain that blocked Vancouver two years ago will not be hauled from that area to Prince Rupert in any case.


Charles A. Stewart: Part of it will.


John Evans: Prince Rupert has been proved to be over 190 miles farther from that area than Vancouver now.


Charles A. Stewart: My hon. friend forgets that there is a portion of northern Alberta that is just as close to Prince Rupert as it is to Vancouver.


John Evans: It is questionable whether the grain from the Peace river country will find its easiest outlet to Prince Rupert in any case. According to the minister's own statement, the first time there is a heavy crop in Alberta the result will be a block at Vancouver. I should say that Port Mann would be the natural place to build an elevator to serve the Peace river valley and that part of Alberta which has been referred to.


Charles A. Stewart: I understand there is one under construction at Port Mann.


John Evans: Why build this elevator away out of the reach of the grain route? It will be nothing but an expense on the grain trade and will add to the load carried by an already over-burdened industry. With regard to the elevators at. Saskatoon and Moose Jaw, I can state, I think with some authority, that when the Hudson Bay railway is built these two elevators will be used to their full capacity, but the Prince Rupert elevator will be nothing more than a white elephant for many years to come.


Thomas George McBride: It was not my intention to say anything on this question, but now that the Peace river district has been brought into the discussion it may not be out of place for me to say a few words. I can remember when the elevator was built at Vancouver. It was not used for quite a length of time-in fact I have often heard people call it "Stevens' white elephant'- but that elevator has proven its worth.


Henry Herbert Stevens: Showing the foresight of the member.


Thomas George McBride: It proved the foresight of the hon. member for Vancouver Centre in anticipating what ought to be done. If I were asked the question "Is the elevator at Prince Rupert before its time?" I would not want to say but that, perhaps, it is just a little previous. But when I look back at the effect the building of the elevator at Vancouver has had on that city I must say that I think Prince Rupert is entitled to consideration. Vancouver is not the only city on which the sun shines; there are other places entitled to elevators as well as Vancouver.
It has been said by one of the hon. members from Alberta that he has brought the Peace river district to the notice of the hon. Minister of Railways (Mr. Graham) a great number of times. I frankly admit that he has; but if the Minister of Railways would figure out the number of times I have called on him and advocated the opening up of the Peace river country I think he would admit that I have brought it up a good many times also. When I think of that vast empire up there in the northern portion of Britjsh Columbia I do not think any government is doing justice to the people of Canada as a whole in not giving that country an outlet; and I say that section of the Grand Trunk Pacific will never be on a paying basis until there is an outlet from the Peace river connecting up somewhere near Vanderhoof or Prince George. I have enough confidence in the Minister of Railways, to justify me in the belief that such an outlet will be built in the near future. An outlet ha3
Supply-Trade and Commerce

been advocated for quite a number of years by way of Brule. I have always opposed that for the reason that the route from Brule to Grande Prairie would traverse barren country and a very expensive country to build a railway through, whereas the other route, for the greater part of the distance, would run through a good agricultural district. As to the cost of clearing the land in the Peace river country I heard one hon. gentleman say it would amount t,o $35 an acre. I would say that the cost of clearing land for the average homestead in the Peace river country would not be $2.50 an acre; in fact the greater part of the country is prairie land, with an amount of light timber on it. Taking all these matters into consideration, and recollecting what happened in the case of the Vancouver elevator, I think the government is justified in going on now with the construction of the elevator at Prince Rupert in that it has already been started.


Donald Ferdinand Kellner: Some little time ago I asked the minister the cost of the construction of the elevator leaving out the foundations. I think he looked it up and I should like to have the information.


Thomas Andrew Low: Deducting the cost of the
foundation, which amounts to $222,000, and of the trackage, trestle and fill, $60,000, from the estimated cost of $1,329,000 it would leave $1,047,000. I notice that my hon. friend from Vancouver Centre has another question to ask.


Henry Herbert Stevens: I should like to ask the minister if it is intended to equip this elevator with patent car dumps, and if so what are they called?


Thomas Andrew Low: The three elevator unloading tracks will have capacity for spotting fifty-four cars at one time on through trackage. The unloading facilities will consist of six track unloading pits equipped with power shovels, and two receiving legs.


