Right Hon. W. L. MACKENZIE KING (Prime Minister):: Mr. Speaker, before we
enter upon the business of the day, I should like to say with what real sorrow the people of our country have learned of the passing this morning in Great Britain of that great and distinguished public servant, the Earl of Balfour. I do not rise for the purpose of attempting any eulogy. Lord Balfour's life at all times and in all places will be more of a testimony as to what is highest in personal conduct and best in public life than anything that can be said of him. But I should like to give some expression to the feelings which T know hon. members of this House of Commons cherish, in common with the members of parliament at Westminster and indeed with the members of British parliaments everywhere, concerning the passing of one who has had such a distinguished career and who has rendered his own country and the empire of which it is the centre so vast a service.
Lord Balfour's public life extended over more than half a century. His name was as well known to our fathers as it is to us. He wras associated in parliament with Disraeli, Lord Salisbury, Parnell, Gladstone and with all of the great men whose names have figured in the stirring events of the present century. During the period he was in public life he filled at one time or another most of the high offices of state. He was at different times President of the Council, President of the Local Government Board, Secretary for Scotland, Chief Secretary for Ireland, First Lord of the Treasury, First Lord of the Admiralty, Foreign Secretary, leader of the opposition, leader of the Commons and Prime Minister of Great Britain. To all of those great offices

The late Lord Balfour
he brought exceptional qualities of heart and mind, and he has left a record that is unsurpassed for what it reveals of high integrity and splendid ability.
In the period of the war Lord Balfour was entrusted with the most delicate and important of missions, and since the war few have played a greater part than he in the task of reconstruction and particularly in the great work of the League of Nations and all that pertains to its affairs. It is interesting to recall here that his last great public service was connected with the work of the committee on interimperial relations which met during the period of the imperial conference of 1926 and of which committee he was the chairman. The Balfour report, so-called, will go down in British history as one of the world's historic documents.
But not only was Lord Balfour a great statesman; he was everywhere recognized as a great scholar. There is in the British isles hardly a university with which he had not been associated or which had not conferred upon him its highest honourary degree. He was at different times Chancellor of Cambridge university, Chancellor of Edinburgh university, Lord Rector of St. Andrew's university and Lord Rector of Glasgow university. He was amongst other of his high attainments a philosopher, a scientist, and a man of letters. He was, too, an authority upon art. He had been president of the British Association for the Advancement of Science, member l'Academie des Sciences Morales et Politiques, l'lnstitute de France, and president of the British Academy. Indeed there were few intellects of modern days comparable with his. It has been said of him that he possessed the greatest political and philosophical intelligence of our age. He was above all a great gentleman, a man universally respected and indeed revered. His charm of manner was irresistible. In moral stature none loomed larger than Lord Balfour. He has left to the world an example of what I believe is finest in private and public life-the maintenance at all times of great integrity of conduct, of word and of thought, and of exceptional many-sided abilities in the discharge of public duties. His long and distinguished services to his country, to the British commonwealth of nations, and to great world causes are present in the minds of all to-day and will be gratefully remembered through generations to come. As I have already said, we in this House of Commons join with those who belong to popular assemblies in all parts of the world in mourning the passing of one who has been so great a servant of mankind.


Hon. R. B. BENNETT (Leader of the Opposition):: Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister (Mr. Mackenzie King) has spoken for this parliament, for this House of Commons, as its leader, and with what he has said I am heartily in accord. Lord Balfour may be said to be the last of that great group of Victorian statesmen who survived into the twentieth century. He was the last of the cider statesmen of our empire. It is fitting that the house should pay tribute to his memory, for I recall, when we were sitting in the museum, the afternoon he spoke there, and the effect that was produced upon the members who were privileged to hear him. I could not but remember that afternoon that one portion of his address might well have been entitled "The foundations of belief," which was the title of one of his great works, while the latter part of that address might well have been entitled "A defence of philosiophic doubt," which was the other great work by which he is so well known as an author. Statesman and scholar, patriot and philosopher, he touched life at many points. I know of no man of our time so many sided and who played so distinguished a part in so many avenues of human effort.
In the world of literature and scholarship he was recognized as one of the great men of our time. Perhaps his position in this regard was not so eminent as that of Burke or Morley, but certainly in scholarship he ranked with either. His philosophic training gave him a detachment of mind which made it possible for him to exercise that sound judgment which was one of his dist.ingushing characteristics. I venture to think that while he will long be remembered as a great- statesman whose achievements are now a part of the history of our empire, he will best be remembered because at a moment of the gravest peril to the life of his country he who had been Prime Minister of Great Britain served and held office under two prime ministers and, later, under two others, neither of the two latter having even been a member of the House of Commons when he had obtained a great position in the public life of his country.
As the Prime Minister has said, not only was he a great gentleman but he had that inexpressible charm that made those who were young feel that he was of their generation and those who were older feel that they could always look to him as a friend for counsel and advice.
He served the world well. He served the empire well and in so doing he was entrusted at the most critical moment of its history with great reponsibilities, among them being the
Questions

visit he made to America. The service he then rendered this country is one that I hope we shall not soon forget. I desire on behalf of those with whom I am associated on this side of the house to agree heartily with the observations that have been made by the Prime Minister, and to say how honoured we are to associate ourselves with men and women in popular assemblies in every part of the world who will pay their tributes of respect and admiration to the memory of a great statesman who enriched the public life, not only of his own country, but of the whole world, by his service to mankind.



BANKING AND COMMERCE

[Stage Direction]
First report of the select standing committee on banking and commerce.-Mr. Hay.

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

Mr. BLACK (Yukon):: 1.	Referring to the question as to in what capacity L. A. Giroux, Liberal member of the legislature of Alberta, was sent to Yukon, and the reply thereto of the Minister of the Interior as reported in Hansard of March 10, 1930, that said Giroux accompanied the Director of Northwest territories and Yukon Branch, as legal officer in connection with proposed revision of Northwest territories ordinances, game regulations and other matters relative to administration in the north, what are the ''other matters relative to administration in the north," so referred to?
2.	How many legal officers, legal advisers, solicitors, counsel, law' officers and legal persons are employed in the Department of the Interior ?
3.	Who is Commissioner of the Northwest territories?
4.	Who is deputy commissioner?
5.	Who are the councillors of Northwest territories?


Mr. STEWART (Edmonton):: 1.	Matters of administration affecting particularly the native population in connection with which it is desired to have a policy as near same as possible in the Yukon and Northwest territories.
2.	Three.
3.	4 and 5. Commissioner, W. W. Cory, C.M.G., Deputy Minister, Department of the Interior.
Deputy Commissioner, R. A. Gibson, Esq., Assistant Deputy Minister, Department of the Interior.
Members of Council, Charles Camsell, LL.D., Deputy Minister, Department of Mines; O. S. Finnie, B.Sc., Director, N.W.T. and Yukon Branch, Department of Interior; H. H.Rowatt, Esq., Dominion Lands Board, Department of Interior; D. C. Scott, Litt. D., Deputy Superintendent General, Department of Indian Affairs; Colonel Cortlandt Starnes, Commissioner, Royal Canadian Mounted Police. All these serve without extra remuneration.


MOOSE JAW-CUSTOMS REVENUE
Mr. STEVENS:: 1.	What is the amount of revenue collected by the Department of National Revenue through the collector of customs at the port of Moose Jaw, Saskatchewan?
2.	What is the amount of revenue received through the post office at Moose Jaw?
3.	What salary is paid to the collector of customs at the port of Moose Jaw?
4.	What salary is paid to the postmaster at Moose Jaw?
5.	What salary is paid to the chief clerk in each of these services at Moose Jaw?


Mr. RINFRET:: 1.
Import duties	$373,826	61Excise taxes	
151,131	27Excise duties	
18,787	05Sundry collections	
2,863	93

(Revenue from outports not included.)
2.	$140,046.79.
3.	$2,640.
4.	$3,420 a year.
5.	Assistant Postmaster's salary is $2,820 a year. No chief clerk; 2 senior customs excise clerks at $2,220 each.


MILITARY HOSPITALS-STAFF
Mr. ARTHURS:: 1.	How many medical officers, full time, part time, are employed in Christie street, St. Annes. and Westminster hospitals?
2.	How many nurses, with overseas service, are employed in Christie street, St. Annes, and Westminster hospitals?
3.	How many nurses hold registered nurses' certificates ?
4.	How many other persons than the above mentioned are employed in these three hospitals?
5.	What salaries are paid to matron, dietician, and nurses, at these hospitals?

Questions


Mr. KING (Kootenay):: 1.	Number of medical officers . .Full-time
Part-time
2.	Number of nurses
with overseas service	
without overseas service	
3.	All nurses employed are graduates.
Registered	
4.	Other persons employed	
5.	Salaries-Matron	
Dietician	[DOT] [DOT]
Nurses	
Christie	West-	
Street	minster	St. Annes13	8	620	5	(a) 940	16	1811	5	10all	19	27136	181	164(b) $2,520	(c) $2,160	(c) $2.1,60(d) $2,820	$1,980	$2,040SI ,380 to	81,560 (same in	all hospitals)(a)	Attached to Montreal office.but available at St. Annes.	_ _	_(b)	This lady is matron-in-chief for Canada, as well as matron of Christie street hospital, and she has an assistant matron whose salary is SI ,620.(c)	This lady is assisted by a charge nurse at a salary of $1,620.(d)	This lady is chief organizing dietician for Canada, as well as dietician at Christie street hospital, and she has an assistant dietician whose salary is $1,560.


PUI.PWOOD EXPORTATIONS
Mr. PARENT:: 1.	Has any pulpwood been exported to the United States during the months of January and February, 1930 ?
2.	If so, how many cords from each province?
3.	How many cords from Indian reserve lands, stating the locations of such lands?


