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

Mr. DESLAURIERS:: 1.	Has the government any knowledge that the Dominion Glass Company imports from the United States goods under item " unfinished article " when these are finished articles, and, that labels made in the United States are removed from the goods and those made in Canada substituted in its factory at Toronto, and that it distributes to the public said goods as thus received?
2.	If so, is the government in a position to prevent this state of affairs which is contrary to the best interests of the Canadian workmen?


Hon. Mr. COPP:: The government have
not the information to answer No. 1, and the answer will therefore be, No.


CANADIAN NATIONAL RAILWAYS-TONNAGE
Sir HENRY DRAYTON:: 1.	What are the monthly percentages of tonnage originating in the different provinces on the Canadian National Railways and affiliated companies to the total traffic of the year for each of the years 1923 and 1924?

Questions


Hon. Mr. LOW:: 


CANADIAN NATIONAL RAILWAYS
[Stage Direction]
Per cent of total revenue traffic for year originated in each province each month
Province	Jan.	Feb.	Mar.	1923 Apr.	May	June	July	Aug.	Sept.	Oct.	Nov.	Dec.Prince Edward Island.. ..	.. .01	.01	.01	.03	.04	.03	.02	.02	.02	.03	.06	.03Nova Scotia	.. .39	.44	.54	.50	.58	.50	.36	.42	.41	.44	.45	.30New Brunswick	.. .33	.34	.34	.55	.21	.43	.36	.36	.34	.36	.32	.28Quebec	.. 1.10	.93	1.12	1.43	1.07	1.S2	2.08	1.66	1.80	1.59	1.45	1.16Ontario.. .. '	.. 2.74	2.42	2.77	2.92	2.95	3.81	3.87	4.01	3.99	4.50	3.83	2.99Manitoba	.. .49	.36	.58	.49	.32	.53	.45	.47	.85	.85	.64	.46Saskatchewan	.. .76	.45	.83	.88	.92	.57	.43	.28	1.07	2.86	2.52	2.23Alberta	.. .91	.90	.60	.47	.38	.37	.34	.48	.60	1.49	1.80	1.66British Columbia	.. .11	.09	.12	.11	.14	.16	.18	.14	.17	.18	.15	.12Prince Edward Island.. ..	.. .02	.02	.03	1924 .02	.03	.03	.02	.02	.02	.05	.08	.03Nova Scotia	.. .32	.26	.45	.45	.45	.39	.41	.39	.40	.43	.39	.36New Brunswick	.. .31	.42	.52	.46	.37	.31	.33	.31	.30	.35	.33	.29Quebec	.. 1.08	1.20	1.65	1.50	1.65	1.73	1.71	1.57	1.68	1.72	1.33	1.21Ontario	.. 2.75	2.96	3.45	2.67	3.14	2.99	2.91	3.09	3.83	4.77	3.67	2.96Manitoba	.. .37	.47	.53	.39	.46	.52	.41	.37	.69	1.16	.91	.46Saskatchewan	.. 1.00	.74	.67	.71	1.14	1.62	1.10	.30	.36	1.79	1.72	1.12Alberta	.. 1.76	1.17	.96	.82	.87	.74	.77	.41	.68	1.19	1.74	1.59British Columbia	.. .10	.10	.13	.14	.16	.13	.13	.14	.16	.20	.16	.14

Mr. GOULD:: Referring to question No. 21 on the order paper of the 27th day of February, 1925, partly answered as follows by Minister of Trade and Commerce,
'' One report of a special nature had been received in 1924, and has not been printed
1.	Why was the special report submitted in 1924, not printed?
2.	Are there any other reports from Dr. Birchard
available?
3.	If so, how many, and on what dates? If not, why?
4.	Did the department ask for any report from the grain testing laboratory at Winnipeg or from Dr. Birchard during the years 1921, 1922, 1923 and 1924?


Hon. Mr. LOW:: 1.	As stated in part 6 of the answer to question No. 21 on the order paper of February 27, 1925, referred to above, the report referred to has not yet been printed, as it was referred to Dr. H. M. Tory, Chairman of the Honorary Advisory Council for Scientific and Industrial Research for consideration as to the value and practicability of the work covered therein. Dr. Tory was in the west at the time and stated he desired to discuss the matter further with the minister when he (Dr. Tory) was next in Ottawa. There the matter rests at the moment.
2.	The only reports of Dr. Birchard published were: Report on trial shipments of bulk wheat from Vancouver via the Panama canal to the United Kingdom (1918); and a progress report dated December 31, 1919, covering the work of the Dominion Grain Research Laboratory since its inception in 1918. These were widely distributed at the time, and while there are no copies now available
of the first mentioned, there are a few of the second.
As to the availability of other reports, there are on file numerous progress reports furnished the Board of Grain Commissioners by Dr. Birchard, many of which consist of one or more typewritten pages reciting the work done during the current month, and stating that certain experiments were under way or being continued, but at the time no conclusions could be drawn. Many other lengthy analytical and statistical reports were also sent to the board. There are also reports on file regarding tests made on specific samples furnished Dr. Birchard by the Chief Grain Inspector.
3.	Answered by No. 2.
4.	Dr. Birchard had standing instructions with regard to reports. In April 1914, he was informed by direction of the minister to make a monthly progress report, but no direct requests for reports in the years mentioned were sent to Dr. Birchard from the department, as by the terms of Dr. Birchard's instructions from Sir George Foster, Minister of Trade and Commerce, under date of February 8, 1916, Dr. Birchard was placed under the direction of the Board of Grain Commissioners, with whom he was "to co-operate and report results." Dr. Birchard was further informed that his instructions as to the line of work he was to carry out "would come from the Board of Grain Commissioners."
In 1921, however, the department wrote to Dr. Birchard asking him to revise the proofs of his booklet No. 2, the publication of which had been approved of by the Board of Grain
Questions

Commissioners in July 1920. Two thousand copies of this had been ordered printed in August 1920. It was impossible, however, to get the revised proofs back from Dr. Birchard; hence in November 1921, the department was obliged to instruct the Printing Bureau to cancel the requisition and disperse the type.


REPAIRS TO C.G.S. LAURENTIAN
Hon. Mr. BAXTER:: 1.	Were tenders called for repairs to C.G.S. Lauren-tian about the month of August, 1924, and, if so, when did such tenders close?
2.	What tenders were received, what were the amounts of such tenders and who was the successful tenderer?
3.	Within what time was the work required to be completed ?
4.	When was the work actually completed?


Hon. Mr. CARDIN:: 1.	Yes, in local St. John newspapers. Closed September 13, 1924 at 12 o'clock noon.
2.	Tenders received and amounts of such tenders as follows:-
Woodwork and Caulking.-Chapman & Moore, St. John, N.B., $1,000; Herbert E. Stackhouse, St. John, N.B. $375; Union Foundry and Machine Works, Ltd., St. John, N.B. $350.
Canvas work.-Howard E. Holder, St. John, N.B., $350; George E. Holder, St. John, N.B., $287.
Upholstering work.-Emery's Ltd., St. John, N.B., $74.50.
Iron work.-Wm. Lewis & Son, St. John, N.B., $1,280; Union Foundry and Machine Works, Ltd., St. John, N.B.,	$1,500; St.
John Iron Works, St. John, N.B., $1,800. Painting.-John E. Courtney, St. John, N.B., $185; John Johnston & Son, St. John, N.B., $225; James Huey, St. John, N.B., $268; Red Cross Memorial Workshop, St. John, N.B., $325.
Machinery repairs.-St. John Iron Works, Ltd., St. John, N.B., $440.
Boiler.-St. John Iron Works, Ltd., St. John, N.B., $179.
Painting, Boiler, Ironwork, Machinery and Woodwork repairs.-St. John Dry Dock and Shipbuilding Co., Ltd., St. John, N.B , $4,600.
The successful tenderers were as follows:- Machinery repairs.-St. John Iron Works, $440.
Woodwork and Caulking.-Union Foundry and Machine Works, Ltd., $350.
Canvas work.-George E. Holder, $287. Upholstering work.-Emery's Ltd., $74.50. Painting.-John E. Courtney, $185.
Boiler repairs.-St. John Iron Works, $179. 
Iron work.-Wm, Lewis & Son's tender,-$1,-280 was accepted but they later advised they could not complete work in time specified by the next lowest tenderer the Union Foundry & Machine Works, namely-15 days, therefore the latter tender was accepted their tender price being $1,500. Work completed in 10 days.
3.	In calling for tenders there. was no specified time required for work to be completed; tenderers were asked to state the number of days they would require to complete the work and the firm agreeing to perform the specific work tendered on in the shortest period was given preference, but not until the lower tenderer was offered the contract to be completed by the time specified by his competitor. The various contracts were to be completed within periods ranging from six to fifteen days depending on the extent of the work undertaken.
4.	All contracts completed by November 1, 1924.


BRITISH EMPIRE STEAMSHIP CORPORATION-EMPLOYMENT OP CHINAMEN
Mr. NEILL:: Regarding the 105 Chinamen allowed into Nova Scotia to work on the steamers of the British Empire Steamship Corporation, and for whom a bond of 5105,000 was put up by the said corporation, guaranteeing that the Chinamen would ultimately be checked out of Canada, as stated in this House on April 28, 1924.
Have any of -these men been checked out, or are they all still employed by the said corporation?


Hon. Mr. ROBB:: Ninety-five Chinese, only, have been employed as members of the crews of vessels operated by the British Empire Steel Corporation, Limited, since the deposit of the bond in the sum of $105,000. Of this number, 73 have been passed out of Canada, 5 deserted -at Canadian ports, for which the British Empire Steel Corporation, Limited, have been penalized in the sum of $5,000; and 17 remain as members of the crew of the SS. Rosecastle.
VANCOUVER HARBOUR COMMISSION Mr. BLACK (Yukon):
1.	Do the members of the Vancouver Harbour Commission have to devote their entire time to duties of the harbour board?
2.	Can the Harbour Comissioners have any interest, directly or indirectly, in any firm or corporation dealing with said harbour board?


Hon. Mr. CARDIN:: 1.	No.
2.	By-law No. 8 of the Vancouver Harbour Commissioners, reads as follows:-

Questions
The corporation shall have no dealings of any kind *with any of its members; nor shall any member thereof, or any officer or any person employed by, or in the service of the commissioners, be concerned, directly or indirectly, in any contract that may hereafter be entered into appertaining to any work carried en by the commissioners; but all transactions shall be conducted by and through the secretary or other officer specially authorized, subject to the approval of the commissioners.


KEMPT HEAD WHARF
[Stage Direction]
Mr. HANSON;
1.	What work was done on the Kempt Head wharf, Victoria county, Nova Scotia, during the calendar year 1924?
2.	Was the work done by contract or day labour?
3.	If by contract, who was the contractor, what was the contract price, and were tenders called for?
4.	If more than one tender was received, what were the names of each tenderer and the amount of each tender?
5.	If the work was done by day labour, how many persons were employed, what were their names, what was the rate of wages paid, the number. of days each person worked and the number of horses employed?
6.	If the work was done by day labour, what amount was paid for the different classes of material, to whom and at what rate?
Hon. Mr. KING (Kootenay):: For calendar year 1924
1.	The outer face of wharf reinforced with native dose piling driven along the face and fastened to the cribwork.
2.	Day labour.
3.	Answered by No. 2.
4.	Answered by No. 2.
5.	(a) 8 persons employed;
(to) J. W. McKenzie, Foreman, 28 days at $3.50 per day, $98.00; J. C. Smith, Labourer, 13 days at $2.50 per day, $32.50; James Fraser, Carpenter, 18 days at $3.00 per day, $54.00; Rod. McKenzie, Labourer, 1 day at $2.50 per day, $2.50; J. P. Morrison, Labourer, 4 days at $2.50 per day, $10.00; W. K. Morrison, Labourer, 6 days at $2.50 per day, $15.00; D. M. McKay, Labourer, 5 days at $2.50 per day, $12.50; Thos. McQueen, Labourer, 3 days at $2.50 per day, $7.50;
(c) Eight horses.
6.	D. W. McKay, 243 lineal feet piles 27 x 7 at 10 cents lineal feet, $24.30; John C. Smith, 324 lineal feet piles 27 x 7 at 10 cents lineal feet, $32.40; Wm. Morrison, 324 lineal feet piles 27 x 7 at 10 cents lineal feet, $32.40; J. P. Morrison, 324 lineal feet piles 27 x 7 at 10 cents lineal feet, $32.40; A. K. McKenzie, 500 feet board measure lumber at $26.00 per miles deliverd, $13.00; Rod. McKenzie, 405 lineal feet piles 27 x 7 at 10 cents lineal feet, $40.50;
R. Musgrave & Sons:-
250-J bolts 24", 1,000 at $5.75 cwt, $57 50
1 hook for pile driver	
3	0027 lbs. of 3" trope at 25c. per lb...	6	754 lbs. of 1^" rope at 25 c. per lb...	1	001 keg spikes at 6c. per lb	
6	001-Si6 auger	
1	251	auger crank	
1	252	gallons of paint at $5.50	
11	001 brush	
1	151 gallon oil	
1	70Glasses, 2	
50Prepaid freight	
46


$91 56 INCOME TAX FORMS IN FRENCH
Mr. DOUCET:: 1.	Why does the government refuse to give out forms in French to persons who ask for them at the income tax offices, in Montreal?
2.	Is it the intention of the government to take legal action against these persons who do not fill in the English forms because forms in the French language have been denied them?