Henry Herbert Stevens: There are not to be any car dumps?


Thomas Andrew Low: Not at present, no.


Henry Herbert Stevens: I understood they were
provided for in the specifications.


Thomas Andrew Low: No, I do not think car dumpers are provided for. However, I will look over the specifications.


Henry Herbert Stevens: I think we ought to know that. I understood it was provided for in the specifications. Surely the minister can tell me. There is a marked difference between these car dumps and power shovels.


Thomas Andrew Low: No, there are no car dumpers.


George Gibson Coote: Before the item passes I
should like to say that I am tempted by the remarks of the Minister of the Interior to point out that we are liable to have a congestion on the Pacific coast any year when we get a big crop in Alberta . Two years ago it only took two weeks to fill the elevators at several of the shipping points in southern Alberta, and then we could not ship any more grain to Vancouver. I think the Minister of the Interior is probably right when he says that a congestion of the elevators at Vancouver will make grain go to Prince Rupert. Personally I think it is following an unnatural route in going to Prince Rupert. However, all I want to say is this: I think it is very poor policy on the part of the government to construct this elevator at Prince Rupert before building one at Port Mann. I think the elevator at Port Mann would be used immediately it was completed and to its fullest capacity, because even during last winter we could not ship our grain to Vancouver without a permit, the elevators there being full to capacity most of the time. I think this shows what the country suffers through the old party system of government which seems to compel the government to build elevators, and other public works, for political instead of economic reasons.


Robert Gardiner: When the item for the
building of the foundation of this elevator was under discussion last year I called the attention of the minister to the fact that in my opinion the structure would have no value until such time as an outlet was given from the Peace river district. I must confess that I supported the item last year, but I did so more or less on the general understanding that an outlet for the Peace river district would 'be provided within a reasonable period. I regret very much, Mr. Chairman, that we have no information before us at the present time that would lead us to believe that such an outlet will be given in the near future. I should like to support the remarks that have been made by more than one member to-night in reference to' the situation at Port Mann. I think if this elevator had been built it would have been of more advantage to the farmers of western Canada. On the other hand the elevator at Prince Rupert could have been built when it really was required. However, in view of the fact that the government has decided otherwise I must content myself by saying that I regret this money seems to me to have been wasted for the time being.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.

Supply-Trade and Commerce
Canada and the West Indies and South America, or both service or services between, $340,668.66.
Thomas Andrew Low: The contract has been renewed with the Royal Mail Steam Packet Company until the 30th June, pending the conference which is to be held in the city of Ottawa. After that conference we will decide just what to do in connection with the subsidy.


Edward Joseph Garland: I have in
mind the discussion which took place on this item last year, the year before and the year before that. It was pointed out to the minister then in charge that the boats under contract did not comply with the treaty regulations with the West Indies. They are old, out-of-date boats, some of them 'built over thirty-five years ago. They have whiskers on their joints and on their keels. Talk about the Canadian Government Merchant Marine; these boats are prehistoric dreams compared with the Canadian Government Merchant Marine. They have not the speed requirements, the passenger accommodation, the tonnage, the warehouse facilities or the cold storage facilities required. They have not a single thing provided for in the treaty, and yet the government persists :in continuing the subsidies. Before this item is carried to-night, I would like the minister to give the committee some justification for the renewal of this subsidy to Pickf.ord & Black.


Thomas Andrew Low: One of the most important
subjects to be discussed at the conference next June is the question of transportation, and until we have had that conference no change will be made in the service. There is no question that the boats that are in the service at the present time do not comply with the spirit of the contract, or the trade agreement made in 1920. After the conference we will 'be in a better position to decide upon a policy.