Mr. RINFRET:: 
COAL IMPORTATIONS
Mr. SMITH (Cumberland):: 1.	What quantity of anthracite coal was imported into Canada during the calendar year 1929, stating country of origin?
2.	What quantity of bituminous coal was imported into Canada during the calendar year 1929, stating country of origin?
3.	What quantity of coal of all kinds was exported from Canada during 1929, stating provinces of origin and country of destination.


Mr. MALCOLM:: 1.	Canada's imports of anthracite coal, calendar year 1929, with country from which imported, were:
Country	T ons
United	Kingdom	
729,458United	States	
3,172,942Alaska	
1Japan	
112Russia	
117,404Total	
4,019,9172.	Canada's imports of bituminous coal, calendar year 1929, with country from which imported, were:Country	TonsUnited Kingdom	
114.044United States	
13,593,402Alaska	
21Newfoundland	
76Total	
13,707,5433.	Canada's exports of coal of all kinds, calendar year 1929, with country to which exported, were:Canadian Foreign Country	produce	produce
Tons Tons
United Kingdom. .. 26,605		
United States	 451,516	16,842
Alaska	 21,642		
Argentina	 1,066		
Australia	 19,225		
Belgium	 3,463		
Bermuda	 950		
British South Africa. 12,089		
China	 4,994		
Cuba	 3S0		
Denmark	 758		
France	 5,108		
Germany	 2,140		
Questions

Canadian
Country	produce
Tons
Gibraltar	 1,335
Greece	 1,085
Irish Free State.. ..	683
Italy	 3,327
Netherlands	 5,247
Newfoundland	 269,168
New Zealand		6,752
Norway	 421
Poland and Danzig..	371
Spain	 916
St. Pierre and
Miquelon	 2,248
Sweden	 552
Syria	 290
Turkey	 641
Foreign
produce
Tons
7
Total	 842,972	17,436
Note:-No statistics available as to exports of coal according to provinces of origin. During the calendar year 1929 the exports of coal
(Canadian produce) from Canada via provinces were:
Exports via	Tons
Nova Scotia	 351,176
New Brunswick	 20,609
Quebec	 130
Ontario	 3,480
Saskatchewan	 8,227
Alberta	 1,060
British Columbia	 458,290


IMMIGRATION TO ALBERTA
[Stage Direction]
Mr, KELLNER:
1.	Have any immigrants come to the province of Alberta during 1930?
2.	If so, how many, and from what country or countries did they come?
3.	Who provided for their importation?
Mr. STEWART (Edmonton):: 1.	Yes.
2.	The records are available only for the month of January, during which month 290 immigrants arrived at ports of entry giving Alberta as their destination. These were of the following racial origins. The records available do not show in every case the country from which the immigrants came.
Austrian	 i
British-
English	 50
Irish	  14
Scotch.. ..	..	22Welsh	'	4Croatian	
2Dutch	
iEsthonian	
2Finnish	
4French	
3German	
33Italian	
3Jugo-Slav	
3Lithuanian	
4Magyar	
23Polish	
19Roumanian	
3Russian	
1Ruthenian	
60
Scandinavian-
Danish	 9
Norwegian	 10
Swedish	 8
Slovak	 5
Swiss		1
Total	290
3.	Some were admitted as domestics from the British isles coming under the auspices of the department. Some were admitted as moving under the railways' agreement, and others as joining relatives and friends.


BIGGAR, SASKATCHEWAN, POST OFFICE
Mr. EVANS:: 1.	What was the revenue from the post office of Biggar, Saskatchewan, for the past three years?
2.	What salary was paid the postmaster at Biggar, Saskatchewan, for the past three years?
3.	What was the rental of the building housing the post office at Biggar, Saskatchewan, for the past three years?


Mr. VENIOT:: 1,	2 and 3.
Year
Revenue	Salary and allowance
$8,706 87 Salary	$3,211 00
Night allowance	
200	00Forward allowance	
504	00Money order com	
810	39Postal note com	
30	80Rent allowance	
688	00

Total

Questions
Year
1928-29
Revenue	Salary and allowance
$10,767 14 Salary	$3,21100
Night allowance	
200	00Forward allowance	
405	74Postal note com	
29	75Money order com	
855	40Rent allowance	
688	00Total	$5,389-89
$11,195 20 Salary including compensation for
money order business	S4,021	00Night allowance	
183	26Forward allowance	
370	09Postal note com	
35	55Rent allowance	
719	00Total	
$5,328 90
. ALBERTA RURAL MAIL ROUTES


Mr. GARLAND (Bow River):: .
1.	What is the total number of rural mail routes in the province of Alberta, and what are their respective locations?
2.	What mileage was covered by rural mail courier in each route?
3.	What is the amount paid to each of these couriers for their service in connection with each route?


Mr. YENIOT:: 1.	2 and 3.	173 rural routes; locations,
mileage per trip and amounts paid per annum as follows:-
Mileage
Name of route	per	Cost
trip
$ cts.
Alix No. 1	... 27	423 69Balzac No. 1	... m	425 00Balzac No. 2	... 25f	470 00Barons No. 1	... 37-9/10	700 00Big Valley No. 1	... 30	550 00Blackfalds No. 1	... 33*	700 00Biackie No. 1	... 441	1,400 00Byemoor No. 1	... 25	500 00Byemoor No. 2	.. . 28	520 00Calgary No. 2	... 60	1,196 00Calgary No. 4	. .. 39	800 00Carmangay No. 1	... 34	850 00Carstairs No. 1	... 46	1,000 00Cayley No. 1	... 26*	700 00Cayley No. 2	... 24*	520 00Cochrane No. 1	... 47	8 00 per trip or $832.00 per annum.Craigmyle No. 1	... 36	648 00Craigmyle No. 2	... 27*	553 93Craigmyle No. 3	.... 37*	725 37Crossfield No. 1	.... 38	60 00 per month or$720.00 per annum.Delburne No. 1	.... 21*	375 00Dc Winton No. 1	.... 42*	900 00Didsbury No. 1	.... 40	1,000 00Didsbury No. 2	.... 42|	1,100 00Eckville No. 1	.... 31	850 00Eckville No. 3	.... 36*	450 00
Mileage
Name of route	per	Cost
trip
Elnora No. 1.. Endiang No. 1 Endiang No. 2 Excel No. 1... Excel No. 2...
Fishburn No. 1	
Ghost Pine Creek No. 1..
Halkirk No. 1	
Halladay No. 1	
Hanna No. 1	
Hanna No. 3	
Hanna No. 4	
High River No. 1	
High River No. 2	
Huxley No. 1	
Innisfail No. 1	
Knee Hill Valley No. 1...
Lousana No. 1	
Macleod No. 1	
Midnapore No.l	
Nevis No. 1	
Nobleford No. 1	
Okotoks No. 1

Penhold No. 1...
Red Deer No. 1... Red Deer No. 2... Red Deer No. 3... Red Deer No. 4...
Scapa No. 1	
Scapa No. 2	
Swalwell No. 1 - Three Hills No. 1. Three Hills No. 2
Trochu No. 1...
Vulcan No. 2....
Alliance N o; 1 - Ardrossan No. 1.. Ardrossan No. 2.. Barrhead No. 1.. Bashaw No. 1 - Bentley No. 1 - Bentley No. 2-
Bittern Lake No. 1
25	S cts. 520 00
28*	484 00
26	520 00
29*1	96 00 per
26*/	month or
26	$1,152.00 per annum. 500 00
26*	750 00
42	624 00
40	600 00
46*	799 00
38*	580 00
24	450 00
40*	666 12
58	1,300 94
25-3/10	520 00
34	1,056 13
26*	780 00
21-3/4	425 00
42-2/5	735 00
65	1,050 00
29-5/8	450 00
24*	58 50 per
35	month or $702 00 per annum. 1,500 00
44	733 33
52	1,200 00
42	600 00
26	500 00
32	500 00
23*	350 00
30	520 00
27	546 00
34	900 00
26*	650 00
26	476 00
46	1,000 00
45*	730 00
28	485 34
22	400 00
26	500 00
28	500 00
40	1,872 00
27	5 00 per trip
29*	or $780 00 per annum. 850 00
Questions


REPARATIONS-CANADIAN IMPORTS
Mir. ADSHEAD:: How much of Canada's imports from Germani is assigned under the Young plan to payment or reparations?


Mr. DUNNING:: None. Under tihe new plan established by the agreement with Germany of the 20th January, 1930, embodying the Young plan with modifications, Canada's share of reparations, which has no relation to its imports from Germany, will be credited in cash (in currency other than marks) with the bank for international settlements which is to 'be established at Basle, Switzerland.

Questions


REPARATIONS-CLAIMS
Mr. NEILL:: 1.	Has the government received a number of claims too late to be included under the Reparations Payment Act of 1929?
2.	Is it the intention of the government to have these claims investigated and pay those which are found to be justified?


Mr. RINFRET:: 1.	Yes.
2.	The Reparation Payment Act of 1929 made no provision for these claims.


PORK AND PORK PRODUCTS-IMPORTATIONS
Mr. SENN:: 1.	What quantities of bacon and hams, fresh pork and pork in brine were imported into Canada from the United States during the calendar year 1929?
2.	What proportion of such imports were made by Canadian packing companies, or others than Canadian packing companies?
3.	Have such imports of American hog products been graded, stamped, or labelled, to enable the Canadian consumer to judge as to quality and country of origin?
4.	What was the customs valuation per pound on American hog products mentioned above, for the year 1929?
5.	What was the average wholesale price at Montreal and Toronto, on similar products for the year 1929?