Hon. Mr. BUREAU:: 1.	Owing to necessary changes in forms distribution has been delayed but they will be supplied in both languages as formerly at the earliest possible date.
2.	New forms will be ready for distribution in ample time to enable tax payers to comply with requirements of the act.


FISHING LICENSES TO FOREIGNERS
Mr McQUARRIE:: 1.	Has the Japanese government made any representations to the Canadian government in reference to the limitation of fishing licenses to other than white British subjects and Indians?
2.	If so, what are the particulars of such representations ?
3.	What reply, if any, has the Canadian government sent to the Japanese government in connection with the matter referred to in the preceding question?
4.	Is it true that the Japanese government has refused to make any modification in the agreement subsisting between Canada and Japan, as to the number of Japanese subjects to be allowed entry to Canada yearly?
5.	Has the Japanese government made any proposal to the Canadian government in reference to the matters referred to in the preceding question?
6.	If so, what are the particulars thereof?


Mr. CARDIN:: 1.	No.
2 and 3. Answered by No. 1.


CENTRAL EXPERIMENTAL FARM GREENHOUSE
Mr. SENN:: 1.	What was the total cost of the new greenhouse erected at the Central Experimental Farm in 1924?
Questions

2.	What was the amount of the plumbing contract ?
3.	Did the plumbing prove satisfactory after the architect had accepted it?
4.	If not, what was the cost of the necessary changes?


Hon. Mr. KING (Kootenay):: 1.	SIS,032.39.
2,	3, and 4. There was no plumbing contract. Drains were put in by departmental staff at a cost of $152.95 and are in every way satisfactory. In the installation for heating the material was purchased and installation done by departmental staff at a cost of $4,101.68. When cold weather set in the boiler proved too small as rating was too low for greenhouse work. Vendor took back old boiler at full cost and provided new one at an additional cost of $295; cost of labour installing $187.50.


MARGAREE FISH ASSOCIATION
Mr. HANSON:: 1.	Has the Department of Fisheries any information as to litigation brought in the counts of Nova Scotia by Mr. John C. LeBlanc and others of East Margaree, Nova Scotia, against the Margaree Fish Association in either the years 1922, 1923 or 1921?
2.	If so, what was the nature of such litigation?
3.	Was the government or any department thereof a party to such litigation?
4.	Did the government or any department thereof, pay any (portion of the costs, damages and/or expenses of such litigation?
5.	If so, what amount or amounts, and why did the government or a department thereof pay any of said amounts?


Hon. Mr. CARDIN:: 1.	In 1923 John C. LeBlanc and others of East Margaree, N.S., brought an action in the Supreme court of the Judicature for the province of Nova Scotia as plan tiffs against Severin J. Arseneau of Belle Cote, Inverness county, N.S., President of the Margaree River Salmon Fisheries Association, so-called, for the sum of $592.40 on the ground that they were, during the year 1922, members of the Margaree Fisheries Association and were entitled to equal shares with other members of the Association of the sum of $2,250 that it received for salmon supplied.
2.	Answered by No. 1.
3.	No.
4.	No.
5.	Answered by No. 4.


MR. ALBERT E. ROBICHAUD
Mr. DOUCET:: 1.	When was Albert E. Robichaud dismissed as postmaster of Lameque, Gloucester county, New Brunswide ?
2.	What were the reasons for such dismissal?
3.	Was it for political partisanship? If so, was an investigation held?

4.	Who made the complaint to the government?
5.	Who held the inquiry?
6.	Were the charges proven?


Hon. Mr. MURPHY:: 1.	January 23, 1924.
2.	Active political partisanship.
3.	Yes.
4.	J. G. Robichaud, M.P.
5.	C. T. Richard, barrister, Bathurst, N. B.
6.	Yes.


DUTIES ON FLOUR MILL MACHINERY
Mr. DOUCET:: 1.	Has the Department of Customs and Excise remitted, at any time, any customs duties on flour mill machinery imported from the United States?
2.	What is the policy of the department in that respect?


Hon. Mr. CARDIN:: 1.	There is no record in the department of any remission of customs duties on flour mill machinery imported from the United States.
2.	Not a matter of policy as respects the department which is required to admiuister the tariff as enacted by parliament.


REPAIRS TO WHARF AT MATANE
Mr. JONES:: 1.	Who was inspector of the repairs to public wharf at Matane, Quebec?
2.	Did he have the necessary qualifications?
3.	Who recommended his appointment?
4.	Is he a son of the sitting member?
5.	Is the government aware that serious damages have been done to that wharf?


Hon. Mr. KING (Kootenay):: 1.	Joseph R. Pelletier.
2.	Yes.
3.	Appointed by the Civil Service Commission.
4.	No information.
5.	Yes.



QUESTIONS PASSED AS ORDERS FOR RETURNS


Mr. GOULD:: 1.	What is the total amount of money disbursed on account of soldier settlement, (a) land settlement; (b) fishermen and others?
2.	What was the total cost of soldier settlement each year, to date, including wages, travelling and all other expenses?
3.	What has been the total amount each year paid to the board by the soldier settlers?
4.	What is the amount of the total yearly payments due by the said settlers?
5.	What is the total amount outstanding, including interest, in this connection?


GRAIN TRADE COMMISSIONS
Mr. GOULD:: 1. What is the official individual name of each of the last fourteen commissions appointed to look into the grain trade?

Ocean Shipping Rates
2.	In what years were the various commissions appointed ?
3.	What is the cost of each of the said commissions T



UNOPPOSED MOTIONS FOR PAPERS


Mr. GRIMMER:: For a return for the months of May and June, 1924, showing invoiced value of importations into Canada of canning machinery, suitable for use as equipment in fruit or berry canning factories, which were released by the Customs department without duty being actually paid thereon, together with copies of all correspondence and documents received by the Department of Customs or any member o.f the government relating to such importations, together with a statement for the first six months of 1924, showing importations into Canada of canning machinery suitable for equipment in fruit or berry canning factories on which duty was paid, showing the amount of duty paid thereon and the invoiced value of such importations.



REPORTS OF WORK ON ELEVATORS AT VANCOUVER, B.C.

Hon. Mr. STEVENS:: For a copy of 6ach and every report made by Inspectors of work at Vancouver, British Columbia, representing the Dominion government, or the Vancouver Harbour Commission, on (a) No. 1 elevator extension; (b) No. 1 elevator jetty and superstructure; (c) No. 2 elevator; (d) No. 3 elevator extension and jetty.



OCEAN SHIPPING RATES


[Stage Direction]
Right Han. W. L. MACKENZIE KING
(Prime Minister) moved:
That a special committee consisting of Messrs. Black (Halifax), Sir Henry Drayton, Duff, Sir Eugene Fiset, Halbert, Johnston, Kennedy (Glengarry), Leader, McKay, McMaster, McMurray, Rinfret, Sinclair (Queens), Stevens and Stork, be appointed to consider the resolution to give the government of Canada control over certain ocean rates by confirming an agreement between His Majesty and Sir William Petersen, K.C.B., as set out in said resolution, with power to call for persons, papers and records and report from time to time.
Mr. GOOD:: No notice has been, given of
this resolution and I think notice is required. I shall have t.o ask that it stand.
Mr. MACLEAN (York) I had intended to speak to this motion and I have not my memoranda here. If I do not get an opportunity to speak on it now, I shall have to make a statement, perhaps, on the budget. I should like to have an opportunity of speaking on this question.


John Warwick King: Let it stand
as a notice of motion.


Mr. SPEAKER:: Stands as a notice of
.motion under rule 40.


Mr. MACLEAN (York):: Will the Prime
Minister say when this will be taken up?


John Warwick King: At the next
sitting of the House.



PENSION ACT AMENDMENT

[Stage Direction]
Hon. H. S. BELAND (Minister of Soldiers Civil Re-establishment) moved that the House go into committee at the next sitting to consider the following proposed resolution:
That it is expedient to amend the Pension Act and the amending acts and to provide,-
(1)	For pension to be awarded for total disability at the time of discharge to an ex-member of the forces suffering from venereal disease who saw service in a theatre of actual war;
(2)	For extending the period during which the dependents of a man in receipt of a pension-classes 1 to 5-may be pensioned after his death;
(3)	For a definite pension irreducible for two years in cases of pulmonary tuberculosis;
(4)	For what the final payment shall be in cases of disability between five and fourteen per cent, and what conditions may affect such final payments;
(5)	For amending section 27 of the act to makt provision for payment not provided for in the existing statute;
(6)	For conditions under which pension may be continued to dependent parents;
(7)	For the awarding or refusal of a pension to a widow of a pensioner taking into consideration his condition at the time of marriage, and under what conditions pensions may be paid to prospective widowed mothers;
(8)	For non-cancellation of pension for immoral conduct until after an opportunity for defence has been given, and for reinstatement of cancelled pensions in certain cases;
(9)	For increased pensions to mothers whose husbands are physically helpless or in a dependent condition ;
(10)	For the amendment of the schedules to the act in such a manner as to make pension equal to the actual rate plus bonus, and to make an equitable division of children's pensions;
(11)	For the reappointment of retiring members of the Federal appeal board and the continuation of three as a quorum.
He said:	His Excellency the Governor
General, having been made acquainted with the subject matter of this resolution, reoom-mends it to the favourable consideration of the House.
Motion agreed to.

[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 amend the Fruit Act, chapter 15 of the statutes of 1923, by providing -
(a)	For the abolition of combination grades of apples, crabapples and pears;
(b)	That the minister, with the approval of the Governor in Council, may prescribe additional grades foi individual kinds of fruit, and prescribe the kinds
[Stage Direction]
Miners and Steel Workers
[Stage Direction]
of fruit to which such grades shall apply; and make such regulations as may be necessary to make effective the proposed provisions, from the date of their publication in the Canada Gazette;
(c) That every person who, by himself or through the agency of another person, packs fruit in closed or open packages intended for sale, or who offers for sale or sells fruit, and quotes or represents such fruit to be of any grade specified in section 3 of the act as amended or regulations made thereunder, shall cause to be shown on the package or on an approved label attached thereto, the grade and other marks required under the act, and in the event of such fruit not complying with the grade mark thus designated, such person shall be guilty of an offence under the provisions of the act.
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.
SOLDIER SETTLEMENT On the Orders of the Day:
Mr. E. J. GARLAND (Row River). I am glad to notice that the government has brought down legislation in connection with pensions. When mas' the House expect legislation regarding the land settlement question- revaluation of soldiers' lands?
James Alexander Robb: I shall look into the question of
my hon. friend. As the Prime Minister announced yesterday, we shall be proceeding with the budget from day to day. We hope to have this legislation, if any, down in ample time for consideration of the House.



AUSTRALIAN TRADE TREATY

[Stage Direction]
On the Orders of the Day:
Right Hon. ARTHUR MEIGHEN (Leader of the Opposition):: Can the Acting Minister
of Finance report any progress in the matter of his difficulty with Australia over the Australian treaty?


James Alexander Robb: No. I have no progress to report.
INQUIRIES FOR RETURNS On the Orders of the Day:


Hon. R. J. MANION (Fort William and Rainy River):: I should like to ask the
Secretary of State as to an order for a return that was passed three weeks ago regarding the different royal commissions that were appointed. Some time ago when I asked in regard to two commissions, I got a reply the next day. I hardly see the reason for holding this up. When will the return be laid on the table?


Arthur Bliss Copp: I explained a few days ago that another order, covering a larger number of years, was passed several days after the one moved by my hon. friend was passed, and the two returns are being made up at the same time. I hope to have it down in a few days. I will draw the attention of my officials to it and get them to hurry it.
CANADA GRAIN ACT On the Orders of the Day:


Mr. ROBERT GARDINER (Medicine Hat):: Are the amendments to the Canada
Grain Act completed? If so, when may we expect them to come before the House?