Edward Joseph Garland: I wish to
reiterate my protest of previous years against the people of this country being asked to grant a subsidy to a privately owned, foreign steamship company, running in competition with our Canadian Government Merchant Marine. Is it any wonder we have deficits and difficulties? The hon. member for Cumberland (Mr. Logan) who made a trip to the West Indies made a magnificent speech in the House this session in connection with trade and commerce. I desire to say that I am anxious to see our trade develop, and I absolutely agree with my hon. friend in the conclusion he arrived at, that if Canada wishes to develop trade in the West Indies we can
do it without spending a dollar on steamships, by simply taking down the trade barriers that exist between Canada and the West Indies, no matter what they do in that country. We do not grow articles in Canada which they grow down there, and we are not producing the things which they produce. Our manufacturers do not fear competition. Let us adopt the principle of reciprocal trade, if not free trade, and then it will not be necessary to subsidize privately owned steamship lines.


George Gibson Coote: What is the reason for
paying this subsidy? Is it not because there is not sufficient traffic between the two countries?


Thomas Andrew Low: I do not think it would be
possible to have this service without the subsidy.


William Thomas Lucas: Is there not a number of
merchant marine vessels plying on this trade now?


Thomas Andrew Low: Two or three freight boats
but no passenger boats.


George Gibson Coote: Are these mail packet boats specially fitted for passenger service?


Thomas Andrew Low: Yes they are.


George Gibson Coote: How long has this government been paying a subsidy to these boats?


Thomas Andrew Low: Since the end of 1913.


George Gibson Coote: Was there any subsidy paid
before that time to any line of boats?


Thomas Andrew Low: Yes, it amounted to a little over


Edward Joseph Garland: Could the minister tell the House the total cost to date of the subsidy in order to maintain this West India service?


Thomas Andrew Low: About $5,000,000 in the last thirty years.


Henry Herbert Stevens: Will the minister give us the items which ,go to make up this $340,000, a list of the steamships that are receiving the subvention, Where they run and the period of
their service?


Thomas Andrew Low: There are four steamers, and they Sail from St. John to Halifax, thence to Georgetown, British Guiana, every fourteen days, calling at the islands of Bermuda, St. Kitts, Antigua, Montserrat and Barbados, St. Vincent and Trinidad, and return from Georgetown to St. John, calling at ail the islands in the reverse order.
Supply-Trade and Commerce


Henry Herbert Stevens: Four ships?


Thomas Andrew Low: Yes.


Henry Herbert Stevens: What ships are they?


Thomas Andrew Low: The Chignecto, the Chaleur, the Chaud'iere and the Teviot. The tonnages are: 4,744, 4,746, 4,019 and 3,270.


Henry Herbert Stevens: Gross tonnage?


Thomas Andrew Low: Yes.


Henry Herbert Stevens: Very small boats.


Thomas Andrew Low: Yes.


Henry Herbert Stevens: Do they comply with the terms of the trade agreement with the West Indies?


Thomas Andrew Low: No.


Henry Herbert Stevens: Are we then in default on that agreement?


Thomas Andrew Low: We are, so far as this service is concerned.


Henry Herbert Stevens: Would it not be better to turn this subsidy over to the Canadian Government Merchant Marine, and use the merchant marine ships?


Thomas Andrew Low: I do not think we Could use the boats as they are at present. It would require considerable expenditure on those boats to make them suitable for the service.


Henry Herbert Stevens: We have a number of Canadian Government Merchant Marine ships larger than these and some smaller tied up for three or four years. We have been paying a subsidy of $340,000 a year. We could have taken half of that subsidy and fitted up one or two of these ships at a time, put them into condition, then paid the balance of the subsidy and handed it back into our own treasury, instead of paying it out to these lines. It strikes me we should examine into the possibilities of utilizing the merchant marine ships on routes that we are now subsidizing, and the same argument applies to some of the other subventions to which we will come in a moment. I submit this to the government. I think it ought to ]?e carefully studied, not only studied but acted upon, and thus save to the country a considerable sum. In the first place, the minister states that we are not fulfilling the treaty or trade arrangement with the West Indies. I want to say, however, at this point, that the trade arrangement with the West Indies has resulted in a substantial increase in trade which I think is of value to Canada and justifies the making of the agreement. But we ought to try to discharge our obligations in regard thereto. I know the

minister has not listened to me, but what I have said I think is pertinent to the question, and I hope, although it is a vain hope, that he will read in Hansard to-morrow what I have said.