Mr. RINFRET:: 1.	Canada's imports of baoon and ham, fresh pork and pork in brine from the United States, oalendar year 1929 were:
Pounds
Bacon and hams, shoulders and
sides, cured	 6,853,104
Pork, fresh, chilled or frozen.. 1,007,490 Pork, barrelled, in brine	 11,759,811
2.	No information available.
3.	No.
4. Canada's average import value per pound on United States hog products imported, calendar year 1929, was:
Per pound cents
Bacon and hams, shoulders and
sides, cured	 14.2
Pork, fresh, chilled or frozen... 15.8 Pork, barrelled in brine	 11-3
Note:	The above figures represent the
average fair market value or the price thereof per pound of certain hog products when sold for consumption in the principal markets of the United States whence and at the time when the same were exported direiotly to Canada.
5.	Average wholesale price of certain hog products at Montreal and Toronto, calendar year 1929, was:
Montreal Toronto per	per
Pound Pound
cents	cents
Bacon, smoked light, 6-8
pounds	 31.9	28.4
Ham, smoked light, 12-16
pounds	
29.3	29.2Shop hogs,	(90-110)	
20.2	20.2Mess pork	
20.2	20.4


PICTOU ISLAND CABLE
Mr. CANTLEY:: 1.	At what date did the Pictou island cable connection with the mainland last go out of
commission?
2.	What was the cause of cable ceasing to operate ?
3.	Have representations been made to the postal authorities or any department of the government relative to the failure of cable communication with Pictou island? If so, by whom?
4.	When will cable communication he reestablished with Pictou island?
5.	Has the Postmaster General considered the matter of air mail service to Pictou island during the winter months, either by the diversion of the air mail planes serving Prince Edward Island or the Magdelen islands or otherwise?


Mr. RINFRET:: 1.	December 12, 1929.
2.	Broken by buoy carried adrift by ice dragging its mooring across the cable.
3.	No.
4.	As soon as locality 'becomes clear of ice so that cable ship may proceed there.
5.	No.


AUTOMOBILE PRODUCTION AND IMPORTATION
Mr. KAISER:: 1.	For the fiscal year ending March 31, 1929, what was: (a) the total value of automobile production in Canada; (b) the total value of the imports and exports of automobiles, respectively; (c) the total value of automobile parts imported; (d) the total amount of duty collected on said parts; (e) total amount of drawback paid by the government upon exported automobiles?
2.	What was the total amount of excise tax and the total amount of sales tax collected upon automobiles during the same year?
3.	Is a sales tax collected upon exported automobiles?


Mr. RINFRET:: 1.	(a) The total value of automobiles production in Canada during the calendar year 1928, was $149,176,999. (No records kept by fiscal year in Bureau of Statistics).

Questions
(b)	Imports: S42,969,476; exports: Canadian produce, $43,059,733; foreign produce, $440,677
(c)	$67,777,516.
(d)	$17,261,791.18.
(e)	$3,197,798.53.
2.	Excise tax, $3,076,622; sales tax statistics not available.
3.	No.
Note: (b), (c), (d), (e), of query No. 1 and query No. 2 are for fiscal year ending March 31, 1929.


NORTHWEST TERRITORIES BRANCH OFFICIALS
Mr. BLACK (Yukon):: 1.	What are the various officials of the Northwest Territories Branch of the Department of the Interior?
Name of official
O. S. Finnie	
D. L. M'cKeand	
G. P. Mackenzie	
L. T. Burwash	
J. F. Moran	
A. S. Thomas	
D.	H. Christie	
J. P. Richards	
E.	M. Phillips	
T. F. Bracken	
F.	C. Wilkins	
Miss R. Beilby	
Miss M. G. Anderson...
Miss J. Macdonell....
A. McCracken	
Miss V. M. Roxborough.
Miss D. M. Clarke	
Miss K. E. Berry	
Miss A. A. Beach	
Miss M. A. L. Bidgood.. Miss M. E. Morrissey...
J. E. Fagan	
Miss M. K. Parr	
Miss D. R. McClelland.. Miss M. J. McDonald...
A. E. Porsild	
R. T. Porsild	
J. D. Soper	
W. H. B. Hoare	
J. A. McDougal	
G.	D. Murphy	
P. E. Trudel	
N. W. Champagne	
J. B. LeClaire	
M. J. Dempsey	
H.	McDermott	
D. Arden	
D. C. Ireland	
W. Scheafer	

Location of office
Ottawa.
Fort Smith.
2.	Where is the office or headquarters of each such official located?
3.	What is the annual cost to the country of each such official, showing in each case: (a) salary or remuneration; (b) living allowance;
(c)	other items of cost?
4.	What persons, if any, in addition to said officials and L. A. Giroux, Liberal member of the legislature of Alberta, were, during the past year, paid by the government in connection with the administration of Northwest territories?


Mr. STEWART (Edmonton):: 1.	The following staff administers the Northwest territories and Yukon affairs. The statement of responsibility is embodied in the Yukon pamphlet issued on 28th August, 1929, and in the Northwest territories pamphlet which will be distributed this week:
Present
salary
$ cts.
4.920	00
4.080	00 5,120 00 3,780 00 3,360 00 2,700 00
2.400	00
2.400	00 2,160 00 2,160 00
1.920	00 1,800 00 1,740 00
1.500	00 1,480 00
1.500	00 1,200 00 1,200 00 1,200 00 1,140 00
720 00
1.080	00 1,080 00 1,080 00
720 00 2,520 00 2,040 00
2.400	00
2.400	00 3,420 00 2,160 00 2,220 00 1,800 00 1,440 00 1,560 00
900 00 900 00 900 00 900 00
Living
allowance
$ cts.
3,000 00
1.500	00 1,200 00 1,200 00
1.500	00
1.500	00 Rations.
Other items of cost
(travelling
expenses)
cts.
391 25 1,899 80 1,653 89
2,020 30
3,000 00 2,210 90 2,078 90 1,718 61
205 70
Total
$ cts.
4.920	00
4.080	00 8,511 25 5,679 80 5,013 89 2,700 00
4.420	30 2,400 00 2,160 00 2,160 00
1.920	00 1,800 00 1,740 00
1.500	00 1,480 00
1.500	00 1,200 00 1,200 00 1,200 00 1,140 00
720 00
1.080	00 1,080 00 1,080 00
720 00 5,520 00 4,250 90 4,478 90 4,118 61
4.920	00 3,565 70
3.420	00 3,300 00 2,940 00 1,560 00
900 00 900 00 900 00 900 00

Questions
Name of official	Location of office	Present salary	Living allowance	Other items of cost (travelling expenses) 1928-29	Total$ cts.	$ cts.	$ cts.	$ cts.900 00	Rations	900 00ii	900 00	ii	900 00N Hoy	it	900 00	it	900 00ii	900 00	ii	900 00ii	900 00	ii	900 00ii	900 00	ii	900 00ii	900 00	it	900 00ii	900 00	ii	900 00it	$3 per day	Dr. C. Bourget (part time)...	Resolution	600 00	600 00Dr. A. L. McDonald (part	time)	600 00	600 00Dr. W. A. M. Truesdell (part	time)	600 00	600 00A ii	200 00	200 00Chesterfield	3,120 00	ii	977 96	4,097 962,520 00	ii	872 49	3,392 492,520 00	"	2,520 002'520 00	"	2,520 001,080 00	1,080 00l'OSO 00	1,080 00L. D. Morin	Quebec	2,000 00	300 00	153 85	2,453 85
Yukon
G. I. MacLean...
G. A. Jeckell....
R. L. Allen	
R. L. Gillespie...
F.	G. Berton	
P. M. Kelly	
J. B. Deslauriers. Miss V. Faulkner
G.	V. Leslie	
M. L. Schwarz... R. Henderson.... W. Y. Bruce	
Dawson
ii
ii
ii
it
it
ii
a



a
a
4,140
2,820
1,620
1.920
1.920
1.920 1,620 1,500 1,380 2,400 1,200
00
00
00
00
00
00
3,000 00 1.500	00 1.500	00 1.500	00 1.500	00 1.500	00 1.500	00 1,200 00 1.500	00	1,327 98
	
	
	
	
	
	
	
	
1,200 00	
	
	
8,467 98 4,320 00
3.120	00
3.420	00
3.420	00
3.420	00
3.120	00 2,700 00 2,8S0 00
2.400	00
2.400	00 600 00
2.	Answered by Question 1.
3.	Answered by Question 1.
4.
R. S. Finnie....
R. W. Burroughs
Expenses Wages 1929-30 $1,103 23$ 202 25 629 32	211 50


PURCHASE OF DIPPER DREDGES
Mr. STIRLING:: 1.	Has the government of Canada since the first day of January, 1927, ordered from Canadian Vickers Limited, or any other firm, two dipper dredges?
2.	If so, on what date and for what price?
3.	Were the two dipper dredges delivered?
4.	If so, on what date, and were distinguishing numbers given to such dredges?
5.	If so, what were the numbers?
6.	What department of the public service ordered the dredges?
7.	To what department were they delivered?
8.	Have the two dredges been registered under the provisions of the Merchant Shipping Act? '
9.	If so, at what port and under what numbers?
10.	Has the government rented either or both said dredges?
750	COMMONS
Questions as Orders }or Returns
11.	If so, by ivhat department were such dredge or dredges leased or rented?
12.	To whom were such dredge or dredges rented?
13.	On what date, for what rental, and for what period of time?
14.	Does the government still own the said dredges or either of them?