Right Hon. W. L. MACKENZIE KING (Prime Minister):: The Minister of Trade and Commerce (Mr. Low), I think, would like to answer that question. Perhaps my hon. friend would allow it to stand until he is in his seat.
MINERS AND STEEL WORKERS On the Orders of the Day:


Mr. H. E. SPENCER (Battle River):: I should like to read a telegram, a copy of which I have in my hand, and ask the government a question thereon. The telegram reads: Relief situation Glace Bay to-day as follows: 2,045 families, over 12,000 persons are being supplied with rations. This number increasing daily, estimated $11,000 required for this week. Of this amount only $1,760 on hand, cash for bare foodstuffs our most urgent requirements, outside our province of Nova Scotia aid only from Ottawa except few small individual contributions.
This telegram was sent to Mrs. Freiman, who is .convener, I understand, of the relief committee, and it is signed by the Rev. M.
A.	McAdam, Rev. A. M. McLeod and Mrs.
B.	Siegel.	[DOT]
Considering the seriousness of the Nova
Scotia situation as outlined in the telegram read, I would like to ask the government if they have decided to take any action.
Right Lion. W. L. MACKENZIE KING
(Prime Minister):	The position of the government is as I have stated it right along. I hope that, as a result of the reading of the telegram which my hon. friend has just given to the House, other communities will do as well as Ottawa has done in this situation.


William Charles Good: I notice in
this morning's paper a copy of an open letter to the Prime Minister from Canon Scott regarding the Nova Scotia situation. Has this been brought to the attention of the Prime Minister, and does he realize how

Miners and Steel Workers
dangerous the situation is and how far it is possible to escape the conclusion that the Nova Scotia miners have come to regard the Nova Scotia government as being an agent in the hands of the British Empire Steel Corporation?


John Warwick King: I saw in this
morning's paper the article to which my hon. friend refers, but I had not received any letter from Canon Scott at the time that I read it. I, however, thought it was important and I prepared an immediate reply. Just as I was leaving my office at five minutes to three o'clock, I was handed a letter, which I have in my hand at the moment, mailed at Quebec last night at ten p.m. It has Canon Scott's name on the envelope and I see from the contents it is signed by Canon Scott. I have not yet had an opportunity of reading the letter, but I have no doubt it is the same as the communication I read in the press. I will read to the House the reply which I gave to Canon Scott. Perhaps I should read first Canon Scott's letter to me. His letter reads as follows:
St. Matthew's Church
Quebec, March 24.
" Dear Sir:
" In the name of our country I appeal to you as the head of the federal government of Canada to take immediate steps to save the lives and stop the acute suffering of our 60,000 fellow citizens in Cape Breton.
" If there is no law in the constitution of Canada which gives you the right to avert the hideous calamity now very imminent the supreme law of common humanity empowers you to intervene.
" The funds of the relief committee, we are told by responsible people, including that of the Roman Catholic Bishop of Antigonish and the Anglican Archbishop of Halifax, are almost exhausted, and when they are gone, absolute starvation and death must ensue.
" Ultimately the responsibility of the fate of our fellow Canadians rests not upon one province only, but on the whole Dominion.	The ancestor whose name you so proudly bear, was once judged a rebel because he stood for the rights of the oppressed in defiance of the law. An oppressed people is crying for a deliverer to-day. Never in the whole course of our history has there been a more wonderful example of patient heroism than is being manifested by the thousands of men, women and little children in Cape Breton at the present time.
" If the agony of human beings does not move your government to immediate action, perhaps the reflection that failure to save the lives of Canadians now will not only shake your government, but, what is worse, it will shake the ordered constitution of our country.
" It is merely playing into the hands of that Bolshevism which we all dread, and which is threatening the governments of the world to-day. This should not be the motive to lead us to play fairly with our fellow Canadians, but it ought to have weight with those whose 6elf-interests shut their ears to the cry of the suffering.
" Yours faithfully,



F. G. SCOTT.&quot;

[Stage Direction]
To that communication I have sent the following reply:
Prime Minister's Office
Ottawa, March 25, 1925. Reverend Canon F. G. Scott, M.A., D.C.L.,
St. Matthew's Church,
Quebec, P.Q.
Reverend Sir,-I have read in this morning's paper an open letter, addressed by you to myself, the original of which has not yet been received. The letter constitutes an appeal on behalf of citizens in Cape Breton in need of relief.
Where in any emergency an appeal has been made by the government of any province of our Dominion on behalf of any of its citizens, the administration of which I have the honour to be the head has never failed to give such appeal careful and immediate consideration and to respond in the manner and to the extent circumstances appeared to warrant. I believe the provincial governments of our country have been equally ready to respond to appeals from municipalities within their jurisdiction where they were of the opinion that circumstances demanded such action in the name of their provinces.
Were it to be recognized that the government of Canada, without request from the government of the province concerned, more especially when its legislature is in session, upon appeal from a citizen of another province, thereby becomes obligated to use federal moneys of which it is the trustee to meet a purely local situation, however serious, I greatly fear the effect would soon be, if I may be permitted to quote the words of your letter, to " shake the ordered constitution of our country."
I share all your admiration for the patience of the men, women and children who have been called upon to endure privation and suffering in the present situation. I believe I am not less anxious than yourself to see existing distress speedily alleviated. I am equally cognizant of the fact that, as you intimate, our government may suffer politically through a misunderstanding of the motives which govern its action, should it hesitate to respond to your appeal. This, however, is not a circumstance which to my mind should influence the government in taking what appears to be the right and proper course in this matter.
The fact that federal moneys might, with the consent of parliament, be used towards relieving existing distress, possibly to the advantage of the government itself, does not free either my colleagues or myself from our responsibility of recommending to parliament a course of action which once adopted would open the door to inroads upon the federal treasury from every quarter of the Dominion, and which in the end might only serve to aggravate the present situation in Cape Breton and lead to similar conditions asserting themselves with increasing frequency wherever and whenever industrial troubles arise.
To avoid the very Bolshevism of which your letter makes mention, I feel that regard must be had by the federal government to what would appear to be the constitutional course of procedure in all matters which may involve rights and responsibilities on the part of municipalities, the governments of the several provinces and the government of the Dominion.
Yours sincerely,
W. L. Mackenzie King.
Mr. WOODSWORTH:: Does the Prime
Minister contend that there is any constitutional reason that prevents him from offering any aid to the people of Nova Scotia at this time?
98i

Access of Members to Chamber


John Warwick King: I do not know that this is the time to discuss that question. I think I have clearly stated the position of the government in the letter I have just read.



ACCESS OF MEMBERS TO CHAMBER

[Stage Direction]
On the Orders of the Day:
Alan Webster Neill: I should like to call your attention, Mr. Speaker, to a rule that prevents access to this chamber by members of the House unless the House is actually sitting. Sightseers, tourists and strangers have access here at any time of the day when the House is not sitting, but if a member wishes to come into the chamber to get something from his desk, or if he wishes to bring some of his friends in to view the chamber, he may not do so.


Some hon. MEMBERS:: Why?


Alan Webster Neill: I do not think that is reasonable. I am at a loss to know what the idea is.


Hewitt Bostock: This is not the time to
bring up a question of this kind. I understand that there has been some trouble in connection with the main door in front, which is reserved for members of the House, for ministers of the crown, and for deputy ministers and secretaries. I have studied the rules of many of 'the parliaments in the empire and on the continent of Europe, and there is no legislative body in the world, so far as I know, in which access to the chamber is as easy as it is in the case of the Canadian parliament. I have visited the House of Commons in England myself, and before reaching the gallery I have been obliged to pass through several cordons of policemen and men-at-arms. And the same is true of the continent. The rule governing entry into this chamber has existed since the opening of this building to members of parliament and to the public generally. I may observe that there is a general entrance for the public in the centre, while there are other entrances for the employees of the House of Commons and of the Senate.


Alan Webster Neill: You misunderstand me, Mr. Speaker; I was not referring to any time during the actual sitting of the House. What I complain of is that at other times, in the morning for example, members are unable to come into the chamber to have access to their desks.


Hewitt Bostock: I know of no rule that prevents any hon. member from coming in by the side door.


Alan Webster Neill: There is only a small door in the rear of your chair, sir, by which we may enter the chamber.


Some hon. MEMBERS:: Order.


Alan Webster Neill: Am I not in order, Mr. Speaker?


Hewitt Bostock: The hon. member may conclude his remarks.


Alan Webster Neill: What I am pointing out is that members cannot readily get access to their desks except when the House is sitting, and that is unreasonable. I wanted to come in this morning to get something out of my desk and the only means of access was a small door at the rear of your chair. That is not convenient either to members or to their friends, if they happen to have any with them; I do not see why it should be necessary to poke them through a back door.


Some hon. MEMBERS:: Order.


Hewitt Bostock: I am informed that there is access to the House of Commons any day at any hour almost; the two side doors are open.


Alan Webster Neill: I .beg your pardon, Mr. Speaker, they are not open.


Some hon. MEMBERS:: Order.


Hewitt Bostock: I pass through them myself every morning.



CANTEEN FUNDS

[Stage Direction]
The House resumed, from March 24, consideration in committee of a proposed resolution with regard to the distribution of the canteen funds-Hon. Mr. Beland

Mr. Gordon in the chair.
Mr. CLARK:: There are two paragraphs particularly in the resolution which I desire to touch upon. The first is paragraph (2) which provides that the $100,000 shall be paid to a central board of three trustees appointed by the Governor in Council, without remuneration, to be used in such amounts and such manner-
As it may deem best for the maintenance and assisrt&nce of an adjustment service and bureau for the benefit of ex-service men and their dependents.


The CHAIRMAN:: Order. May I ask
hon. members to desist from conversation? I am not able to hear the hon. member for Burrard (Mr. Clark) although I am within fifteen feet of him.


John Arthur Clark: I can go a long way towards endorsing the principle embodied in that part

Canteen Funds
of the resolution. There are, however, some minor details to which I take exception, and I hope that the minister will amend the bill to conform with the suggestions I am going to make, which suggestions also conform in the main, I think, with the suggestions already made by various members from both sides of the House, indeed, by the minister himself. In the first place I notice the resolution does not provide that the three trustees shall be returned men. I understand the minister proposes that at least two shall be returned men. My suggestion is that all the trustees should come within this category. The only people interested in the fund are returned men, and therefore it should be handled exclusively by them, and there is no justification for the appointment of anyone other than a returned man as trustee.
Secondly, I suggest that if there is necessity for an adjustment bureau-and I am prepared to go so far as to admit that there is- then the money for its establishment should not be provided out of the canteen funds but out of public funds, and I quote the minister himself in support of my suggestion. Recently he laid on the table a return, No. 126, and1 on page 10, paragraph 13 of that return, Mr. Scammell, reporting to the minister on the question of the adjustment fund, said:
On my discussing the matter with you, however, you agreed with me and with the opinion expressed by Sir Arthur Currie after his interview with Mr. Oarruthers, referred to in his letter of May 7, to the Prime Minister, that while the continuance of the service given by the headquarters of the Great War Veterans' Association, or the Veterans' Alliance, Ottawa, pending the establishment, of an adjustment bureau, might be a proper charge against the disablement fund, it would also be a proper charge against public funds, and that this should, therefore, be handled in the form of a loan, and that you would make provision to reimburse the fund from a parliamentary appropriation. I advanced this money on May 16, 1923. Vote No. 543 was increased by $5,000 in order to provide for reimbursement. I received a cheque for $5,000 on August 25, 1923.
Therefore, Mr. Chairman, the minister has already recognized that the adjustment bureau is a proper charge cm public funds. In fact on one occasion he secured a vote from this House for $5,000 towards that very adjustment service that he now proposes to constitute to be financed by the canteen funds.


An hon. MEMBER:: How much will it
cost?