Donald MacBeth Kennedy: What will the cost be of fitting up some of the merchant marine freight boats for carrying passengers?


Thomas Andrew Low: I have no idea, but at the
moment, they are not properly equipped.


Donald MacBeth Kennedy: One year's subsidy would nearly build a new ship.


Edward Joseph Garland: The minister's last confession is an amazing one in view of the fact that as long ago as three years I asked for that very information, and we were put off with: "We will try to find it-out for the hon. member," and "I will make a note of it and give the hon. member the information later." But they never bother about it. It is the same old farce of party politics again.


Robert Gardiner: Did the Canadian Government Merchant Marine boats gain or lose money on this route last year?


Thomas Andrew Low: I have no information on that subject in the Department of Trade and Commerce. No doubt the Minister of Railways and Canals (Mr. Graham), if he were in his seat, would be able to tell the hon. member.


Robert Gardiner: To what time will this vote carry this service? To June only?


Thomas Andrew Low: To the end of June of this year. It is on the basis of a twelve months' contract, and the contract has been renewed only to the end of June. If the same service is to be performed, or if after the conference it is decided to change the service and a larger vote is required for that, we shall have to bring it down in the supplementary estimates. The matter will be decided at the conference.


Robert Gardiner: Would it not be just as well to let this item stand until the conference is held? What is the use of passing this item now and the minister having to come back to the House again with a supplementary estimate for the fulfilment of this service?


Thomas Andrew Low: I do not think it makes a great deal of difference. We may have to increase this vote.


William Thomas Lucas: With whom is this conference being held in June?

Supply-Trade and Commerce


Thomas Andrew Low: With all the West Indian representatives who are expected here on the 19th June.


Edward Joseph Garland: I am alarmed at the threat of the minister, for I regard it as nothing but a threat that he will likely have to increase this item. I have pointed out the way in which he, in carrying out the pledge of his own party, can develop trade with the West Indies, and his own commissioner, the hon. member for Cumberland (Mr. Logan) has made the same statement in this House this session. I have no doubt that I am absolutely within all bounds of reason in supporting the attitude of the hon. member for Cumberland. I shall oppose with all my strength any increase in the subsidy to a privately owned steamship line. Let us use our own boats. Let us fit them up if that is necessary. Let us subsidize our own merchant marine instead of subsidizing individuals to put on privately-owned, especially foreign-owned boats in competition with our own vessels.


George Gibson Coote: What was the subsidy first paid to steamers between Canada and the West Indies?


Thomas Andrew Low: I have not the amount of the first subsidy that was paid thirty years ago. I have only back to the year 1914, eleven years ago, when the subsidy was the same as it is at the present time.


George Gibson Coote: Apparently the subsidy grows as the traffic grows. I understand the idea of giving these subsidies was to develop trade which in time would become self supporting. Evidently that is not the policy. In this case, the bigger the trade, the bigger the subsidy! What is the minister's estimate of the amount he will have to pay in subsidies if he subsidizes privately-owned ships which will be of a nature that they will fulfil our treaty obligations with the West Indies?


Thomas Andrew Low: About $535,000.


George Gibson Coote: If thait is so, this seems to be almost as bad as the proposed Petersen .contract. It would amount to about $140,000 per ship per annum, as I understood the minister to say that there were four ships. I do not believe the people of Canada would stand for this subsidy if they really realized what was going on. I did not realize before the size of the subsidy we were paying for each ship that was on this service. According to the statement .made 'by the hon. member for Bow river (Mr. Garland), which the minister has
apparently not attempted to deny, the boats are not up-tordate boats, they are obsolete and not fitted for .the trade. I am very much opposed' to passing this item with the information we have at the present time.


Thomas Andrew Low: This is an agreement entered into in 1920 and we are simply attempting to carry out its terms. The last offer we had for a service that would meet the requirements of that agreement was $535,000.


Donald Ferdinand Kellner: The agreement that the .minister speaks of now expires this June?
Mr, LOW:	The contract with the Royal
Mail Steam Packet Company is simply from year to year, but the trade agreement was for ten years.


James Shaver Woodsworth: When does the
present contract for this service expire?