Mr. RINFRET:: 1.	Yes.
2.	One dredge was ordered November 29, 1927, at $361,002.03 with spare parts amounting to $35,708. The other was ordered on March 22, 1928, at the same price, the spare parts amounting to $22,513, grand total $780,225.06.
3.	Yes.
4.	One was delivered on July 5, 1928, and the other on August 21, 1928. Both were given distinguishing names.
5.	They were given the distinguishing names of Churchill No. 1 and Churchill No. 2.
6.	Department of Railways and Canals.
7.	Department of Railways and Canals.
8.	Yes.
9.	Montreal, Nos. 154, 452 and 154, 455.
10.	No.
11.	Answered by No. 10.
12.	Answered by No. 10.
13.	Answered by No. 10.
14.	Yes.


Mr. SHORT:: 1.	How many dipper dredges did the Canadian Vickers Company build for the government since the year 1926?
2.	Were they registered after they were delivered ?
3.	If so, at what port?
4.	By which department were the contracts awarded ?
5.	What is the total amount paid for all the dipper dredges ordered by and delivered to the government since the year 1926?


Mr. RINFRET:: 1.	Two.
2.	Yes.
3.	Montreal.
4.	Department of Railways and Canals.
5.	Total amount paid on 2 dredges ordered by Railways and Canals, $722,004.06. Besides this amount, $58,221 was paid for spare parts for these two dredges.



QUESTIONS PASSED AS ORDERS FOR RETURNS


Mr. ARTHURS:: 1.	Have any vessels of 100 tons or upwards been sold by the government or by the Canadian Government Merchant Marine, since January 1, 1921?
2.	If so, in respect of the said vessels, what were: (a) dates of sale; (b) original cost of vessel; (c) tonnage; (d) name of purchaser; (e) price received by the government or Canadian Government Merchant Marine?


LUMBER PURCHASES FROM M. N. CUMMINGS, WESTBORO
Mr. MALONEY:: 1.	Was any lumber purchased from M. N. Cummings, Westboro, Ontario, by any department of the government, during the fiscal years 1927, 1928, and 1929?
2.	If so, what quantity during each of the said years, and at what price?
3.	How much of the said lumber was purchased by tender and how much otherwise?
4.	Were any other materials purchased from the said M. N. Cummings by any department of the government during the said years?
5.	If so, what materials, at what total cost, and during what years?


DOMINION CARILLONNEUR
Mr. KENNEDY:: 1.	What is the name and annual salary of: (a) the Dominion carillonneur; (b) the assistant carillonneur?
2.	When was the Dominion carillonneur appointed and at what salary?
3.	What periods has he been absent each year since appointment: (a) on leave; (b) on holiday; (c) other occasions?
4.	How many concerts were given by the carilloneur in each year since appointment and what was the duration of each?
5.	On what other occasions did he play?
6.	Was the Dominion carillonneur on duty at the opening of the present session of parliament ?
7.	On how many occasions since appointment has the Dominion carillonneur been absent m Europe, and for what reason?
8.	Is it the intention of the government to extend to technical and professional men in the government service, the same leave of absence for post-graduate work?
9.	What was the cost of furnishing his apartments in the memorial tower? Have deductions in salary been made for quarters supplied ?
10.	Have there been any protests from war veterans against the memorial tower being used for living quarters by one not an ex-service man?


PURCHASE OF VESSELS
Mr. THOMPSON:: 1.	What boats have been purchased or ordered during the last 18 months by the government for the following departments: (a) Public Works; (b) Marine and Fisheries; (e) Indian Affairs; (d) Interior Department; (e) Department of National Defence; (f) Department of National Revenue?
2. What was the size and purchase price of the said vessels and the names of vendors or builders in each case?
3.	Were tenders called for?
4.	If so, how and when?


QUEBEC CITADEL-COST OF REHABILITATION
Mr. LUCHKOVICH:: 1. What is the total cost to date of the rehabilitation of the citadel at Quebec for occupation by the governor general?

Immigration Policy-Mr. Donnelly
2.	What was the cost of:	(a) repairs and
alterations; (b) furnishings; (c) electrical fixtures?	,
3.	During what periods has the governor general actually been in residence since the citadel was rehabilitated?
4.	What is the cost of maintenance:	(a)
when in residence; (b) when not in residence.
5.	What was the cost of fuel, etc., m the winter months of November, December, January and February, 1929 and 1930?



UNOPPOSED MOTIONS FOR PAPERS


Mr. CANTLEY:: For a copy of all correspondence between the Halifax harbour commission and the Nova Scotia Chemical Company Limited, The Canada Cement Company, also Alfred T. 0 Leary, referring or relating in any way to the leasing of space on Pier 9, Halifax harbour; also a copy of all correspondence between the said Halifax harbour commission and any department of the Dominion government, relating in any way to such leases; also a copy of all correspondence, if any, between the said Halifax harbour commission and any department of the Dominion government as to bonding privileges on said pier.



MAYO-FORT NORMAN SURVEY

Mr. BLACK (Yukon):: For a copy of all correspondence, reports, recommendations, communications and documents, in possession or control of the government, relating to the investigation, survey, location, construction or building of a trail, road or highway, across the Rocky mountains between Mayo in Yukon territory and Fort Norman in Northwest territories or thereabouts.
CANADIAN EXPEDITIONARY FORCE Sir GEORGE PERLEY (Argenteuil) moved: For a copy of memoranda, orders, and correspondence, on the files of the Department of Overseas Military Forces of Canada, setting forth the policy adopted in 1917 for the control of the Canadian forces overseas, and similar documents showing the means whereby that policy was made operative.


Hon. JAMES MALCOLM (Acting Minister of National Defence):: I would point out that if this motion requires only the production of pertinent documents relating to the adoption in 1917 of the policy for control of the Canadian forces overseas and the general administrative orders which placed that policy in operation, there will be no trouble in having the papers produced, but if the motion involves the production of papers relating to all details of administration as a result of that policy, it would entail the production of a mass of papers, requiring a great deal of resarch and labour. The department wish to advise me that all the pertinent documents can be brought down without any difficulty, if that will be satisfactory.


Sir GEORGE PERLEY:: It will be quite
satisfactory if I receive the papers according to the minister's suggestion.


[Stage Direction]
Motion agreed to.


Mr. THOMAS DONNELLY (Willow Bunch) moved:: That, in the opinion of this house, the time has arrived when the federal government of the Dominion of Canada should no longer assist immigrants to this country in any financial way, except in so far as financial assistance is at present being extended to female domestics.
He said:	Mr. Speaker, I do not feel that
I should apologize to this house for discussing briefly a subject of such importance as immigration, because during the past ten years it has been discussed by almost every public man throughout the Dominion either on the public platform or in the press, and almost every public man has expressed himself in one way or the other with regard to it. So much importance was attached by the house to this question of immigration that two years ago the whole matter was referred to the committee on immigration and colonization for consideration and report. At that time we heard witnesses from every part of Canada, and almost every one of them expressed the view that what Canada needed more than anything else was a greater number of people. They said if we were going to be a great country, then we needed more population, as though numbers would make a country great, and as though all we needed was to bring in more people and then we would have a great country. If numbers alone made a country, China to day would be one of the greatest countries of the world. But we need something more than mere numbers, Mr. Speaker; we need quality. Quality counts more than numbers. If we can only get the right kind and the right class of immigrants then there is some hope and some chance of our becoming a great country in the future.
The other point on which all these witnesses seemed to agree was that the one class of immigrants wanted was the farming class. They all emphasized the point that we could bring in all the farmers available and it would do the country good. All we needed was more population, and particularly more farmers. The strange thing about this unanimity was that the man most interested in the whole thing, the man doing the actual farm work, was never called before the committee to give evidence at all. Everybody was heardl
752	COMMONS
Immigration Policy-Mr. Donnelly
except the dirt farmer himself. We had some people before the committee representing the farmers, but they were not engaged in the actual work on the farm. The farmers themselves of late have been studying this question just as closely as anybody else, and they are absolutely opposed to anything in the nature of an active immigration policy. They believe that it is just as possible to have over-production of agricultural products as of any other commodity. They believe that we can have over-production of wheat, for example, just as easily as we can have over-production of automobiles or of any other manufactured articles. We have seen that due to over-production our wheat to-day is down to such a price that the farmers in the west cannot make a living out of wheat-growing. This is due to over-production. The other day I saw in the local press a statement made by Mr. Legge, chairman of the United States farm board, in a message to George F. Shafer, governor of North Dakota, that:
No other industry in the world blindly produces without any attention to potential market possibilities.
And he added:
Your growers will ask how they are going to get along with a less production, but if they can get more money, and we believe they can, by raising four bushels where they are now raising five, why should they destroy the market by raising the extra bushel?
We see therefore that it is just as possible to have over-production of farm products as of any other commodity. Poor prices for farm products mean a reduced standard of living for the farmer. It comes to this:	if
we bring in more farmers, and in consequence have a greater production of wheat or other products of the farm, our farmers will be reduced to the state of serfs or peons.
The farmer believes in one policy, Mr. Speaker, and one policy only, with regard to immigration; he believes that the best immigration policy is to make the farmer and the labourer happy, prosperous and contented. If we can make our people happy, prosperous and contented we do not need an immigration policy. The question then before the immigration department will not be, how to get more people into this country, but how to keep them out; and that is the condition of things that we want to see.
How are we to bring about that desirable state of affairs? How are we to make our farmers happy, prosperous and contented? The farmer believes that this can be done in two ways, first by reducing the cost of production and secondly, by reducing marketing costs. We can reduce the costs of pro-
duction just the same as it is done by any manufacturing concern, by mass production. Automobiles to-day are manufactured cheaper than they were years ago simply by mass production. And so the farmer to-day is raising more wheat by mass production. Twenty-five years ago when I went into western Canada the farmer was driving a three-horse one-furrow plough; to-day he is driving eight, ten, or twelve horses, turning three or four-furrows; if he is not using horses he has a tractor pulling a four or five-furrow plough. The same applied to other agricultural implements. Twenty-five years ago the farmer was driving a sixteen-run seeder; to-day he is driving a thirty-two run seeder, using for the purpose either horses or a tractor. Twenty-five years ago the farmer was running a six-foot binder, stookers following behind stooking the grain. Two or three weeks later he would engage a threshing outfit with ten, fifteen or twenty men in the gang, and they would do his threshing and probably eat up his feed grain. To-day we find the farmer in western Canada is driving a sixteen or twenty-foot combine, with the result that he and his hired men are cutting, threshing and marketing the crop with half the help, yes, with one eighth the help he employed twenty-five years ago. To sum up in regard to mass production, the farmer to-day is handling 640 acres of land just as easily as twenty-five years ago he handled 160 acres. This means that we have fewer farmers and greater production.
Another way in which we can reduce the cost of production is by reducing the cost of the implements of production and of the necessities of life. To this end the farmers have been assisted somewhat by this government. For instance, last year they cut the duty on combines, which meant a saving to the farmer of $50 to $100, depending on the size of the combine he purchased. Some years ago the government also reduced the duty on agricultural implements, which meant a corresponding reduction in their cost to the farmers of western Canada. Not only that but this government has reduced the cost of many of the necessaries of life. So the farmer to-day is in a better position with regard to his implements and the necessaries of life than he was twenty-five years ago. We hope and expect that the government will do more along that line so as still further to reduce the cost of these things to the farmers throughout the country and thus put them in a better financial position. Another way in which this cost of production can be reduced