John Arthur Clark: It is very difficult to give
an exact estimate. In order to ascertain how much such service would cost, and to what extent it is necessary, I submit that the bureau must be independent of all soldier organizations and of the government itself. The work
of the bureau must be carried on at the discretion of the trustees, and I submit that the minister's suggestion to employ a representative of each of the soldier organizations in the service of the bureau is wrong in principle. By following this course we will get neither economy nor efficiency in the management of the $100,000. I suggest that an independent board of trustees will be best able to investigate and determine the exact number of employees required to provide this adjustment service. The board of trustees would employ men independent of the government and of the soldier organizations. That is why I suggested yesterday that in addition to Sir Arthur Currie a second member of the board of trustees should be selected by the major soldier organizations. For instance, there is in existence now, although it has been challenged by several members, an organization known as the Dominion Veterans' Alliance. Now, if there is a council representing the seven major soldier organizations, the council of the Dominion Veterans' Alliance, it can nominate a second trustee, and those two Can choose a third. When the board is constituted it will be in a position to employ a secretary and such other staff as imay be necessary to give the adjustment service required. All soldier organizations would be entitled to use that adjustment bureau. I repeat, I think the minister's suggestion that the staff of the bureau be composed of seven employees, one from each of the soldier organizations, is unsound. Furthermore, if such a suggestion be carried into effect, the trustees will have no discretion and no authority in the matter, because everything is provided for by the government before they take office.
Now, the necessity of such a board of trustees being independent both of the government and of the soldier organizations is well illustrated by the order in council which was under discussion some days ago, P.C. 1596. It refers to the disablement fund, and recites that:
This fund is being used generally for the purpose of small loans to pensioners and others who are in need of immediate assistance and who, in the opinion of the departmental investigations, would benefit by such assistance. The Dominion Veterans' Alliance, which represents the various veterans' organizations throughout Canada, has for a considerable time past maintained a service bureau in Ottawa for the purpose of assisting former members of the forces in the presentation of claims in respect of pension, medical treatment and other matters.
It was intended to utilize the Dominion Veterans' Alliance as the adjustment bureau under the provisions of the bill passed last year, as recited in this order in council. I
Canteen Funds

presume that the minister has since abandoned any thought of so using the Dominion Veterans' Alliance. Certain complications have arisen since that order in council was passed, which, I presume, will prohibit the utilization of the Dominion Veterans' Alliance or the G.W.V.A. As the minister has stated, the various soldier organizations other than the Great War Veterans' Association have objected to the providing of this adjustment service by any one organization. I think that objection is well founded; and it bears out my argument that the board of trustees should be independent both of the government and of the soldier organizations so that service can be given to all and each organization dealt with fairly and on an equal basis.
I would just like to reiterate the objections I have offered, and to express the wish that some of these suggestions may be embodied in -the bill: First, that the $100,000 be provided from the public funds; second, that the three trustees be all returned men; third, that they be appointed independently of the Governor in Council and in the manner suggested by the hon. member for Fort William and Rainy River and others.


Mr. BELAND:: I do not quite remember the suggestion that was made with regard to the appointment. Will my hon. friend recite that?


John Arthur Clark: The suggestion was that Sir Arthur Currie be one trustee and that the second trustee be chosen by the -major soldier organizations. I suggested the Dominion Veterans' Alliance, if it is still in existence. If the council of that organization can get together and be truly representative of the seven soldier organizations I would be satisfied that a second trustee be selected by them.


Henri Sévérin Béland: Unanimously, or by a
majority?


John Arthur Clark: The majority, I should think. I am quite sure the council would soon agree on a man. Then, the two thus appointed could choose a third, and failing agreement, the Governor in Council should be resorted to respecting the third appointee.
There is one other very vital paragraph in this resolution which has not been debated at all, and that is -paragraph 5, which provides that the balance of the canteen fund, consisting of about $2,000,000, shall be divided among the various provinces. It says:
The provincial allotments to be ipaid to a provincial board of trustees, appointed by the Lieutenant-Governor in Council in each province, without remuneration, empowered to receive and hold the provincial allotment and to ascertain the wishes of those interested and residing in the province concerning the

disposition of such allotment and to determine the object to which the allotment should be devoted, and to administer the same for such object or to provide for such administration by othens, and to do such other things as may be indicated in the order in council appointing them. The expenses in connection with the trust to be a charge on the allotment.
In the first place I object to these allotments going into the provinces without the purposes for which the moneys are to be used being specifically stated. The Ralston commission investigated this matter and they made certain general recommendations as to the purposes to which the money might well be devoted. This resolution does not suggest that any specific recommendations made by the Ralston commission, or any recommendations at all, for that matter should be adopted. It leaves it to a board of trustees, without remuneration, to ascertain the wishes of the returned men. But what chance would a board have in a large province of ascertaining the wishes of the returned men as a body, when seven years have elasped since the men were last interested in the fund? It would be utterly impossible for the board to find out the wishes of the men at this stage. We have, however, sufficient evidence before us to suggest certain specific purposes to which the board of trustees in the various provinces might devote these moneys, and I will enumerate some of them in a few minutes.
I offer the same objection to the appointment of the provincial boards of trustees by the Lieutenant-Governor in Council in each province that I urged to the appointment of the central board by the federal authorities. It is true that we cannot name one man who will be -acceptable to all in each province, but we know that in each province there are soldier organizations, represented by provincial units, and these might get together and agree upon one trustee. There are also in each of these provinces-and this is something which I think has been overlooked-the actual units that formed the Canadian corps in France.


Henri Sévérin Béland: Are they still maintained?


John Arthur Clark: Still maintained, yes. I
doubt whether there is any unit of the Canadian corps which served in France that is not in existence to-day in the defence force of Canada. In most instances they are commanded by men who either commanded the units in the field or were high up in those units. In each of those units you will find a large sprinkling of officers, non-commissioned officers and men who actually served in those very units in the Canadian expeditionary force. In addition to that there is in each of these units a reserve battalion in which many men

Canteen Funds
who served in the corps are enlisted. They do not belong to the active militia, it is true, but they belong to the reserve and they are interested in this fund, although they may not be associated with the various returned soldier organizations. In addition, these units have their clubs and their regimental institutes. For instance, I could not give the exact number of members in my own unit, but I do know that on April 9 of each year between three and four hundred of these men turn out to a dinner. If that is true of all the units throughout the country you will readily see that a very large percentage of the men of the Canadian corps are still identified with the units of that corps.
Now what I suggest in the provincial administration of this fund is that the units which served in the Canadian corps might very well be given the privilege of appointing one of these trustees. There would be no difficulty about getting them to agree on a nominee because the units in British Columbia, for instance, and it is the same in Ontario, are brigaded, and the wishes of each unit could be ascertained by the brigade commander, and parsed on to the district commander. The same could be done in Ontario, where I believe the minister provides for the appointment of five trustees. There are, I believe, three military districts in Ontario. I do not know whether it is necessary to limit the number of these trustees to three in each province, or to five in Ontario; it might be well to have more than three. However, I have no serious Objection on that score. I appeal to the minister to consider this because I believe it will react for the benefit of all of us who are engaged in public life to-day. It will clear us completely. It works both ways, because there are in the various provinces administrations of both parties in this House, and if we adopt this suggestion it will clear our skirts absolutely of any suggestion that any political influence is being brought to bear in any of these appointments. I think the result would be for the greater good of the returned men as a whole.
I would also suggest that in the bill the minister cite the purposes to which the fund in the various provinces might be devoted.


Henri Sévérin Béland: That was done to a limited extent in the bill of last year, in the last clause, which is reproduced in the bill that is going to follow this year. I do not know whether my hon. friend remembers that clause, but it reads as follows, and I think it carries out to a certain degree the ideas which he is now advancing. It says:
Without limiting the -powers conferred on the lieutenant governors in council the following general principles shall govern any distribution or apportionment of the amounts allotted to the said provincial boards of trustees:-
Then follow the recommendations:
(a)	Any plans formulated should be based on the assumption that there will be prospective beneficiaries for several years to come.
In other words, this recommendation precludes the immediate capital distribution of the fund amongst men. Then follows:
(b)	Any use of the fund for relief purposes should be limited to the class of case for which no relief is then available from governmental sources, and in particular to specially meritorious cases;
(c)	If the provision of scholarships in schools and universities is undertaken for specially promising children of ex-mem)bers of the forces or of members of the forces who have died, this should not necessarily be confined to the higher grades.
These are the only limitations. There are some limitations placed upon the lieutenant governors in council. I do not know to what extent these recommendations accord with what my hon. friend has in mind, but I just wanted to bring these facts to his attention.


John Arthur Clark: 
Henri Sévérin Béland: Not in council?


John Arthur Clark: No. It is an incorporated
body. It is quite different from the -present proposaJ. This is a corporation, and the
Canteen Funds

corporation provides for the ap-4 p.m. pointment of a chairman by His Majesty the King. That may be in council; in all probability it is. The first chairman appointed was His Excellency the present Governor Generali of Canada, who has since been succeeded by Field Marshal Earl Haig. To continue:
Under the charter the governing body is a council of management consisting of a chairman, nominated by His Majesty the King, and twelve members, of whom nine are nominated by the British Legion, and the remaining three by the chairman to represent the ex-service men who do not belong to the British Legion. The present chairman of the council of management is Field Marshal Earl Haig. The first chairman was the present Governor General of Canada.
It will be noted that the British government has nothing whatever to do with the disposal of the fund. The council of management meet periodically and decide all questions of principle that arise, and supervise generally the work that is being done.
Then there is a memorandum as to the Administration committee and the Advisory Finance committee and their special agents:
The money is distributed principally under the following schemes:
And these are the schemes I commend to the minister, and whioh I suggest might be embodied in his bill:
Sick ex-service men scheme.
Removal grants for ex-service men.
Care of children not provided for by one or other of the fund's schemes.
Clearing homes for children who could not be properly cared for in their own homes owing to the death of one or both of their parents, and for children living in undesirable surroundings.
Parental care in cases where it is deemed undesirable that the children should remain in the care of their parents, relatives or guardians, notably in the case of very young children, and where the financial circumstances of the family make impossible the provision of adequate food and clothing for the children.
Then under the heading of convalescent treatment:
It is frequently the case that the parents of children recovering from illnesses are prevented by their straitened circumstances from arranging for the allnecessary convalescent treatment.
Special medical treatment for those needing special medical or dental treatment.
Surgical tuberculosis which is responsible for terrible deformities in thousands of unfortunate children.
After care-by which it is hoped to afford every child an opportunity of becoming a useful member of the community.
Apprenticeships and special training for children under 16 years of age form part of the scheme.
Then there is a memorandum on an educational scheme. They do not approve of the institution of any special scholarships as it was considered that a sufficient number already existed, or could be created by the Board of Education to cover the cases of the children whose abilities warranted them, I think these
IMr. Clark.]
are the main purposes to which the British fund is devoted, and purposes to which our fund might well be devoted, certainly in part.


Sir EUGENE FISET:: Do the regulations which my hon. friend has just read form part of the trust, or were those regulations made by the trust itself after the trust was formed? I think these are only regulations. These were not embodied in the bill. I think they left it to their own trustees to make their own regulations.


John Arthur Clark: It was not a bill at all in England. It was an incorporation.


Eugène Fiset: Incorporated by
parliament, and I doubt very much if, in the letters patent, you would find all the details you have read. I think these details were arranged afterwards by the trustees.


John Arthur Clark: That is quite possible.


Eugène Fiset: That is what the minister proposes to do here.


John Arthur Clark: But we are in a different position from that in which they were in England. They dealt with the matter expeditiously. These trustees in England have been in existence for quite a number of years, and we have the opportunity of profiting by their experience and eliminating such features as did not work, incorporating only the desirable features in our bill.


Eugène Fiset: That is exactly
where I think my hon. friend makes a mistake. I think the bill should be as broad as possible, and I think the trustees should be left to make their own regulations.


John Arthur Clark: That may be a matter of opinion, but a difficulty will confront these trustees in the various provinces from the fact that they will not be appointed until nearly seven years after the war is ended. Is that not right?


Eugène Fiset: Quite right, but that does not matter.


John Arthur Clark: We have had two governments in power with an opportunity of studying the situation, and in all these years no scheme has been devised defining any purpose to which this fund might properly be devoted. When two governments have failed to devise a scheme which is approved by all, how can we expect three poor trustees, without any remuneration, probably living hundreds of miles apart, to devise suitable schemes for the administration and disposal of the fund?

Canteen Funds


Eugène Fiset: But my hon. friend thinks this could be done in the House of Commons?


John Arthur Clark: I do.


Eugène Fiset: I doubt it.


John Arthur Clark: That is what I am suggesting. I am now suggesting a method whereby these trustees might be appointed, and leave this parliament free from all possible suspicion of bringing influence to bear upon them as to the purposes for which they might use the funds. I want it to be broad.


Eugène Fiset: I am afraid your
first suggestion with regard to the hundred thousand dollars to be voted by this parliament would defeat entirely the object you have in view. If parliament votes a hundred thousand dollars, those who administer that fund will in the ordinary course be appointed by the Civil Service Commission.


John Arthur Clark: No.


Eugène Fiset: If the money is
voted by parliament the staff will have to be appointed by the Civil Service Commission.


Robert James Manion: The Department of Soldiers' Civil Re-establishment was not appointed by that commission.


Eugène Fiset: But this will be a
special case.


John Arthur Clark: I am not discussing the
hundred thousand dollars at this moment.


Eugène Fiset: But you did.


John Arthur Clark: Yes. My suggestion is that the three independent trustees be empowered by the bill to select and employ independently of parliament or the Civil Service Commission such persons as they see fit.
To come back to paragraph 5, I am suggesting similarly that trustees who are quite independent should be appointed; with general directions as to the purposes to which they may devote this fund. I think the position is so well expressed in a letter I received from a brother soldier that I might read a few words from the letter to show his opinion of it.


Henri Sévérin Béland: A brother general or a brother soldier?