Thomas Andrew Low: At the end of June of this year.
M.r. WOODSWORTH:	No contract is
signed beyond June of this year?


Thomas Andrew Low: No.


Robert Gardiner: Do the Royal Mail
Steam Packet Company that get this subsidy submit statements to show the business and the losses annually?


Thomas Andrew Low: They do.


Robert Gardiner: This subsidy that is paid to them annually would be sufficient, according to statements that I have received and that appear authoritative, to build a ship of almost 7,000 tons. Vessels .on the route at present are of about 4,000 tone. It seems to be very foolish policy to continue paying a subsidy to private concerns -that are running in competition, to some extent at least, with our merchant .marine, when we might as well have Canada's ,own vessels in the trade, and it would appear to be about as cheap to build new vessels if that is necessary than to go on paying this steamship subsidy to other concerns.


George Gibson Coote: Has the minister consulted with officials of the government -merchant marine las to how much it would cost to fit out some of the smaller merchant marine boats for -this trade?


Thomas Andrew Low: That whole question will be discussed at the conference. We have not consulted the -merchant .marine as to fitting up any of the present vessels. I am not sure whether any -of them could be fitted up for passenger service.
3534.

Supply-Trade and Commerce
M.r. WOODSWORTH: What amount will be necessary to pay this company now to bring it up to the end of the present contract?


Thomas Andrew Low: One quarter of the vote.


Robert Gardiner: What was the profit or loss of this concern on this route?


Thomas Andrew Low: That is confidential.


Robert Gardiner: Can the minister give
not even a hint?


William Irvine: Is it the intention of the
minister to renew this contract?


Thomas Andrew Low: That question will be discussed at the conference and until the conference has been held it is impossible to say what will be done.


William John Ward: Has the government no
policy at all on this question? The thing is becoming more amazing as we go on. The question of subsidies has been under discussion in this House during the last four years and in previous sessions we have had discussions similar to that which has taken place to-night. Surely the government must have realized that the point would be reached some day when they would have to face the matter more squarely than they have done in the past. The minister must have some policy up his sleeve.


Thomas Andrew Low: In 1920, an agreement was
entered into with the West Indies whereby we undertook to perform certain services. In the meantime we must at least attempt to carry out our part of it.


Edward Joseph Garland: The terms of the treaty have never been complied1 with by either the West Indies or Canada. Canada has not supplied the necessary service, and the Leeward, Windiward and other islands have not only complained but have objected to paying their share of the cost. The minister's department has had protest after protest from the governments of the West Indies in connection with this matter, and the West Indies are defaulting now where the Canadian government defaulted in the past. How can the minister urge that it was to maintain the treaty that this thing had to be gone on with? A year or two ago he would have found the West Indies tickled to death to scrap the whole thing until they could get better boats on the route.


Thomas Andrew Low: That is one of the reasons we have called the conference-in order to reach some decision.


Edward Joseph Garland: I would
urge on the minister that at the conference, in the interests of Canada, in the interests of the merchant marine under his own department, he fights awfully shy of subsidies to private concerns. Let the minister use the boats of the Canadian Government merchant marine; let him improve those boats or even, as the hon. member for West Edmonton (Mr. Kennedy) has said, let him build boats.
-Mr. IRVINE:	Would it aid the government in coming to a decision on this matter if the committee merely voted as much as is required to meet the contracts now in force, and no more?


James Shaver Woodsworth: I was about to
move, along that line, that item 159 be reduced by the sum of $255,000. It seems to me that in view of the fact that this matter has been discussed for the last three years at least; that we have endeavoured again and again to have the policy of the government changed; that we believe it is utterly vicious in principle to subsidize a line to operate in competition with our own merchant marine; and in view of the fact also that the minister has informed us to-night that a conference has been called to discuss the whole matter, there is no better opportunity for us to call a halt and to register our protest against the continuance of the subsidy and to ask that the policy be completely changed.