Immigration Policy-Mr. Donnelly
to the farmer is by reducing marketing costs. The farmers themselves have not been unmindful of this and have endeavoured to cut out the middleman as much as possible in order that they may obtain the maximum of what is paid by the consumer and turn it back to the producer. During the last few years the farmers of western Canada have organized themselves into one of the greatest cooperative marketing institutions the world has ever known; I refer to the wheat pool. Much of the middleman's costs have been cut out by this wheat pool, and our farmers have benefited exceedingly by this step during the last few years. Within the past few days on account of the condition of the wheat market we have had much adverse criticism of the wheat pool. We are sorry to see that our organized grain trade, our millers and the financial interests throughout the country are trying to discredit the wheat pool in the eyes of the public, and we hope and trust that the public, when they know the facts with regard to the handling of the grain by our wheat pool, will realize the importance of the pool and its necessity to our farming institutions in the west. We are glad to see that our western provinces have come to its assistance so that it may be tided over this crisis, and we believe that when the crisis has passed, the pool will be the better for the ordeal through which it has passed.
Another way in which a decreased cost of marketing can be made effective to the farmer is by reducing the cost of transportation. In western Canada -we are in the unfortunate position of living in the middle of a continent, and on all the necessities of life that we use and must have, we are obliged to pay a long freight haul. Everything that we produce to be sold in the markets of the world, is affected in the same wav. In both cases the freight comes out of the pockets of the farmers, and anything that can be done to reduce this freight haul means a profit to the farmers. We are gkd to know that years ago a Liberal government in their wisdom, put on the statute books of Canada what is known as the Crows-nest pass agreement, and it was through a Liberal government, with the aid of some other sections in this house, that we were able to retain the Crowsnest pass agreement on the statute books. May I say here, Mr. Speaker, that the Crowsnest pass agreement means to the farmers of western Canada, especially those who live in the central part of Saskatchewan, a saving of as much as 6 cents a bushel on every bushel of wheat they market. It has been of immeasurable benefit to them.
Another way in which this government has been helping with regard to the marketing of our wheat has been in the building of the Hudson Bay railway. We hope in the next few years, when this railway is completed and ive begin to ship our grain and produce over that railway, we shall be able to bring in by that route some of the necessities of life, with the result that much of the freight charges and the cost of handling our produce will be reduced and the farmers of western Canada again will be helped. This is the way, Mr. Speaker, that the farmers of western Canada can be assisted, and they believe it is the only way-the keeping down of the cost of production and a reduction of their marketing cost.
Who, then, is asking for an aggressive immigration policy for this country? Is the labouring man asking for it? Does he want more labourers to come into the country than can be employed, with the result that his wages will be cut down? I think not. I cannot believe that the labourers are in favour of such a policy. I am certain, too, that the farmers are not asking for an aggressive immigration policy. I have been farming in western Canada, Mr. Speaker, for twenty-five years, on an extensive scale. I have associated with farmers during that period; I know their mentality, and I can assert that they do not want an aggressive immigration policy in western Canada, which would mean bringing in more immigrants to compete with them. As I view it, the people who are asking for such a policy are the manufacturers. They figure that if only they can get an aggressive immigration policy by which a large number of people will be brought into the country, they will be abl? to get cheaper labour. Our contractors, too, are asking for it. The contractor who takes a job believes that if he can get enough of this cheap labour coming into the country he will be able to make a handsome profit on his contract. Who else is there besides those? Well, we have some others-


Mr. CHAPLIN:: What about the members from Montreal?


Thomas F. Donnelly: Yes, there may be some from Montreal who want it; I do not doubt that, because Montreal is a manufacturing centre. And there may be some members from those parts of the country where they manufacture automobiles and automobile parts, such as the section represented by my hon. friend who has just spoken. The great transportation companies are also asking for it. They have land in western Canada, and they believe that if they can get large numbers of people in from foreign countries they can dispose of



Immigration Policy-Mr. Donnelly
their land. Not only that, but they will get also their transportation fares and the revenue from the freight on their goods coming in, the produce that they sell, and the necessities of life that they buy. Thus they say we will make the railways pay. They will get them 'both coming and going.


Herbert Bealey Adshead: Are those assisted passages?


Thomas F. Donnelly: No, all immigration, whether assisted or not. They want any kind, no matter what it is. Another class of people who are asking for it is some of the members of this house. I listened to the speech of the hon. member for North Vancouver (Mr. McRae), last year or the year before, on the question of immigration. He got a lot of publicity by making a great immigration speech in the house. He said he wanted this government to spend three hundred million dollars in the clearing of land and the building of homes in the northern parts of our western provinces, in that way getting immigrants to come to Canada. I assume that the hon. gentleman was speaking for the Conservative party. He is a front bencher now, in fact he is the Conservative organizer, and probably will be the next Minister of Immigration.


Some hon. MEMBERS:: Hear, hear.


Mr. SPEAKER:: Order.


Thomas F. Donnelly: Yes, it may be a long time, I have no doubt, Mr. Speaker-


James Dew Chaplin: Whenever you bring an election on.


Thomas F. Donnelly: Just think of it 1 Twenty-five years ago I went as a homesteader into the southwestern part of Saskatchewan. Thousands of others went in there. We were told that the land was no good, that it was a dry belt; but we stayed with it and we proved it to be a good country. There is the odd quarter section here and there that has not been homesteaded; we look upon that as our birthright, and we are keeping it and want to keep it for ourselves and for our children who are growing up. And now they are asking us to tax those people who went in there, people who received no assistance whatever from this government; they are asking us to raise three hundred million dollars to build homes for outsiders. Whoever heard of a more ridiculous policy than that? Let them go out to the prairies and tell the people all about that policy and see what they think of it. Let them preach it from the housetops in Regina and see what will happen. As I say, Mr. Speaker, I can fMr. Donnelly.]
think of nothing more ridiculous in the world than to tax our people to build homes for immigrants. Many years ago Esau was held up to ridicule because he sold his birthright for a mess of pottage. Would we not be held up to much more ridicule, Mr. Speaker, if we entertained such an idea as that of hiring people to come in here and take away our birthright?


Mr. McGIBBON:: It is your government [DOT]that is doing it.


Thomas F. Donnelly: Yes, and if you were in we would be even worse off, because you say so.


Hewitt Bostock: Order.


James Dew Chaplin: You will excuse it then.


Hewitt Bostock: Order.


Thomas F. Donnelly: I do not need to say that the hon. member is not the only member in the Conservative party, Mr. Speaker, who has said thgt. Others have said the same thing. The hon. member for Fort William (Mr. Manion) has said the very same thing on several occasions.


Mr. MANION:: Has said what?


Thomas F. Donnelly: Let me quote what the hon. member for Fort William said in one of his addresses in this house.


Robert James Manion: What is it? Said what?


Thomas F. Donnelly: This is from one of his addresses, Mr. Speaker, in the session of 1929, page 2751:
Our land, I repeat, should be the mecca for all the desirable people from all the overcrowded portions of the earth.
He would want to make it the dumping ground for all sorts and conditions of people, the riff-raff, the ne'er-do-wells. That is the policy of the Conservative party.
I want to refer for a moment, Mr. Speaker, to my resolution as I have it here on the order paper. The resolution is as follows:
That, in the opinion of this house, the time has arrived when the federal government of the Dominion of Canada should no longer assist immigrants to this country in any financial way, except in so far as financial assistance is at present being extended to female domestics.
This resolution should meet at least with the whole hearted support of the Minister of Finance, since it is the one resolution on the order paper which asks the government to save some money. I believe 80 per cent of the other resolutions ask the government to spend money, but that is not the case here.

Immigration Policy-Mr. Donnelly


Mr. CAMPBELL:: I might remind the hon. member that the next resolution on the order paper suggests the saving of money as well.


Thomas F. Donnelly: 
Mr. STEWART (Edmonton):: The hon.
member is not quite correct; we have no agents upon the continent, they are simply inspectors and examiners.