John Arthur Clark: A brother soldier; it could
be both. He says:
If, after six years this is the best suggestion the government can make for the disposal of the canteen funds, bearing in mind the expert staff which it has had at its disposal, what could you and two other trustees do to make a plan to dispose of the money
that would be handed over to you with no expert staff at your disposal and with no remuneration for the time you would have to spend. Furthermore, if you were a trustee you would have out of work returned men sitting on your doorstep every night. You would be accused of favouritism, lack' of sympathy, embezzlement and God knows what before you finish.
There are other very appropriate remarks in that letter, but I feel quite convinced that that will be the situation if we simply pass the fund to trustees in the various provinces and ask them to devise a scheme, when we have men here who have studied the problem and can give them broad suggestions which could be contained in the bill, some of which they might follow and some of which they might reject. We can make the suggestions broad enough so as to avoid the possibility of manipulation of this fund, because certainly from the time the trustees are appointed they will be the target of manipulators. Let us safeguard the trustees and safeguard the fund in the interests of returned men. That is my sole object and I ask the minister to take it under consideration. He can rest assured that he will have the hearty co-operation not only of myself but of all other returned members who are interested in the fund.


Henri Sévérin Béland: Would the hon. member
kindly elaborate the method he has suggested for the appointment of the trustees in the different provinces? Do I understand him to contend that the Lieutenant Governor in Council in each province should not be the party to make the appointment in the first instance? If that is so, if the Lieutenant Governor in Council should not make the appointment, who should make the appointment of the trustees? Also in the third place, amongst What classes should the trustees be selected in order to carry out the object which he has in view?


John Arthur Clark: From what classes?


Henri Sévérin Béland: From what classes, whether
of soldiers or civilians or organized bodies of some kind; in other words from where should the trustees be brought that would constitute the board which would come up to the expectations of my hon. friend?


John Arthur Clark: From what class? I say
unhesitatingly, only one class-the returned soldiers. I feel quite sure that I could name three trustees who would be acceptable to the returned soldiers generally in British Columbia, and I could draw them all from my hon. friend's party or from my own, for that matter. That is not the point. The recommendations should come from the returned soldiers' institutions. The units of the Cana-
Canteen Funds

dian corps now in existence in each province might well select one of the trustees. The various soldiers' organizations in each province might well select one of the trustees. That would be two, and the third might be selected by these two, or, failing that, by the Lieutenant Governor in Council. Another scheme might be that the Lieutenant Governor in Council might name the chairman, and the chairman accept the recommendation of the various returned soldiers' organizations for one trustee and the recommendation of the units of the Canadian corps in the province for the other trustee. For instance, if by any possible chance-and I do not think there will be such a chance-the units of the Canadian corps could not agree on one man and there were two men equally well thought of by those units, then if those two recommendations were handed in to the chairman, I would be quite satisfied th'at he should choose one trustee from these two or from >a number of recommendations. The matter would be very simple. In England that policy was followed out. Only one of twelve was named by the government. My memorandum says "By His Majesty the King," which I presume, as the minister suggests, means His Majesty the King in Council. If one is named by the Lieutenant Governor in Council, it will be quite satisfactory, as is done in England, to have the others named by the soldier's organizations or by the units of the Canadian corps in each province. That was done in England to the extent of twelve trustees.


Henri Sévérin Béland: I do not know whether I have exactly understood my hon. friend. If I have grasped the meaning of his remarks with reference to the appointment of provincial boards, they would tend to convey the following idea. Let us take Ontario as an illustration. The Lieutenant Governor of Ontario in Council would ask the different units in Ontario to nominate a candidate, then the different soldiers' organizations to name another candidate, and then the Lieutenant Governor in Council would appoint these two men and the chairman. Since we deal with Ontario as an illustration, we must not lose sight of the fact that in that province it was intended to have five trustees, on account of the size of the province,-the large number of returned men who have enlisted from or been discharged in that province, and the large number of pensioners there. Would my hon. friend be agreeable to something along this line-that the different militia units still in existence in Ontario would nominate two candidates, the returned soldiers' organizations nominate two, and the Lieutenant Governor

in Council appoint a chairman, a man naturally of outstanding reputation. Would that meet my hon. friend's views. As regards the other provinces, the suggestion is that the same method should be resorted to, that the units still in existence would recommend one candidate, the soldiers' organizations another and the Lieutenant Governor in Council appoint the chairman. This I think, is quite acceptable. I do not say at the present time that I accept the suggestion, but it is certainly worthy of consideration.


Mr. MacLAREN:: May I offer the suggestion that all the trustees should be returned men?


Henri Sévérin Béland: I would not say that. I did not say that.


Murray MacLaren: I am aware that the
minister did not, but I want to be sure whether that is in his mind. I would suggest to the earnest consideration of the minister that all these trustees be returned men. There is a sufficiently large field to choose from and it seems a natural course to place this in the hands of returned men. There seems to be no cause for going outside of them, and I think it would be a source of satisfaction to the returned men to have the appointments made in this way.


Henri Sévérin Béland: On general grounds I have no objection to the suggestion as it is made, but the recommendation was that the majority of each board should be made up of returned men. I have in mind, for instance, the case of the appointment of the royal commission. It was left open to the Governor in Council to appoint two returned men only and one civilian, but three returned men were appointed. I would submit the fact that an outstanding citizen, who would otherwise appear acceptable to the community at large as being eminently qualified for the position, should not be debarred because he did not happen to serve in the army, probably on account of his being disqualified by his age. A man of sixty or sixty-five occupying an exalted position amongst his co-citizens might be desirable as a member of that board. For instance, let us suppose the man who would be at the head of the patriotic fund-I do not know who he is, even by name

should be a man of sixty-five, eminently qualified for such a position. The fact that he did not serve in the army should not debar him from any appointment of this kind since he has served in a humanitarian capacity for a number of years. Although on general principle I agree that all trustees should be selected from amongst the men

Canteen Funds
themselves, I do not think that the selection should be confined entirely to the body of returned soldiers. So -long as we adopt the principle that the majority of each board shall consist of returned men I think we should leave some room for selecting suitable outsiders.


Murray MacLaren: There is no difficulty
about finding suitable men among the returned soldiers themselves; capable men I have no doubt could be found both within and without the soldier body. But as >t!he fund is the property of the returned men it seems to me only proper and rational to band over the administration, of it to those who are directly and more particularly -concerned. Undoubtedly all of us desire to do our utmost to satisfy -the returned soldiers, and my interpretation of th-eir feelings is that they wish to have the opportunity of administering their own funds rather than having someone assist them, however well qualified that assistant might be. Men can be found, I say, within the ranks of those who have been overseas who would be perfectly capable of handling -the fund.


Henri Sévérin Béland: The trustees will have to
serve without remuneration under this legislation, and that provision in itself might be an obstacle in the way of some returned men who might on all other grounds be excellent members of -the hoard. Some returned men might not be favoured with worldly things, and although they might be thoroughly qualified for the position they might find it impossible to serve without remuneration, losing probably a few days in the month. That .is what I have in mind at the moment. My suggestion is that we do not bind the hands either of the federal government or of the provinces in the selection of the trustees. If it were found that some man might make an acceptable -trustee, perfectly satisfactory to the returned men themselves, it would be unfortunate if some provision in the statute precluded his appointment. Since this resolution has been before the House one man has been suggested to me as -acceptable to the returned men; I do not propose to give his name, but I have every reason, to believe that he would be satisfactory. I do not think he would serve on the central board of trustees, although he might be asked -to serve in Toronto; butt I am quite sure that he would be an ideal man, quite acceptable to all ex-service men. If we provide in the statute that no man shall be appointed who has not been overseas we are going to tie the
hands of those who may make the appointments. and in that way it seems to me we shall seriously handicap them. Generally speaking, the principle suggested by my hon. friend (Mr. MacLaren) is a good one, and one to which I subscribe myself. I should be sorry, however, to see the law so framed as to make it impossible for some outstanding man, who might do splendid service on the board, to be appointed merely because through age or ill health he had been unable to join the forces. That is the point I have in mind.


Mr. ARTHURS:: I can see no reason why
the amount allotted to each province should be hedged around with conditions of any kind. The minister knows as well as I do that we have had the fund under our care for a number of years and we have had representations from all quarters as to its disposal. A committee on soldiers' civil re-establishment has dealt with it more or less exhaustively for years and no decision has been arrived at; and it is now apparent that we are deciding to pass our responsibility over to the provinces.
I can see no reason at all why this should be done. The minister mentioned the province of Ontario by way of illustration and I may refer to the same province also. I have no reason to suppose that the members of the Ontario government, present or future, would have the soldiers' interests less at heart than the members of this parliament or of the present government, and I do not see, therefore, why, if we are to divide the fund in the manner suggested, we should not hand it over to the men in every way untrammelled. As a matter of fact, when the minister brings down his bill I would suggest that it be entitled, "a bill for the purpose of passing the buck". We are simply trying to shirk our responsibility and to pass it on to someone else, hedged around with all sorts of difficulties, and I can see no possible reason for that.


Henri Sévérin Béland: I am afraid that if the
government decided to administer the fund the hon. member himself would object; he would want to know why we did not leave it to the provinces.


James Arthurs: There is absolutely no
danger of hon. gentlemen taking that course; the government of which the minister is a member are so used to passing the buck that it is nothing new. I want to say a few words now regarding the $100,000. Let me point out that this canteen fund belongs to the rank and file of the Canadian army. I was not here yesterday while this question was being discussed, but as I said a few days ago, this
Canteen Funds

money belongs to the men entirely and I can see no possible reason why $100,000 or any sum at all should be taken from the fund for the purpose of creating a third or a fourth bureau at Ottawa. We must remember in the first place that the country undertook to place our returned wounded men in the same position relatively that they would have occupied had they not been wounded. And our pension officers are for that purpose. It is quite true that our pension board has been more or less a sell, and probably there is a good deal of reason in some cases; but to get over that difficulty we appointed another bureau, the Federal appeal board. And both of these institutions have been maintained at the public expense. Now it is necessary to have a third body to see that justice is done the returned men. Well, why not pay that body too? Why should this amount be abstracted from the canteen fund of the soldier himself? In the course of this debate I fancy most of us have wandered somewhat from the subject. This canteen fund does not belong to the dis-ab.ed man alone but equally to the man who returned A-l. Everyone on returning from overseas was supposed to be placed in the same position, as regards earning power, as he held before the war. I am absolutely opposed therefore to the abstraction of this amount from the fund, and this is the view taken by the majority of the returned men. It is also the view taken by Sir Arthur Currie as quoted yesterday, although I have not the extract before me. He distinctly stated that the amount necessary for this adjustment bureau should be taken from the public fund.


Mr. HUMPHREY:: Mr. Chairman, in my opinion no condition should be laid down by this House in regard to the appointment of trustees. I would leave it in such a way that any representations would be considered by the Lieutenant-Governor in Council. As to the suggestion bjr the hon. member for Burrard (Mr. Clark) that military units now in existence should have representation, I am not in agreement with him. There may be military unite in Vancouver, but to-day throughout the interior of British Columbia there are practically none, and I am convinced that to lay down the condition that such military units should have representation would create dissatisfaction. I am sure every one in this House, and more especially the Minister of Soldiers' Civil Re-establishment, wishes to evolve a measure that will prove as near satisfactory to the returned men and to the country as is possible, but I do not think we are likely to reach this desirable 
result- if we attempt to lay down conditions regarding the appointment of trustees. Certainly I cannot subscribe to such a course and I cannot agree that military units now in existence should be given representation.


John Arthur Clark: Would the hon. member deny to five hundred members of a military unit, all of -whom served in France, any voice in the disposal of this fund? Furthermore, will he say there are no military units in existence in the upper country of British Columbia?


Levi William Humphrey: I would not debar the five hundred men identified with a military unit from any voice in the disposal of this fund, I would allow their representations to be considered to the fullest possible extent. But I contend that the representation of military units now in existence is a minor consideration, for these men are sure to be connected in some way with the different soldiers' organizations, through whom they can express their views.


John Arthur Clark: I would wager that not one in fifty of the five hundred men I have referred to belong to any soldier organization. How many ipaid-up subscriptions does the hon. member think all the soldier organizations have to-day?


Levi William Humphrey: I should not like to get into any controversy over soldier organizations.


John Arthur Clark: You are suggesting that they ought to belong to the soldier organizations if they are to have a voice in the disposal of these funds.


Levi William Humphrey: No. I want to see them have representation, but I think the administration of this money should not have any military aspect whatever. I believe I am safe in saying that a very high percentage of the returned men want to keep the fund free from military interference. The hon. member for Burrard would apparently bring the administration back to a war status. Replying to his second question, there are very few military units throughout the interior of British Columbia. So far as my knowledge goes, there is only a small nucleus of a military formation at Kamloops.


John Arthur Clark: How about the B.C. Horse?