George Perry Graham: I would ask the committee to be fully seized of the attitude they are taking on this question. The difficulty is not at all in striking out a subsidy. As a matter of fact, we have certain treaty obligations with the West Indies, just as the British government has. These steamers are not competing with our marine so far as passenger traffic is concerned because the Canadian merchant marine has only a limited passenger capacity. We are now on the eve of an arrangement with the West Indies which we trust will be beneficial to both countries. Would it not then be unwise, by striking out the estimate, to abandon the method by which we are approximating this agreement with the West Indies? I do not say that we are fully living up to those treaty obligations, because we have had such an upheaval in the world that this among other things has in a measure been overlooked. But in a few weeks' time representatives of the West Indies will be coming to Canada to discuss the whole situation, and it may be that out of the conference there will evolve something in the direction of better steamship facilities with the West Indies which will not carry a

Supply-Trade and Commerce
subsidy with it. But it would hardly have any beneficial effect, while we are negotiating with them, to cripple further the facilities which at present obtain in the service between Canada and the West Indies. With me, it is not a question of striking out a subsidy; I have no interest in the Pickford & Black steamships. But these steamers are assisting in carrying out our obligations, and until we arrive at some satisfactory agreement I do not think it would be wise to adopt such a course as is now suggested.


Edward Joseph Garland: I would
suggest to the minister that probably he would be able to enter that conference in June with much freer hands and a clearer brain, and under much less influence-although I have no idea that he would be influenced-if he cut himself adrift from this subsidy before the conference takes place. It would be the best thing for the country if this were done. The minister raises the issue of treaty obligations; but as I pointed out, the treaty obligations have been broken on both sides, and the present state of affairs is a source of irritation between the West Indies and Canada. As regards passenger accommodation, no man who wants to make a business trip to the West Indies is going to waste his time on a Pickford & Black eleven-knot old wreck of a schooner; he will go to New York or Montreal and take a fast boat. Business men have no time to waste in winter tours. As a matter of fact, the whole idea in the subsidy is to provide some nice well-off gentleman with a pleasing manner of spending a winter holiday. It is a nice long tour. As the member for Cumberland indicated, it certainly takes a longer time than any member in this House could spare for business purposes.


Henry Lumley Drayton: Mr. Chairman,
I have been out for some time and do not know exactly what has happened in my absence, but we have been discussing this matter at considerable length in the committee on Railways and Shipping, and the view has been pretty generally held that we ought to strengthen the Canadian Government Merchant Marine. Unfortunately we have no boats at the present time which are fitted for this work.


Edward Joseph Garland: Refrigerator space might be supplied.


Henry Lumley Drayton: It would take
some time.


William Thomas Lucas: What in the estimation of
the hon. member for West York (Sir Henry 226
Drayton) would it cost to fix one of these boats for passenger traffic?


Henry Lumley Drayton: We have already fixed two of them and they are able to carry thirty-five passengers. They have two good cabins, the rest are very poor and very small. These boats are each about thirty-five hundred tons. None of the boats in the West Indian trade are properly fixed for cold storage. We happen to have on hand in connection with the Canadian Government Merchant, Marine about $1,200,000 or $1,400,000, representing insurance which was paid upon some of the boats that were lost. This fund is in the hands of trustees, and the committee thought that the best thing to do was to get authority to use the money in providing boats to look after both passenger and freight business, but this would take some tittle time. The people on the islands, rightly or wrongly, think there should be a passenger service. I do not think we stressed the tourist business, I am frank in saying that; but on the other hand a great asset of the islands lies in their tourist business, and they are inclined to insist on it. We are doing fairly well with them in trade. At one time eighty-five per cent of the flour sold in Jamaica was American; as a result of the agreement of 1919-the minister will correct me if I am wrong-seventy-five per cent of the flour now sold there is Canadian. I think we should dlo nothing to disturb the situation until we get together. We are in default now. We want to get further concessions in their markets, and I think we are perfectly willing to give them further concessions in ours, but I do not think in the meantime we should give them any added cause of grievance in connection with this service.


George Gibson Coote: Could the minister give us
any reason why we should pay a subsidy for passenger service between here and the West Indies? To me it seems unreasonable.


Thomas Andrew Low: The subsidy is to cover passenger, freight and mail services, not passenger service alone.


George Gibson Coote: Is that all the reason the
minister can give us why we should pay a subsidy for passenger service?