Thomas F. Donnelly: The cost of these assisted passages to immigrants from Great Britain and Northern Ireland for the year 1928-29
was as follows:
Contingencies and salaries	 $399,165	86
Number of immigrants	 35,912
Average cost	 $11	12
The empire settlement assisted passage scheme works out as follows:
Contingencies and salaries	 $616,990	00
Number of immigrants	 23,585
Average cost	 $26	16
The total amounts to $1,016,155.86 for 59,497 immigrants, or an average cost per immigrant of $17.08. There are a number of societies which receive assistance from the government, such as the British Immigration and Colonization Society, the British Settlement Society of Canada, the Salvation Army, the Scottish Immigration Aid Society, the Council for Social Service, Church of England in Canada, and the British Welcome and Welfare League. The assistance given to these societies during the year 1928-29 amounted to something like $23,100.


Mr. WOODSWORTH:: Was any assistance given to any of the provinces?


Thomas F. Donnelly: Yes, during the year 1929 the provincial government of Ontario received $3,910, and the provincial government of New Brunswick received $500.


Milton Neil Campbell: Was there no assistance given to the province of Quebec?


Thomas F. Donnelly: Not that I know of.


Milton Neil Campbell: There was a vote in the estimates of last year for $50,000.


Thomas F. Donnelly: As I understand it, that was for repatriation. The farmers object most of all to this method of assisting people to come to this country. We would like to see not only assisted immigration but other immigration restricted, and we would be glad to have the large majority of immigration continue to be British.
We feel that a man who has to be paid to come to this country is no good. I have assisted several people to come to western Canada and every time I have paid, or assisted, or coaxed a man to come, to the west as an immigrant, he has always said to me after having been in the west a while: "Well, you paid me; you coaxed me to come to this country, it is up to you to look after me."
I have come across some of those who have been brought out under the 3,000 family scheme and one of them, who was too lazy to work but not too proud to beg, came to me and said:	"The government brought us
here and it is up to them to keep us here. Y>
a have been here long enough; they should give us the land even if we are not able to pay for it." When you coax or pay people to come to this country, you take away from them the very first essential in a good immigrant, namely, self-reliance. When you take that away from a man he simply relies on the government or his friends or somebody else to keep him alive. Moreover, in regard to the practice of going throughout the world and coaxing, paying or almost hiring people to come to Canada, if I were a man in another country the first question I would ask would be:	What is the matter with your
country that you people are trying to coax us to go there? There must be something wrong; you would never be doing this if your country was any good. We are lowering our status; we are degrading ourselves in the eyes of the world when we coax and pay people to come here. The time has arrived when we should be more selective in regard to the people we bring here. We should let those people come from northern Europe and the British Isles who are able to pay their own way; if they are not able to pay their own way when they get a rate of ten pounds, they are not much good.
I am sorry my time is up. I should like to have referred to the question of female domestics, which are required chiefly, I might say, for bachelor farmers and homesteaders in western Canada.


Mr. D. F. KELLNER (Athabaska):: Mr. Speaker, I want to offer a few words of commendation to the hon. member for Willow Bunch (Mr. Donnelly) for bringing this resolution before the house. I might remind him that there are in this chamber some hon. members who have criticized this expenditure every year for a good many years; and we are glad to see the good work is spreading out a little further. At the outset I should like to express a word of regret that the hon. member did not have time to tell us why he wanted female domestics to come in under the scheme of assisted passage.


Thomas F. Donnelly: For bachelor farmers.
"58	COMMONS
Immigration Policy-Mr. Kellner


Donald Ferdinand Kellner: So far as my experience goes they have not been entirely satisfactory in this country, and before I finish my remarks I am going to offer an amendment to delete that part of his resolution.
I also want to point out that his resolution is not broad enough. There are, as -he suggests, many immigrants who -come to Canada under the activities of the railroad companies. I was talking to one of them just a few days before I left Edlmonton, and he told me about his experience in the old country. He said he went down the street one morning and saw a sign reading "Immigrants wanted for Canada. Four dollars a day." A day or -two later he was passing another agency and he saw practically the same sign, but they wanted immigrants at $5 a day, and in a short time the rate was up to $7 a day. That man sold out his stuff in -the old country. He got $2,200 or so for it; he came to Canada and the first job he was offered was at 82 a dlay, but he would not take it because he thought it was not in accordance -with the promise given. After waiting for two or -three -months he bought a small farm west of Edmonton where the land is probaibly the poorest of -any we have; he built a house and spent what he had remaining from his money. Last winter the city of Edmonton had to feed both him and his family. That immigrant was not brought here iby the activities of the Dominion government. The railroad -companies are -bringing those immigrants in. Thousands of others come in, assisted not by the government but 'by various organizations. For instance, when this immigration flurry started it almost reminded one of the situation t-h-at arose in the great war. There was an agitation across Canada that the country was simply being flooded with Catholics, and practically every Protestant -church got busy and started to bring in immigrants. So you have the Catholic church trying to bring immigrants in faster than the Protestants and the Protestant churches -trying to get even with the Catholics. My hon. friend's resolution would cover that, but it is high time that parliament took notice of the matter. That sort of thing should -be stopped.
My hon. friend did not go very deeply into the question of assisted immigrants. Let me point to one feature of that phase of the question of which we should have a clear conception. We have in western Canada today several hundred, indeed', I think several thousand immigrants who have not one dollar invested in farm or equipment. The Dominion and the Im-perial governments together have paid the immigrant's passage across the ocean and out -to western Canada; they have

bought his equipment, his stock; they have built his house; they have dug his well and they have broken up his farm for him. Not one dollar has he invested in it. The experience of the soldier settler has shown us that a mam- cannot make a success on a farm where he owes the entire value of the capital invested in it. If a returned man cannot make a success of his operations under those circumstances, surely an immigrant cannot do so. In my judigment this sort of thing will produce a serious situation one of these days. The time will come when the taxpayers of Canada will become tired of paying for these immigrants' farms and undoubtedly there will be a demand that the government get rid of that white elephant. Big corporations will be formed; the land will be purchased and then you can kiss your ordinary farmer good-by, because he will n-ot be able to farm. The situation will be worse than that in regard to the Australian treaty which we have been discussing for the last few days.
I am not going to take up -more time in discussing this question because every hon. member has a reasonable appreciation of it, but I desire to move the following amendment:
That all the words after "way" be struck out and that the -following words be added:
"and that any company, organization, association, church or other institution bringing, or assisting in bringing, any immigrants to Canada, shall deposit with the government the sum of $1,000 for each and every immigrant so brought in or assisted; and provided further that the money so collected shall constitute a fund from which payments shall be made to the governments of the provinces in which the immigrant resides, to provide for unemployment, health and other expenses."
Before I sit down I want to point out that at the present time we are receiving a number of immigrants, some assisted by the government and some not. From a return that was brought down to-day, I find that 290 were brought in for Alberta in January, and from private sources I am advised that a lot more landed there last week. It seems to me very strange that when the province of Alberta is feeding over 4,000 people we should bring in 290 more in January, and an unknown number since then. We are packing the people in there week after week and month after month, and for my part I object to that. I am going to ask the house, therefore, to accept the amendment, and before taking my seat I again wish to express my appreciation of the action of the hon. member for Willow Bunch in bringing this matter before the house.

Immigration Policy-Mr. Pouliot


Mr. JEAN FRANCOIS POULIOT (Tem-iscouata):: Mr. Speaker, the resolution brought forward by my hon. friend from Willow Bunch (Mr. Donnelly) has come into the house like an invigorating breeze from the west. I believe that the object of the resolution would be supported by a large portion of the population of this country. I do not wish to cast any reflections on the immigrants who have come here from other lands and have adopted Canada as their home country. Many people have come here from all parts of the world with the intention of becoming good Canadian subjects-that is the term, I believe, in the immigration law. These people have the Canadian spirit, and it is highly desirable that we should have them in our country, but I believe that they would have come here even without any assistance from the government because they knew that the future of this country was bright, and that they could make no mistake in coming here, where they could live and bring up their children 3nd enjoy all those blessings that a man who is ready to work on the soil can have in this country.
I take this opportunity of congratulating you, Mr. Speaker (Mr. Boulanger) upon your presiding over this particular debate, because as vice-president of the Native Sons of Canada you have preached eloquently, even in the west, the same doctrine that has been propounded by the hon. member for Willow Bunch this afternoon.
We live in a very large country, and that is why the Department of Immigration was created. We had not enough people, and we had to bring in more people from other countries in order to lower the taxation in this country. The consequence was that several j-ears ago, people who were interested in the transportation companies, in order to make money for themselves, were very active in bringing immigrants into this country, and for that they received a bonus, which I believe was wrong. I was sorry to see last year in all the papers of this country a joint declaration made by the heads of the two great railway corporations of Canada to the effect that assistance to immigrants should be continued. Personally, I feel that when people want to go somewhere they should not be paid to go there. If you pay them to * come, they will imagine, as my hon. friend from Willow Bunch pointedly remarked, that dhere is something wrong with the country. Assistance was granted to immigrants in order -to increase the population of this country, but was the population actually increased by that method? I do not believe that our population has increased in proportion to the huge .sums which have been expended in bringing IMr. Kellner.]
immigrants to this country. If, however, the measures that have been passed by this government had been enacted by previous governments, our population might have been increased. For instance, if we had had old age pensions years ago, many old people would have continued to live here and their children would not have been put to such a great expense in supporting them. That is only one measure I might mention.
Coaxing and paying immigrants to come to this country is an artificial method of increasing population; and these artificial methods produce no worth-while results. I cannot understand why people should be induced to come to this country from the British Isles or continental Europe, sometimes under false pretences by any agency of transportation companies. I do not know if they get a share of the bonus, but undoubtedly they herd those immigrants on the ships and send them to Canada, which is represented to these poor deluded people as another promised land where they can shovel money twenty-four hours of the day. I have for instance met some of these men, members of distinguished Russian families who lost all their property in the revolution, men with university training, men of intelligence and culture, and they were gaining a livelihood here as servants, just" as they do in Paris. You know very well, Mr. Speaker, that one out of every five taxi drivers in Paris is a Russian nobleman. Those men came here because they were told they would be able to shovel gold, that they were coming to a second Klondike, so prosperous was this country. I believe, sir, in the prosperity of Canada, provided that there is no attempt at interference with the natural course of events. We must proceed along normal lines. I think this is a good country to live in, but I am convinced that the more people we bring here through the bonus system or under false pretences the more trouble we shall have with them. For instance, we have many Italian immigrants. They are hard workers and as a rule make good citizens, but when they can find no work to do some of them become desperate and resort to violence. But I believe such criminals are not representative of the majority of their race, although it is a regrettable condition of affairs.
There is nothing like love of one's native land, or of one's adopted land, to make one a good citizen. I cannot conceive of a Canadian by adoption who still thinks in terms of his native land; his whole spirit and outlook must be changed if he is to become a good Canadian. For instance, a man from the British Isles, or from continental Europe, or from South America, if he does not love
760	COMMONS
Immigration Policy-Mr. Pouliot
Canada as his own country but still remains at heart a national of his native land, will never develop into a good citizen of Canada. Not only that, but I do not think he will remain here long. We have an organization known as the league of Native Sons of Canada; it is formed of people born in this country. That association does good work. But 'I do not speak only of those people who trace their descent through generations and generations of Canadians, I speak also of those who come from any other country, including the United States, and who become so thoroughly imbued with the spirit of their adopted land that they are really good Canadians. Of course, Mr. Speaker, there must be exceptions, and too often we see immigrants from the British Isles who have come here because they cannot earn a living at home, and yet they adopt a very snobbish attitude towards " colonials " even though they may beg for charity.