Levi William Humphrey: Where throughout the interior does it exist?


John Arthur Clark: I am asking my hon. friend the question. It is in his neighbourhood.

Canteen Funds


Levi William Humphrey: West Kootenay is not anywhere near my neighbourhood. At one time there was a formation of the B.C. Horse, but we have no military units of that nature now. The consensus of opinion is that the time is not opportune for a military unit. But that is getting away from the question before the committee. I do not want to be identified with the laying down of certain conditions regarding the appointment of these trustees and the administration of the fund. I have the fullest trust that any outstanding man, whether he is connected with a military unit, a soldier organization or any other concern, will give his best efforts to the administration of this fund in the interests of the returned men and the country. I believe if we keep away from the laying down of the conditions to which I have referred it will be better not only for the returned men but for the country.


Robert James Manion: I do not wish to delay the resolution, but I desire to make a few points and to emphasize those I made yesterday, because we intend to keep faith with the minister that the resolution shall be permitted to go through before six o'clock. I think before the minister brings in the bill based on the resolution he should bear in mind the suggestions made from different parts of the House. I cannot agree with the hon. gentleman who has just sat down (Mr. Humphrey). He appears to think that we should not be discussing this resolution at all. But surely the time to discuss a resolution or a bill is before it is passed.


Levi William Humphrey: I do not wish to be misunderstood by my hon. friend. I did not imply that we should not discuss the resolution at all, I merely said that we should not lay down conditions respecting the appointment of the. trustees and the administration of the fund.


Robert James Manion: It is better to lay down
conditions before the resolution passes than to complain about them afterwards. My hon. friend said that the minister especially is anxious to get this matter arranged properly for the benefit of the returned men; but while giving him credit for this, I think we may take it for granted that we are all anxious to bring about a result wholly satisfactory to those concerned. There are two or three points I wish to make in regard to the $100,000 from the canteen fund. I dealt with this phase of the subject yesterday and was supported by the hon. member for Burrard, the member for Parry Sound and some others. The view we take is that this $100,000 should not be
taken from the canteen fund and that the expenses of the adjustment bureau should be provided for by an estimate passed in this House, the appropriation to be handled entirely by the central board of trustees, independently of any department of the government. I am on solid ground in taking that attitude. It is the view not only of practically all members who have spoken, but also of Sir Arthur Currie, as the hon. member for Parry Sound pointed out a few moments ago. The hon. member did not have Sir Arthur Currie's comments on the subject before him, but I have them here and I would like to quote from some statements Sir Arthur Currie has made in this connection. I do this because if the minister agrees with what we are proposing I would like to see him arrange his bill so that we can avoid amendments afterwards. Sir Arthur Currie, writing to the Prime Minister in May, 1923, speaking' of an adjustment bureau, says:
1 ain firmly convinced that such an organization is desirable and necessary and Mr. MacNeil informs me that the Hon. Dr. Beland and yourself hold similar views. I believe myself that such a service is a proper charge upon government funds and its maintenance could be justified to the members of the House.	.
Then in another letter under date of May 19, a few days later, addressed to the Minister of Soldiere' Civil Re-establishment, he says:
Such action I hold to have been illegal-
That is, the use of money from the canteen fund or the disablement fund for other purposes.
The canteen	funds are funds	in which	all	thesoldiers have an	interest and they	are trust funds	andneither the government nor any	department	of	the
government has any mandate to expropriate one cent of those funds.
In another letter dated November 27th, 1924, he says to the minister:
I am more than ever convinced that this service must be kept going and I take it the government has admitted the principle by its appointment of a soldiers' adviser in the	large centres of	population	in	the
Dominion. There can be no question in the minds of all right thinking people that the adjustment service as carried on by the headquarters of the G.W.V.A. is urgently necessary and must not be allowed tc lapse. You know that my opinion is that the cost of this service should be borne by the government.


Henri Sévérin Béland: Would my hon. friend read further on?


Robert James Manion: I just quoted the words
applicable to my remarks. That is the reason I stopped.


Henri Sévérin Béland: I think he says something about taking such an adjustment bureau away from the control of the government.
Canteen Funds


Robert James Manion: Of course; he has said
that a number of times. I think we all agree, the minister himself included, that that should be done. I continue the reading of the paragraph:
I believe that you are willing to bear this cost but that you cannot agree with the G.W.V.A. as to the organization which should be provided for that service.
No, he does not refer to it in that letter, but he may in some other letters. I quoted an opinion of his yesterday that the bureau should be independent of any branch of the government. I quote further from the same letter:
You know my views regarding the use of any part of the canteen fund or the disablement fund for this purpose.
That is, the purpose of an adjustment bureau.
I regSrd both funds as trust funds and I think that any disposal which has already been made, while perhaps justifiable, was not in accordance with the spirit of a trust.
I think these are sufficient quotations to show the attitude Sir Arthur Currie takes in the matter. Now, here is the statement of a prominent war veterans' organization as sent to a member of this House-to the leader of the opposition, as a matter of fact -from Toronto on March 6th, nineteen days ago. Mr. J. H. Davidson, President of the Riverdale Command, Great War Veterans' Association of Canada, says:
Sir,-The Command of the G.W.V.A. of which I have the honour to be the president most strenuously oppose the payment out of the canteen funds of any moneys to any association, the Great War Veterans' Association included. We maintain, sir, that no association of ex-service men no matter how strong in membership it may be has no right to receive from the canteen funds any moneys whatsoever.
He really contradicts himself there, but it is simply an inadvertence in the wording. A little further on he says-


Henri Sévérin Béland: May I ask who writes
that?


Robert James Manion: I gave the name a moment ago-J. H. Davidson, President o-f the River-dale Command, Great War Veterans' Association. I am just giving it as an outside opinion.


Henri Sévérin Béland: That association has already received funds from the canteen fund?


Robert James Manion: It is possible; I cannot
help that. I am simply quoting his opinion.


Henri Sévérin Béland: Does this gentleman say
that should not be done?


Robert James Manion: Yes, he apparently opposes it very strenuously.


Henri Sévérin Béland: He was assuredly, then,
not a member of the Great War Veterans' Association when that association received large amounts of money from the canteen funds, appropriated by a former government.


Robert James Manion: Well, he is opposing it, anyway. Apparently he opposes any moves that were made to convey moneys of the canteen fund to the Great War Veterans' Association or any other organization. He says:
We maintain, sir, that no association of ex-service men, no matter how strong in membership it may be, has the right to receive from the canteen funds any moneys whatsoever.
Then, a little further down:
If the bill, when introduced, or rather when it is voted upon next time, makes no reference to the payment of any moneys to the Veterans' Alliance or to any other service organization, but that it simply allocates the balance of the canteen funds now in the hands of the Receiver-General to the different provinces in the proportion as suggested last year, that is so much to each of the different provinces and the sums to the Red Cross of TJ.S.A. and Great Britain, this will be in line with our views. We feel that if at this time it is necessary for moneys to he available for the veterans to have a service bureau to assist them to prosecute their claims for pensions, adjustments, etc., it is the duty of the government of the day to set aside by parliamentary procedure the necessary moneys, and not that the returned men shall be called upon to furnish them from out of the small amount they were fortunate enought to accumulate whilst overseas by their purchase (out of their pay) in different canteens.
This geutleman represents a prominent organization of war veterans, and that is his opinion. So I think the minister should seriously consider the introduction into the bill of a clause which would permit the adjustment bureau to be handled not out of the canteen funds but out of the moneys of the people of Canada and by trustees independent of any branch of the government or of the opposition. That is the first point. Then, in regard to the trustees, this point has been dealt with also; I dealt with it yesterday myself and others have referred to it. I hope the minister will live up to what I think he agreed to yesterday in regard to arranging the appointment oif the central trustees-and if he can carry it to the extent of arranging similarly the appointment of the provincial trustees I will follow -him- namely, that no strings should be attached to them, politically or otherwise. In other words, if possible one trustee should be selected by this parliament, and one by the different returned soldiers' organizations combined, and then let these two choose a third.


Henri Sévérin Béland: My hon. friend would not
allow the Governor in Council to appoint one?

Canteen Funds


Robert James Manion: If these two could not
agree, I would say the Governor in Council should appoint a third member. But I do not see why the government should be particularly anxious to appoint one. It is not government money.


Henri Sévérin Béland: If the government is to
be distrusted as much as that, I wonder why the fund was placed in its hands.


Robert James Manion: There was nowhere else
to place it, as far as I know.


Henri Sévérin Béland: It could be put in a
thousand other places. It could be deposited with a bank or trust company, for instance.


Robert James Manion: As a matter of fact somebody suggests that it was another government in whose hands the money was placed. However, I was not going to refer to that.


Henri Sévérin Béland: And they dealt with the
funds very poorly.


Robert James Manion: I do not agree with the
minister; and I am willing to debate that point with him if he wants to take the time to do it. I think we dealt with them very honestly and fairly. Whatever distributions were made were in proportion to the numbers in the different organizations. As far as distrust is concerned, I think the minister is simply importing that into the discussion. It is* not a case of distrust, it is simply a case of endeavouring to get these trustees appointed in such a way that they will be outside of politics altogether. This money does not belong to the government .or to parliament; it belongs to the returned men entirely, and I think the returned men should handle it. It should not be handled in any way by this government or any other-I happen to speak of this government because this is the government which is arranging to distribute the funds. I am not making this suggestion because of any distrust, but because I think the trustees should be absolutely above anything in the shape of political influence. I have no doubt the minister could mention many names to the House that would absolutely satisfy me. I am not suggesting that the trustees should be Conservatives or anything of that sort. I have heard a number of names mentioned already, among them the name of Sir Arthur Currie, who I believe is a Liberal. Another very prominent man in this city I heard mentioned jmsterday. He is an outstanding Liberal, and his brother is an exceptionally outstanding Liberal, and if this man was appointed he would certainly be satisfactory to
me. So I am not thinking of the political side of it at all. My only desire is that so far as possible the trustees shall be appointed in such a way that they will be outside of politics altogether. If this money belonged to the Department of Soldiers' Civil Re-establishment that would be a different proposition. Then the government themselves should appoint the trustees. But this is money that belongs to the returned -men, and I do not see any reason why the government should wish to appoint the trustees; I think they should welcome the opportunity to get rid of all responsibility in the matter.
In regard to the trustees, I rather lean to the idea of their being returned men, not because I have not the same respect as the minister has for many men who did not go overseas, particularly those who were too old to go. I know very many men who did not join the forces, and who never did anything directly in a military way, yet who are perhaps equally deserving with the men who went overseas. I would be the last to suggest any distrust of anybody who did not go overseas simply on that account. At the same time, I believe you would get more satisfaction among the returned men if this fund were handled by the returned men entirely; that is the only reason, I have for making this suggestion. Otherwise, I should not care to put up a fight on the matter at all. I think the government would be wise, when they bring in the bill, to provide for returned men entirely handling the funds, especially in view of the fact that we have four or five hundred thousand returned men in the country; and though, of course, there are many able men outside the ranks of those who went overseas, certainly among four or five hundred thousand men you could get just as outstanding men as you would find outside. I think it is only a fair proposition, therefore, that this money, which belongs entirely to the men who served overseas, should! be handled entirely by the returned men themselves.
There is one other point, and that is in regard to the passing of the resolution. There are some others who wish to speak, I presume, but I wish to point out this: Last evening we had a little bit of discussion about carrying this resolution over until this afternoon, and my good friend the Minister of Justice (Mr. Lapointe) argued that the principle of the resolution did not deal with the details. Perhaps he was right. At the same time, if by passing the resolution we are agreeing to the principle that there is to !be a distribution
Canteen Funds

of the can*teen funds, though I may be quite agreeable to that, I do not wish it to be understood that we will not move amendments if the government does not introduce some that have been suggested; for example, along the line of the allotment of the $100,000. I want it to be understood that when the resolution is presented, we are at liberty to move any amendments we think desirable to be made in the bill. I presume that is understood by the minister.
There is one other point, and that is the point made by my hon. friend from Burrard (Mr. Clark) regarding the putting of limitations on the trustees. I notice 5 p.m. that clause 10 of the bill of last year, Bill No. 253, as passed by the House of Commons on the 16th of July, of last year, provides:
(a)	Any plans formulated should be based on the assumption that there will be prospective beneficiaries for several years to come;
(b)	Any use of the fund for relief purposes should be limited to the class of case for which no relief is then available from governmental sources, and in particular to specially meritorious cases;
(c)	If the provision of scholarships in schools and universities is undertaken for specially promising children of ex-members of the forces or of members of the forces who have died, this should not necessarily be confined to the higher grades.
Of course, I know these subclauses are put in partly conditional 'upon, 'their adoption. At the same time, the fact remains that in last year's bill the government did introduce some limitations as to the manner in which these fund^ should !be used by the different provinces, and if there are some good suggestions for us in the uses to which the funds in Great Britain have been put, which were cited by my hon. friend from Burrard-and I think some of the suggestions were good-there is no reason in the world why one or two subclauses might not be added to the bill of last year. I have not seen the bill of this year, and I do not know whether it contains these subclauses.