Thomas Andrew Low: It would be impossible to develop trade without this subsidized line. As I understand it, the agreement was entered into in 1920 because it was necessary to provide a transportation service. Otherwise the islands would not have entered into any arrangement with us.



Supply-Trade and Commerce


George Gibson Coote: Does the minister mean that the islands would not have entered into the agreement unless we agreed to provide a passenger service?


Thomas Andrew Low: The passenger service is part
of the agreement.


George Gibson Coote: What I am trying to get at is, why we agreed to pay a subsidy for a passenger service. I may not have made myself clear to the minister, but that is the information I wish to get from him.


Thomas Andrew Low: The subsidy is more particularly to cover freight service.


George Gibson Coote: Yes; but when we suggest
that the merchant marine might be used, the reply of the minister is that they have not any passenger accommodation. Now I ask why should we enter into an agreement to subsidize a passenger service?


Henry Lumley Drayton: Mr. Chairman, the hon. gentleman was not on the committee and did not hear Sir Henry Thornton. He was pressed why we could not do all this at once. His view was that many of our boats were not suitable for the business, and that those which were suitable were already doing useful work in the Pacific coastal trade and in trade with the Orient and Australia. He wanted to be given time to look into the matter with a view to seeing just what he could do, and he was assured of the committee's full support to go ahead, but so far we have not heard anything from him. I understand, however, that the cabinet are to take the whole matter up this summer with representatives of the Canadian Government Merchant Marine and of the islands.


William Irvine: How much trade does the minister think we would 'have to develop in order to return a profit to the Canadian people of $340,000, the amount of the subsidy?


Thomas Andrew Low: I am sure my hon. friend is in a position to make that estimate just as well as I am.


William Irvine: Have we arrived there now?


John Evans: The minister (Mr. Low) has told us that this contract ends in June. Will the Minister of Railways (Mr. Graham) inform us in what way we are bound by treaty with the West Indies to make it imperative that we pass this full vote?


George Perry Graham: I did not say it was
imperative, for this parliament can do anything it likes; but as a matter of fact there is a treaty between the West Indies and

Canada providing for certain passenger and freight salings at regular intervals.


John Evans: But that ends in June, does it not?


George Perry Graham: No, the trade agreement does not end in June; but, as pointed out by the hon. member for Bow River (Mr. Garland) the carrying out of this treaty obligation has become unsatisfactory to both parties. We believe that we can develop a much greater trade with the West Indies by sitting down around a table and talking over frankly with their representatives the whole situation. As the member for West York (Sir Henry Drayton) pointed out, it would not be wise-and that is my opinion-at the present time to do something else that would, to put it mildly, irritate the West Indian people when we are on the very eve of having a conference with them with the object of making a new arrangement that will be advantageous to us both. There is no question in the world that one of the first things to come up at that conference will be better steamship connection between the West Indies and Canada. While we are at the present time, and have been for years, carrying on this subsidized service, I think, even though we perhaps do not approve of this subsidy -and I agree largely with the statement that the ships in their present condition are not worthy of a very great subsidy-yet we have had this service running for some years, and right within a few weeks of the time of our meeting the West Indian representatives to discuss this whole situation, my humble opinion is that it would be unwise to do anything that would stir up any difficulty on this question of transportation, Which to my mind, will be even paramount in our discussion to the question of tariff or anything of that kind.


David Spence: While I agree with the
principle of getting away from subsidies, I am afraid I cannot vote for the amendment. I know that a number of people are coming here from all parts of Canada to the conference on the 19th, people who are well posted, who know what they want, and who will ask for a better class of boats than we have today. The present boats are not equipped with refrigeration or any kind of cooling process and they are entirely inadequate to build up the trade in print between Canada and these countries. I think we had better wait until this conference takes place.