Mr. GEARY:: Nonsense.


Jean-François Pouliot: 
Charles A. Stewart: Mr. Speaker, I thought
perhaps it might .be wise at this juncture that the house should be informed as to what the government intend to do in connection with this very vital question of immigration -what proposals they have to make to the house, and what change, if any, in policy they propose with respect to handling prospective immigration to this country.
Immigration, ever since I have been a member of this house, at all events, has been a very much disputed question. Members do not agree as to the policy that is to be pursued, in connection with people coming to Canada from other countries. I well remember, sir, sitting here in 1922, as Acting Minister of Immigration, being bombarded for several days with respect to the appropriations that were made for immigration purposes. However, I do not propose this afternoon to deal very much with the past, or to say very much about it, except briefly to refer to it 'and to such aspects of it as will apply to the future.
Two years ago we had a very exhaustive inquiry before a committee of this house, and a report was made to this house, and the government have, so far as I know-and the minister who preceded me-been endeavouring to act upon the recommendations contained in that report. Economic conditions have changed somewhat in the past eight years, and when I was acting in this capacity in 1922 I found myself occupying a very difficult position. I found that there was one class of public opinion in this country that felt that the only way in which to save the financial situation then existing in Canada was to secure as large a number of immigrants as possible to come to Canada, for the avowed purpose of helping us to pay our debts. That was the assumption. I wish to say at once, Mr. Speaker, that I never subscribed to that opinion. I never believed that new immigrants to this country would assist the people who are here very materially in paying their indebtedness. I believe that these immigrants create problems which are not compensated for by the amount they may earn. It is true that you can point to isolated cases where perhaps financial help has been forthcoming through the influx of new people to any given territory, but that condition is not general.
I do not desire to argue that point this afternoon; I will simply content myself by saying that the government used its best endeavours, through the various means at its disposal, to bring people to Canada. It may be questioned as to whether it was a wise policy to enter into agreements with organ-iaztions or corporations such as those mentioned by the hon. member for Athabaska (Mr. Kellner) in his amendment to the motion. On the other hand, hon. members should remember that while these schemes were not perhaps fully sanctioned by the provinces, they did give some assistance to them. All the provinces are concerned with immigration, although it is the duty of the federal government to secure immigrants; to see, as far as it may be possible, that advertising is responsible and dependable, that no misleading statements are made and that the information given any intending immigrant is authentic. I know that complaint has been made that this is not always the case, but when these complaints have been traced to their sources usually it has been found that the advertising in question has been issued by some agency other than the government.
Many complaints have been made about the class of immigration and the desirability of the immigrants who have come to Canada. In this country to-day we have a cosmopolitan population, and no one will pick out any particular race and say that they are not of service to this country or that they do not fit in with our people. I am not one of those who subscribe to that sort of thing. I be-
762	COMMONS
Immigration Policy-Mr. Stewart (Edmonton)
lieve there is room in Canada for the honest individual who is physically and mentally fit, so long as he is willing- to abide by our laws and assist in building up this new country. I would not put a restriction on any man except the general restrictions which every country must have with regard to the economic factors involved. Neither am I one of those who subscribe to the statement that Canada now has all the people it wants and that there is no room for any newcomers, though of course I do believe that reasonably good judgment should be exercised in supervising the entrance of these immigrants to Canada. Having said that, may I just interject that naturally, as the agency through which people come to this country, when there is a great deal of unemployment the federal government usually receives the blame for such a condition. That has been true during the past winter, but when there is no unemployment; when the country is prosperous and labour is required, of course the federal government receives a good deal of commendation for bringing people to this country to meet that need.
I should like to go back to what I consider to be the difficulty in connection with this situation. It is not a new difficulty; it is that I cannot conceive any other agency being responsible for the entrance of a newcomer to this country than the federal government, but unfortunately the responsibility of the federal government stops the moment an immigrant arrives within the boundaries of any given province and takes up his residence there. That immigrant then becomes the responsibility of the province, and I have been giving some attention during the past few months to this question in an endeavour to bridge the difficulty as between the responsibility of the federal government and that of the provinces. Indeed, I gave that question some attention in 1922. In that year I was so convinced of the importance of this matter that I made a trip through western Canada and interviewed the governments of all the provinces. I mention this fact because my hon. friend from Willow Bunch (Mr. Donnelly) has said that he thinks the government has stolen some of his thunder by forestalling this resolution. In 1923 also my successor in office, the late Mr. Robb, had a conference with the representatives of the provinces at which this matter was discussed.
When I took that trip through the west I told the provincial governments that I felt that as far as colonization was concerned, Canada had arrived at the place where this duty should be assumed by the provinces, and I said I felt that the provinces had a right to say how many immigrants, and what class 
of immigrants they could absorb during any given year. Then it would be our business as a federal government to supervise the bringing in of those immigrants and place them inside the boundaries of the province. Later, if they proved undesirable for any reason, it would be the business of the federal government to remove them from the province and send them back to the country from which they came. Briefly that was my proposition on that occasion. The western provinces, I think with some reason, answered: "We the western provinces, are not in control of our natural resources. Wre believe it to be the business of the federal government to continue to settle these lands and to be responsible for the colonization work."
As I say, that statement was perfectly proper under the circumstances, but from that time od there has been a good deal of cooperation between the federal Department of Immigration and the provincial governments throughout Canada. The settlement of the boys brought to Canada has been largely under the auspices of the province. That is particular^ so in Ontario, and also in Alberta where the provincial Minister of Agriculture, as most hon. members know, has an immigration scheme of his own with regard to British boys. At present that condition exists in New Brunswick and in Manitoba as well. We, as a federal government, in conjunction with the British government, pay the cost of transportation of these boys from their homes to Canada; in Alberta the boys have been received by the Minister of Agriculture and in the other provinces by other agencies and settled in homes in those provinces. So it may be said that this is a three-way agreement now in existence between the provinces, the federal government and the British government, with the British government contributing one-half the cost of transportation.
That scheme is in existence at the present moment, and the same thing may be said with respect to domestics, though not to such a large degree. Domestics coming to Canada have been recruited in some instances by the province of Ontario, and by us at the request of the other provinces; they have been taken to the hostels of those provinces under the supervision of the Department of Immigration. Recruitments are made by the federal and provincial governments in some cases, and by the Salvation Army and other agencies which operate along that line.


Richard Bedford Bennett: W ould the minister
kindly state the contractual obligations of the department with reference to assistance, and give the house the extent of the obligations outstanding at the moment?

Immigration Policy-Mr. Stewart (Edmonton)


Charles A. Stewart: So far as domestics are concerned, at the moment we are paying a proportion of the passage by way of a grant, an equivalent amount being contributed by the British government. I have forgotten the exact date, but I think it was in 1925 or 1926 when the full amount of the passage was loaned with the intention of future recovery, but that procedure met with very indifferent success. That arrangement was abandoned and we now make a grant to domestics.


Sir EUGENE FISET:: What does that
amount to?


Charles A. Stewart: 
Mr. HEAPS:: We did not hear the answer to the question.


Charles A. Stewart: 
Abraham Albert Heaps: Is that the amount which this government contributes towards bringing domestic servants to this country?


Charles A. Stewart: I was speaking largely from memory, but I think that is the correct amount.
Then there is the boy and girl movement, to which rve contribute one half the cost of the passage to point of destination. This arrangement applies to the children of individuals who came out as farm labourers, and it will apply to the one hundred families per year who are being brought out to the province of New Brunswick under a tripartite agreement. That agreement is the last one to be completed so far as the bringing out of people from the old land to Canada is concerned. There are a number of individuals at present working as farm labourers who come under the three thousand family scheme. They will be settled upon the land in order to complete that agreement, but no more families will be brought from the old country for land settlement outside of the one hundred per year to New Brunswick. Under this scheme we have brought out already two hundred, one hundred will be brought out this year, and one hundred during each of the two succeeding years.
If there should be children under nineteen years of age accompanying these families they will be given free passage, the same as the children between fourteen and nineteen years of age.