Henri Sévérin Béland: Yes.


Robert James Manion: There is no reason, to my mind, why the minister could not add another subclause, or more, exactly on the same lines as this, to provide that the funds shall be used entirely for the benefit of the returned men and their dependents in the different provinces.


Eugène Fiset: Suppose those
restricting clauses are embodied in the bill who is going to prepare the further regulations that will be needed both for the provincial boards and the central board? Will the central board prepare them?


Robert James Manion: They were incorporated in the bill of last year. Perhaps the minister could answer that.


Eugène Fiset: What were incorporated in the bill of last year were the restrictions my hon. friend has mentioned. They were not what I might call absolute regulations to guide the provincial boards as well as the central board. The central board, in my opinion, should be the body that will provide the further regulations that will be needed either for the central board itself or for the provincial boards.
May I go a little bit further and suggest that the main body to be organized under this resolution is the central board. And the very fact that my hon. friend has mentioned Sir Arthur Currie's name as chairman of this board, is proof that this board is considered the most important board that will be appointed under this resolution. So why not leave to the central board the work of ascertaining from the different associations of returned men 'in the different provinces what men they would choose to sit on this board of appeal for each province? That is the proper body, in my opinion, to consult with the associations in the different provinces, and after consulting with them they could recommend to the Lieutenant Governor in Council of -each province the names of those who should be appointed to form these boards. I think that meets the opinion of everybody, and I think also it is a concrete, and practical proposal.
Mr, MANION: I would agree with that.


Mr. CHURCH:: This discussion has gone on now for some four or five sittings-


Henri Sévérin Béland: Will my hon. friend allow m-e first to reply? I understand he is entering upon another subject.	.
My hon. friend from Fort William and Rainy River (Mr. Manion) has referred to the limitations in clause 10 which were incorporated in the bill of last year. I will deal with that in a moment. But before we go any further, I would like to explain to the committee that the central board, though it is so named, will have nothing to do at all with the provincial allotments.


Eugène Fiset: I did not mean that, but in the bill you can give power to the central board to prepare the way before the other bodies are appointed.


Henri Sévérin Béland: My hon. friend from
Rimouski (Sir Eugene Fiset) has suggested that the central board should be given certain

Canteen Funds
powers which it has not under the resolution or under the bill that is to oome. However, that is worthy of consideration. I understand that at present, and as the matter Stood last year, tihe function of the central board was to maintain to the best of its knowledge adjustment services out of an amount which was turned over to it by the Receiver-General, and in the premises the amount is $100,000. It is obvious to hon. members that some of the. provincial boards will have very heavy functions to perform, inasmuch as amounts as large as $800,000 will be turned over to one province, and in some other instances two or three hundred thousands will be allotted to the provincial board. Their functions will be very important, as a matter of fact much more important than the functions of the central board, whose functions are limited to organizing here in Ottawa an adjustment bureau in the way they deem to be best in the interest of the returned men-fixing the number of people who should constitute it, and providing for the proper remuneration of the parties so engaged.
Let us deal with this central board in the first place. How should it be appointed? We all agree that it should be appointed in such a manner as to render it absolutely beyond governmental or ministerial influence. It has been my intention from the first to appoint a board that would be so outstanding in reputation that not one member of this House, and not one single man, could take exception to it. My idea was to ask Sir Arthur Currie to be the head of the board. I have reason to believe that he will accept, not that I have consulted him to-day or yesterday, but on account of his willingness to accept such position some ten or twelve months ago. Another idea of mine was that the president of the Canadian Red Cross, whoever he may be, should be ex-officio a member of that board; and that a third man should be nominated by the returned men's organizations. These three men would be absolutely beyond governmental influence. I think this suggestion of mine would be acceptable to everybody. But I do not think you can take from the Governor in Council the appointment of the board of trustees. It is the duty of the Governor in Council to make that appointment, and I think it is the duty, of course, of the House of Commons to vest the power in the Governor in Council.


Robert James Manion: We understand; the appointment is certainly in the hands of the Governor in Council, but we were speaking of the choice.


Henri Sévérin Béland: If the bill should provide that the president of the Red Cross or the president of the Canadian Patriotic fund should be one of the trustees ex-officio, that one nominee from the returned soldiers' organization would be the second nominee, and that the third would be appointed by the Governor in Council, and if I say, as a minister, that it is my intention to request Sir Arthur Currie to act in that capacity, I believe that this clause at least, inasmuch as it refers to the appointment of the board of trustees, will be surrounded with all' possible security. [DOT] I have noticed all through this debate that my hon. friends on the other side were somewhat nervous over the appointment of the central board of trustees. If they feel that I have in my mind some evil design to appoint three staunch Liberals who would do exactly as I told them, I must remove that impression. I hope such an impression has not penetrated the mind of any hon. gentleman opposite. That never entered my head.
I had no intention of appointing a board of that character. I deprecate the idea that such a board should be under the control of the government for the very reason that has been many times invoked during the debate, namely, that this money belongs to the returned men, and no government should try to interfere with the proper disposal of it. It has been suggested that this adjustment bureau should be supported by public funds. This is an idea that may be shared by a great many. Parliament has not been stingy in providing assistance to such services through Canada. Hon. gentlemen will remember that at the time of the appointment of the Federal appeal board, it was provided, I think in the Department of Soldiers' Civil Re-establishment Act amendment, that soldier advisers should be appointed all over the country.


Mr. ROSS (Kingston):: As the minister
appears to be so very generous as to throw away all the appointments, I ask him, will he be as generous as he was in regard to the appointments on the Federal appeal board?


Henri Sévérin Béland: I think they were very fine appointments indeed, men of outstanding ability and reputation. I have not heard a single complaint as to the character or ability of any of these men.


Arthur Edward Ross: How many Conservatives were appointed?


Henri Sévérin Béland: I think, two.


Arthur Edward Ross: Could the hon. minister name them?

Canteen Funds


Henri Sévérin Béland: I am not going to name them in the House. I will name them after the House rises, if my hon. friend wants the names. They were at one time strong Conservatives, but perhaps they have gone back on my hon. friend because he has not lived up to their expectations. Speaking of soldiers' advisers, we have appointed, I think, thirteen or fourteen all over Canada, and in no instance have we appointed a man of our choice. We have asked the Dominion Veterans' Alliance to indicate to us in every unit a soldier who would be acceptable to them. They have submitted these names and all have been appointed. Lately, not more than two or three weeks ago, I again requested the Dominion Veterans' Alliance to submit the name of a man in New Brunswick because the soldiers' adviser had resigned, and a name was suggested to us and an appointment made. Everybody knows these men have not been selected for their political inclinations. There may be some Liberals among them; I would think the majority would be Liberals, because the majority of the people in the country is made up of Liberals.


Robert James Manion: Not now. That was three years ago.


Henri Sévérin Béland: We will have to wait till a general election to find out about that. I know of some who are staunch Conservatives who are discharging their duties in a very creditable manner. In this case all the soldiers' advisers are paid from public funds. An appropriation is voted every year for the purpose and they are paid by the Department of Soldiers' Civil Re-establishment in every case. This is going a good way towards discharging this public function to which the hon. member for Fort William and Rainy River has alluded. W hat I want to impress upon the House is that, after consultation with the returned men throughout Canada, the royal commission has recommended this arrangement. It passed last year and since then I have not heard anybody criticize it, outside of this House at all events. For some months after that session was over, I did not receive from any organization throughout Canada any representation as to what should have been done instead of what had been done. In the present instance it is clear that the organizations are supporting the legislation. The only protest is against the allotment of any part of that $100,000 to one particular organization. They deprecate the idea that one special organization should be selected above the rest to be their representative here at headquarters. It is not for 
me to say whether they are right in their contention or not. But we say to the organizations, there is no intention-and I say that deliberately in spite of what you may read in the order in council-of having this money applied only to one soldiers' organization, but on the contrary it would be the intention of the government to say in the order in council appointing the trustees that they should make it a point to have an adjustment bureau that will be acceptable to every soldier in the country. That will not mean the application of the money to one particular organization. With a few exceptions, I believe this is acceptable generally to the soldiers in Canada.


Robert James Manion: The quotations I gave were not against the money being used by one organization, but against the money being taken from the canteen fund for any purpose.


Henri Sévérin Béland: For the Dominion Veterans' Alliance.


Robert James Manion: For any purpose. The
quotation I gave from Sir Arthur Currie was that the canteen fund should be left as the canteen fund. Perhaps one of the quotations was against one particular organization getting the money. I certainly did not offer, and I did not hear any other hon. member offer any criticism of the present adjustment bureau or the Great War Veterans' Association in any way. The only attitude I took was that this should be administered fairly and squarely.


Henri Sévérin Béland: Be that as it may, the
recommendation of the commission was to the effect that $100,000 should be allotted to a certain board of trustees for the purpose of maintaining a service bureau here at headquarters. How did the royal commission come to this view, I wonder? I have asked myself that question more than once. I have not questioned them in this connection, but I presume they have reached the conclusion because in every unit of the Department of Soldiers' Civil Re-establishment, the department is supporting one soldiers' adviser and is providing also some clerical assistance for him. I presume tl at the royal commission has said: The dutj of maintaining a certain service throughout Canada, a service that would be ear-marked as it were for returned men, has been attended to by the government in the creation and in the remuneration of soldiers' advisers boards. It was undoubtedly pointed out to the commissioners that the soldiers were contributing throughout the country for the maintenance of a certain adjustment bureau at headquarters. It was

Canteen Funds
their money which was used largely for the maintenance of that bureau. Since the money of the returned men is being contributed to maintain an adjustment bureau at Ottawa, is it entirely beyond the mark to suppose that the commissioners have thought that a part of the canteen funds should be used for the purpose, because it would relieve at least the organizations and the members of the organizations from contributing for that service. I believe that is the main reason that has prompted the royal commission in making the recommendation which they have made. This is no bill of mine. I may have drafted it, but it is framed upon the recommendations of the royal commission. I imagine-and I am in the judgment of hon. members-that if on one particular occasion I had come before a committee of Supply with a proposal to appropriate $100,000 of the public money to maintain an adjustment bureau at Ottawa, the hon. member for Fort William and Rainy River or the hon. member for Burrard could have risen and said: This is another government agency; this money, whatever you do, will be paid out by the government and it will serve party purposes.


Robert James Manion: That would be correct if
it were not handled by such a board of trustees as we propose.


Henri Sévérin Béland: It would be said, as it has been pointed out and hinted on many occasions since the commencement of this debate, that in some way or another it will be possible to keep a string on that money because it is public money. Of course everybody is entitled to his opinion in this regard, but I hope the resolution as it is will pass, and that the bill, with certain amendments which will make the appointment of the board more secure from political influences, will be brought down and accepted by the House.
The hon. member for Fort William and Rainy River has referred to clause 10 in the bill of last year. My hon. friend was out of the House for a few moments when his colleague the hon. member for Burrard was discussing some phases of the resolution, particularly the appointment of provincial boards of trustees, and also the distribution amongst the provinces of certain amounts and the uses to be made of those sums. When my hon. friend was out of the House I quoted clause 10 of the bill of last year, which clause will also be incorporated in the bill of this year and which imposes upon provincial boards certain limitations. What are they? I have read them and the hon. member for
99i
Fort William and Rainy River has read them. Why are they to be incorporated in the bill of this year? Because the royal commission has pointed out that these limitations should be incorporated in the bill.


Robert James Manion: I understood that and I
meant to mention it.


Henri Sévérin Béland: What did the royal commission say in this connection? They said in the first place that the fund should not be spent immediately but that its use should be providently spread over a number of years. And what did the bill of last year contain? It contained a clause to the effect that, without limiting the powers conferred upon the lieutenant governors in council:
-the following general principles shall govern any distribution or apportionment of amounts allotted to such provincial boards and trustees:
(a) Any plans formulated should be based on the assumption that there will be prospective beneficiaries for several years to come.
The royal commission further recommended) in this connection, assistance to specially meritorious cases where ex-members of the forces and their dependents are in genuine distress; and there will be found in the bill a clause bearing upon this very subject. In the third place we have a recommendation that scholarships in schools not necessarily to be confined to the higher grades and universities, be provided for specially promising children of ex-service men. Again there is in the bill, in section (10), this limitation:
If ithe provision of scholarships in schools and universities is undertaken for specially promising children of ex-members of the forces and of members of the forces who have died, this should not necessarily be confined to the higher grades.
This is no impediment to the proper carrying out of a sound policy for the administration of the canteen fund in the various provinces; it will not prevent the provincial boards from doing everything possible in the interests of the returned men generally. But it does impose upon them certain limitations in the interests of the men themselves. Of course, it will be for every provincial board to elaborate its own policy with regard to the expenditure of the money that is given it by the Receiver General. It will not be for me to say, "You shall do this or that;" as a matter of fact the boards shall be appointed by order in council passed by the Lieutenant Governor in Council in each province. I do not know of any measure presented to this parliament in the last quarter of a century that has been surrounded with so many provisions to preclude, beyond any possibility of doubt, any influence on the part of the gov-
Canteen Funds

ernment in the administration of the particular law concerned. There has not been a measure surrounded with so many securities against governmental influence as there are in this legislation to prevent the government from influencing in any way the distribution of the money.