Edward Joseph Garland: I think both the hon. member for Parkdale and the Min-

Supply-Trade and Commerce
ister of Railways have not understood the amendment. The amendment does not affect the contract; it does not cut out the treaty; all it does is to make things safe for the government when tire conference is called so that the government can go into the conference without its hands tied by any contract. We are allowing enough in the vote, according to the minister's own statement, to provide for the fulfilling of the contract to the end of June. What more can we want?
Sir HENRY DR..YTON:	I am against
these votes as a rule, but I am interested in this West Indian business. Here is the trouble we are in: Suppose we had what the committee on National Railways and Shipping wanted-all this business with the Canadian National; Sir Henry Thornton would say that the Canadian National should have exactly that subsidy, or more; that it is unfair to ask a publicly operated service to carry on where a private service cannot make a profit. I know what a good market it is for us down there if we can really get hold of it, and what a splendid thing it would be if we could get a direct service between Canada and these countries and from the United Fruit; Company of the United States. It would be a splendid thing for us if we could get those fruits without that restriction. These people are willing to do all their business with us but they cannot do it so long as the great white fleet gives them a service which is far ahead of anything we are giving them. And Sir Henry Thornton, if he is going to give them anything like an adequate service, will want this subsidy.


George Gibson Coote: I would point out to the
hon. member for West York that we are all interested in this contract. We are interested now to the extent of $5,000,000. The minister admits that the boats now in the service, which are receiving the subsidy, are obsolete. It is right that we should be interested in it, and if we do not take some steps to get the cabinet interested in it I suppose they will go on paying this subsidy forever and the people of Canada will go on licking stamps to put on their notes. We are preaching economy to the people; let us not set them a bad example by failing to practise it ourselves. I wish to ask the minister with whom this contract is made and to whom this money is being paid at present.


Thomas Andrew Low: The Royal Mail Steam Packet Company.
Amendment (Mr. Woodsworth) negatived; Yeas, 13; Nays, 56.
22&i


George Newcombe Gordon: I declare the item
carried, same vote.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Canada and South Africa, steam service between,
George Gibson Coote: How many ships are in this service?	*


Thomas Andrew Low: The subsidy is $25,000 less than last year. The contract is with the Elder Dempster Company. It is for a monthly service during the first fifteen days of each month, sailing from Montreal and calling at Quebec. During the months of September, October and November, the calls are at Halifax, but during the winter months the sailings are from St. John, calling at Halifax.


George Gibson Coote: How many millions have
been spent on this service since it was inaugurated?


Thomas Andrew Low: I am sorry I have not the
figures before me. I may say that as a result of this arrangement we supply about 75 per cent of the paper market of South Africa, and during the last ten years there has been little or no increase in the rates. Exports to South Africa in 1923 amounted to $5,583,390; 1924, $8,019,853; for the fiscal year ended March 31, 1925, $9,276,502. am increase of almost 100 per cent in the last two years.


George Gibson Coote: Are we still paying the same subsidy?


Thomas Andrew Low: No. The subsidy was reduced last year and again this year, and we hope gradually to wipe it out.


George Gibson Coote: Are there any government merchant marine boats on this route?


Thomas Andrew Low: No.


George Gibson Coote: Are these the only boats trading between Canada and South Africa?


Thomas Andrew Low: Yes.


William Irvine: It appears to me that according to this principle or lack of principle, of subsidizing, that the Canadian people are being taxed to ship goods to other countries, to the extent that they are paying more than really the whole traffic is worth in some instances, I should like to ask the minister how long he thinks Canada can be taxed to ship goods to other countries?


Thomas Andrew Low: In selling these goods we create employment in this country, and I think the spending of $100,000 to increase our exports by 100 per cent is a good investment.

Supply-Trade and Commerce


William Irvine: Will the minister say that the trade to South Africa has created enough extra employment in Canadla to pay for the amount of the taxes required for the subsidy?


Thomas Andrew Low: I think so.


William Irvine: Are you sure of that? What are the figures?


George Newcombe Gordon: Shall the item carry?


George Gibson Coote: I should like to ask the minister if he would mind giving me the figures I asked him for as to the total amount that has been paid out on this service?


Thomas Andrew Low: I shall be glad to get that information for my hon. friend.


Henry Lumley Drayton: I would suggest that this is an appropriate time to adjourn.
Progress reported.
On motion of Mr. Mackenzie King the House adjourned at 11.55 p.m.
Tuesday, May 26, 1925