James Arthurs: The minister has referred to the provisions of last year's bill, and I notice that the word "shall" is used. That is certainly prohibitory so far as any other use of the money is concerned. Was there no difference of opinion among the witnesses before the Ralston commission as to the disposition of the fund?


Henri Sévérin Béland: There is no question that a number of schemes were submitted to the commission. My hon. friend is quite right, for as many as twenty-seven different schemes for the use of the fund were considered.


James Arthurs: Does the minister condemn all the others except these three?


Henri Sévérin Béland: No. But these are not
schemes in themselves; they are only limitations. They simply say: Do not use the money all at once but spread it over a number of years. Of course, there may be ten or twenty different plans, but these are general limitations recommended by the commission, and they are wise limitations, I submit.


James Arthurs: Would it not be better to leave it to the discretion of the various provincial governments instead of laying down this provision?


Henri Sévérin Béland: The Lieutenant Governor
in every province will appoint the 'board of trustees and the province will draft its own order in council; I am not going to draft it. But as minister I want to relieve my colleagues and myself of the responsibility which was placed on our shoulders by the royal commission in the recommendation of these limitations. In section (10) of the bill we provide that the Lieutenant Governor in Council and the provincial government shall direct themselves according to the provisions of the act, and if they fail to do that they will be to blame; I shall not be responsible. That is the only explanation I can give.


James Arthurs: I still object to the word "shall" in regard to these provisions. The minister says that he is relieving himself of the responsibility imposed upon him by the commission in these particulars. Would that not be equally true of all the recommendations of the commission?-and if so why did he not have them before the House long before now?


Henri Sévérin Béland: My hon. friend cannot accuse me of having hidden anything in connection with this bill, which is exactly the same as the bill that was before the House last year. The hon. gentleman read 'last year's bill more than once and he knows it by heart. Section (10) declares that without limiting the powers conferred on the lieutenant governors in council certain general principles shall govern any distribution or apportionment of the amounts allotted to the provincial boards. The word used is "shall." Why not? We could not say "may" govern. It seems to me that these particular limitations recommended by the commission are such as to appeal to every member of the House, and I am sure my hon. friend is ready to subscribe to them. They are of a general nature and are most commendable. They say that any plans formulated should be based on the assumption that there will be prospective beneficiaries for years to come. That is to say, it suggests that the plans be so formulated as to ensure that benefits will be derived from the fund for a considerable time. In the second place, it is recommended that any use of the money for relief purposes should be limited to the class of cases for which no relief is at the time available from government sources, and particularly to specially meritorious cases. Surely I need not dwell on the wisdom of that; in a word, that provision is that we do not help those who are already helped and that we confine ourselves largely to the most meritorious cases. And the third recommendation is that if provision in regard to scholarships in schools and universities is undertaken for specially promising children of ex-members of the forces or of members of the forces who have died, this should not necessarily be confined to the higher grades. Could anything be more democratic than that? It provides that we shall have regard for the children not only of officers but of the private man himself. This is a wise limitation and it is democratic in the extreme; it recommends that the son of the ordinary soldier shall be dealt with in the same way as the son of the officer high in rank. These limitations were accepted last year and I am sure they will be accepted Again.
Now, we have discussed this resolution extensively and there are some amendments which I intend to submit when the bill is before the House in committee of the Whole in connection with the appointment of the central board and probably as well of the provincial boards, largely in line with the suggestions that have been offered. Also I

Canteen Funds
intend to introduce an amendment to deal with the Yukon's share. I do not know whether it will satisfy my hon. friend (Mr. Black) entirely, but I can assure him that if it errs in any way it will be on the side of generosity for the Yukon.


Mr. MacLEAN (Prince):: Mr. Chairman,
I notice that Prince Edward Island and Nova Scotia are also grouped together. We take objection to that, and we sincerely trust that the minister will treat Prince Edward Island separately, so we will have the benefit of our own share of the funds.


Henri Sévérin Béland: I shall be glad to submit an amendment making the allotment separate for Prince Edward Island as a province.


Thomas Langton Church: The minister has wrestled
all day with this resolution and I do not intend to delay its passage. The only point before the committee is how the canteen fund is to be divided, by whom and when. There is room for a great deal of difference of opinion on this, and the more I hear the minister (Mr. Beland) speak on the resolution the more doubtful I am whether he is taking the right course. The city of Toronto is interested in til's fund, having some 45,000 returned soldiers within her boundaries. We know it is the desire of the minister to help the returned men. He is a returned man himself, and fie never looks to this part of the chamber without getting sympathy and help. My objection is to the administration of the fund. I would like to see him take example by the patriotic fund of $44,000,000, which was administered by outstanding business men at a minimum of cost and with a maximum of efficiency. There was never a single complaint about the administration of that fund. Here we have two and a half million dollars, and I fear that a large part of the fund will be spent in administration costs and the men will get only a small balance for their benefit. To-day, seven years after the war, we have the most cumbersome and complex system for the relief of our soldiers. What they want is direct relief. And goodness knows many of our returned men who are suffering to-day would find this fund a godsend and a blessing if it were administered by outstanding business men instead of being frittered away by a bureau here in Ottawa. I fail to see such a bureau can help a soldier in Toronto, Hamilton, Brantford or any other city. This bureau is simply a lot of red tape. I think it would be better if the minister administered the fund in his own department, or by three outstanding business men. I know one such
man in Toronto, Mr. W. D. Ross, and there would 'be no difficulty in getting others to cooperate with him without expense to the country or to the soldiers. Then those for whom the money is intended would get every cent of it. We in this quarter of the House have every sympathy with the minister, notwithstanding the very unfair remarks of the hon. Minister of National Defence (Mr. Macdonald). He was not in the House last night and did not hear the reasons why I spoke. I did not occupy the attention of hon. members for more than ten minutes, and yet I heard him say, "Tommy Church 'has been obstructing for an hour. Everybody knows that that is not correct. I repeat, the minister should either deal with the fund through his own department or as the patriotic fund was administered, by a board of two or three prominent business men.


Mr. LADNER:: I should like to say a
few words on this question, having a large number, relatively speaking, of returned soldiers and their dependents in my constituency. One aspect of the question I do not think has been touched upon-the nature and need of the work of the adjustment bureau. I am in accord with the principle of the resolution, it being based upon the Ralston report. Since 1917, when the soldier organizations first became active on behalf of the returned men, it has been evident to anyone associated with those organizations that they were serving a good purpose. Taking the Great War Veterans' Association as an example, I am informed on good authority that they have dealt with more than 80,000 individual claims during the past six years, of which 32,000 were successful. The men have confidence in their own organization, which explained to the claimants the nature of their cases and the legal difficulties confronting them, and as a rule the claimants were satisfied. It has been suggested that perhaps the D.S.C.R. could carry on some of this work, but being a department under the goverment and having the taint of officialdom, it does not satisfy all the returned men The cases I have referred to cover a very wide range. They indude -matters connected with parliamentary legislation, cabinet action; departmental regulations; Employment Service Council; pensions; medical treatment; medical treatment-pay and allowances; dental treatment; military pay; working pay; separation allowance; burial expenses; badges and decorations; estates; exchange; transportation expenses; repatriation; whereabouts; war service gratuity; discharge cer-
Canteen Funds

tificates; medals; pleas for clemency-judicial; civil service appointments; divorce; educational exemptions; housing loans; soldier settlement; Dominion lands; insurance; mother's allowance; naturalization; patriotic fund; relief; general employment; vocational training; vocational loans; miscellaneous; appeals.
Now, the cost of maintenance of the legislative and adjustment service during this period amounted to $450,000.


James Arthurs: What is the hon. member quoting from?


Leon Johnson Ladner: From a memorandum
handed me by the secretary of the organization I am discussing. The amount expended, I am told, was $450,000, of which eighty per cent was borne by the Great War Veterans' Association from its internal revenue. Staffs are maintained in seven provinces. There are in this particular organization some 800 branches. I am told that about forty new Claims per day are coming in and that over
8,000	files are in process of adjustment. I mention these facts in order to lay the groundwork for my contention that an independent adjustment bureau detached from the government does serve a good purpose and should be maintained in the future.
The resolution provides for the placing of S100.000, allotted from the canteen fund for the maintenance of an adjustment bureau, under the control of three trustees. As I understand it-at any rate, I hope the bill provides for this-the trustees may make the arrangements for the organization to be used in connection with the adjustment bureau. No doubt all the soldier organizations will be consulted so far as the formation of the bureau and the spending of the money is concerned and that the advice of the different organizations capable of assisting in the perfecting of such an adjustment bureau will be secured. I do not advocate, and I do not think anyone would, that the money should be applied to or given to any one particular organization. But it should be independent of the government, detached from any element of bureaucracy or officialdom and under the control of the trustees who themselves would appoint capable men selected perhaps from different organizations on account of their skill to carry out the work.
A reference to. the Ralston report will Show that a ballot taken with regard to the disposition1 of the fund1 disclosed such a variety of opinion that it was impossible to come to any conclusion upon it. The largest vote was in favour of the establish-
Mr. Ladner.]
ment of memorial workshops for the provision of sheltered employment and home employment for disabled ex-service men including the tuberculous. The number of votes for that scheme was 5,764. The votes for two other schemes, denominated in the report as schemes B and C, were 2,874 and 2,298 respectively, and there was a similar number of votes for scheme D. The parliamentary committee of 1922, in making their report regarding the disposition of the canteen funds, recommended a board which would consider the advisability of employing the canteen funds: (a) for the promotion of sheltered workshops, and (b) -for providing further education facilities for children of ex-members of the forces who would otherwise be unable to enjoy the same. When the Ralston commission went to the different cities they found that various organizations had different ideas as to how the matter should foe dealt with. The report states:
To determine from the foregoing the common desire of the ex-service men concerning the ultimate use of the money is impossible, but the Wo clear-cut suggestions were, education of children whose fathers served in the war, and relief of distress among exservice men and dependents.
I now come to a question that I do not think has been raised in this debate, and that is the question of pensions for old soldiers. We know there are many meritorious cases of men who served overseas and whose health has been shattered but who have not been able to claim pension on account of the peculiar operation of the rule of attributability, and who may find themselves destitute and dependent upon charity unless some provision is made for them. I would like to see some direction given to the provincial trustees which will bind them to certain definite purposes in the use of this fund. I would like to see something in the bill which would oblige the trustees to give primary regard to the two purposes which the commission found there was common agreement on, namely, the education of children whose fathers served in the war, and the relief of distress among ex-service men and dependents. I would also like to see a provision which would enable relief to be given to men of shattered health who require assistance in the evening of their life. It will be noted that the resolution is wanting in that respect. According to the resolution the trustees are empowered to receive and hold this allotment and to ascertain the wishes of those interested and residing in the province. Now, the royal commission sat in each province, at considerable expense to the public treasury, and they did ascertain to a large ex-

Patent Act
tent the views of representative organizations and interested parties in the provinces. I therefore hope that the minister will make provision in his bill for a recognition of those purposes in respect to which a definite conclusion has been arrived at. With regard to the appropriation of $100,000 out of the canteen fund, I do not entirely share the views expressed by some hon. members in this part of the House. The fund is primarily for the purposes of returned men and their dependents, and these purposes having been served to a large extent in the past, by the adjustment bureau of the Great War Veterans' Association, a portion of the money for the purpose coming out of these funds, I do not see why in the future also the canteen funds should not take care of an adjustment bureau under the trustees. The public have expended large sums of money in the establishment of the department, in the establishment of federal appeal boards, soldier advocates, and in a number of other ways, and I think the fairest and the most considerate way would be to appropriate $100,000 out of the canteen funds, because that apparently has already met with the agreement and consent of large sections at least of the soldier body and of the public, as well as being the judgment of the royal com" mission which investigated this matter.
Resolution reported, read the second time and concurred in. Mr. Beland thereupon moved for leave to introduce Bill No. 32 respecting the distribution of the Canteen Funds.
Motion agreed to and bill read the first time.
At six o'clock the House adjourned, without question being put, pursuant to rule.
Thursday, March 26, 1925