George Reginald Geary: Coming out with whom?


Charles A. Stewart: With their parents.


George Reginald Geary: Would the minister be able to give categorically the different plans under which immigration is proceeding at the present time?


Charles A. Stewart: I think the hon. member will find that I have given a complete statement with regard to juvenile immigration.


George Reginald Geary: I was listening as carefully as I could, but I did not understand that that had been given.


Charles A. Stewart: 
Abraham Albert Heaps: Has the system of training
in the old country been discontinued?


Charles A. Stewart: No assistance is granted to the trainee other than the assistance given to him in the securing of employment. I think there are some 1,100 in training this winter, none of whom have left England.
As I have stated, my hope is that the bills now before this house for the transfer of the natural resources to the western provinces will go through. I trust that those bills will put all the provinces of Canada upon an equal basis. They will transfer the administration of the lands of the western provinces from this government to the governments of the provinces. Some time ago I wrote to the prime ministers of the western provinces stating that I felt that the objection taken in 1922
764	COMMONS
Immigration Policy-Mr. Stewart (Edmonton)
by the representatives of the western provinces that they did not control their natural resources, was now removed. I told them that in order that we might have an agreement between the provinces and the federal government, I was going to send the Deputy Minister of Immigration to consult with them, and I very naturally asked them to take the responsibility for colonization. That arrangement will apply to all the provinces of Canada.


Milton Neil Campbell: Will that involve the
termination of the contracts with the transportation companies?


Charles A. Stewart: As has been stated by the hon. member for Willow Bunch (Mr. Donnelly) that agreement expires next autumn, and in accordance with the report, of the committee it will not be renewed. The railway companies have been notified to that effect.
In the proposed agreement with the provinces we are asking them to assume the responsibility for saying how much and what kind of immigration they are desirious of having and can absorb in any given year. We will not pass into Canada people destined to any province unless it is the desire of that province to receive them. It is not the intention of this government to prevent any healthy individual in the British Isles or in northern Europe who is in a position to finance his passage and who has a reasonable sum of money in his possession to maintain himself when he arrives in this country, from entering the country unless the provinces should say that they are not desirous of receiving such immigrant. Under such circumstances we would have to debar to that extent an individual's entry into that particular province.
So far as the immigration from central Europe is concerned, the classes mentioned in the railway agreements, that immigration will come in under what we call our permit system. It means simply that the application, instead of coming to the Minister of Immigration of the federal government, will go to the appropriate officer appointed by the province, and if he passes upon that request, then we will put the machinery into motion to bring in that individual.


Eugène Fiset: WThen will this new procedure take effect?


Charles A. Stewart: As soon as
the agreement expires this year and we have an opportunity, after consultation with the various provincial governments, to work out the details.


Richard Bedford Bennett: It will not be in 1930
anyway?


Charles A. Stewart: It cannot go into effect this year. It is proposed to put it into effect next year.


Donald Ferdinand Kellner: These relatives would
not come under the assisted passage scheme?


Charles A. Stewart: We are not thinking of continuing any assistance except that we have not yet arrived at a definite decision as to whether we should discontinue assistance to juveniles or not. That is the only case in regard to which we have not reached a definite decision. The juveniles are passed upon by the appropriate provincial officer and it will be at the request of the province that they will come to Canada. We wish to make a clear distinction between the responsibility of the federal government and that of the provincial government. Believing that the province is responsible for the individual the moment he arrives within the boundary of that province, we propose for the future not to bring in, not to admit to Canada, if you like, any individual who has not been passed upon and a request made for his admission by the provincial authorities.


James Shaver Woodsworth: How is it proposed to keep an immigrant within a particular province?


Charles A. Stewart: There will be no more difficulty about that than there is at present.


James Shaver Woodsworth: There is a difficulty at present.


Charles A. Stewart: 
Richard Bedford Bennett: Is there any diminution
of the department's effort this year or in the number of officers who have been maintained heretofore?


Charles A. Stewart: We have
not discontinued the services of any officers.


Richard Bedford Bennett: Is there any cessation or limitation of effort?


Charles A. Stewart: The instructions I have given are that we are not to lend encouragement to people to come to Canada. We are not, in other words, trying to encourage people to come to Canada. We are not saying that they must not come here The railway agreement, of course, has not expired. We have served notice on the railway companies. I understood, when I took over the department, that the maximum number they were bringing in was 8,000. I at once brought them to Ottawa and told them I felt, so far as that movement could be curtailed. steps should be taken immediately to curtail it, and I have their promise that they will do so as far as possible.


James Shaver Woodsworth: How is it that advertisements are still appearing in the British press, urging people to come to Canada?


Charles A. Stewart: I cannot be responsible for all the advertisements that appear in the press, but I assure my hon. friend there are no advertisements appearing under the auspices of the federal government agencies making any such statement.


James Shaver Woodsworth: Would the minister like to have one? I think I can supply it.


Charles A. Stewart: I would be glad to have one. Briefly, that is what we propose to do. So far as juvenile immigration is concerned, it is not our intention to withdraw that assistance in conjunction with the British government, provided that the provinces are willing to take and absorb those juveniles within their jurisdiction. But in every particular it is our intention not to bring or to admit to Canada people that the provinces do not want to absorb in their midst.
May I say in conclusion I cannot conceive of any province which is going to shut the door and say: We do not want a single individual to come into our midst? That would be an absurd position. But I can understand a clear desire on the part of a provincial government to have control of the people who are coming into their midst. I have felt that very strongly ever since I have had anything to do with immigration. I believe they have an inherent right to be able to say what class of people they are desirous of having come within their particular province, because, after all, they are the responsibility of that province the moment they take up their abode in it.
On the other hand, I think immigration will continue. I expect that the provinces will cooperate with us in this scheme of immigration; that we shall have better control, and I hope that we shall remove the feeling that the provinces have, that when difficulties arise with respect to unemployment or even to deportation and matters of that kind, they have no responsibility in the matter. At the present time they can say: We have nothing to do with it. Some of the provinces have said, as I find upon the records, we could absorb so many people. If the provinces make arrangements with church organizations and other organizations of various kinds to carry on this work, we will respect those agreements; but it is not the intention of the federal government to make any agreement of any sort, and as soon as the existing ones are cancelled we shall discontinue anything of that kind and all assistance except that granted to juveniles.


Mr. SPENCER:: With regard to deportation, is it the custom of the federal government to pay the expenses, or are they paid either by municipal authorities or by the provincial government?


Charles A. Stewart: The federal government pays the expenses of deportation, but there is, between the time the individual is apprehended or complaint is made by either the municipality or the province and the time the matter reaches the federal department, a period during which expenses have been incurred. We have not paid those expenses, but from the moment we take charge of the individual, we pay all expenses.


Mr. IRVINE:: Has,the minister any knowledge of the percentage of immigrants which Canada and other immigrant-receiving countries have been able to absorb in the last ten years; and does he not think that would be a fair basis to work upon for the future?


Charles A. Stewart: My hope is that when the provinces have the full responsibility of stating how many people they can absorb, we shall overcome our difficulty in that connection. I have stated how the difficulty of migration from one province to another can be covered; how domicile and
Immigration Policy-Mr. Lucas

responsibility can be established for the individual. Therefore we get over those difficulties. I think, for example, the provincial government of Manitoba have a far better idea of the number of people they can absorb in their province in any given year than we at Ottawa or even one of our officials located in the city of Winnipeg can have. I anticipate that there will be some difficulty when we begin to work the plan out, but I think it is a sound, safe and sane one and will prevent a lot of difficulties arising that we have had in the past.


James Shaver Woodsworth: The minister said a few moments ago that the Canadian government was not encouraging anyone to come to Canada. Here is the advertisement to which I referred, published in the News of the World of December 8, 1929. It reads:
Try Canada! 3,000 good men are wanted on Canadian farms next spring.
If you are single, between 19 and 35 years of age and physically fit, why not be one of the 3,000?
The British government will give you three months' free training before you sail and a free ticket to your destination in Canada.
The Canadian government promise you a job on arrival.
Apply without delay to any employment exchange, Canadian government agent or passenger agent.
Train during the winter and sail in the spring for Canada.


Charles A. Stewart: If my hon. friend will send the advertisement over to me, I shall make inquiries about it.


Mr. W. T. LUCAS (Camrose):: I was very glad to hear the minister state that in the government's new policy the responsibility for bringing in immigrants in the future is to be delegated to the provinces. If that plan is carried out, it will meet a very large body of opinion in western Canada.


Charles A. Stewart: I do not want my hon. friend to misquote me. I did not say delegating; I said, at the request of the provinces. The responsibility will still remain with the federal government.


William Thomas Lucas: The responsibility of recruiting immigrants will remain with the federal government, but the provincial governments will be responsible in regard to the numbers to be brought in, if I understood the minister correctly.


Charles A. Stewart: Yes.


William Thomas Lucas: The resolution proposed by the hon. member for Willow Bunch (Mr. Donnelly) this afternoon expresses, I feel sure, the opinion of a large and growing body 
of opinion in Canada, an opinion that has been expressed in this corner of the house for several years past. The question of immigration is perhaps one of the most important with which Canada has to deal. Canada is a young and growing country, with a vast area, tremendous natural resources, and a sparse population, and therefore the people that we are bringing in to settle this country at the present time are very largely going to lay the foundation stock for the future of this great Dominion. In my opinion, therefore, it is necessary that we should not look upon numbers alone, but that a careful selection should be made of intending immigrants in order that we may lay a sound foundation. In this connection I should like to read a resolution which was passed by the United Farmers of Alberta, at their annual convention held at Calgary in January last.
Whereas, the policy of assisted immigration as practised in this Dominion for many years has been futile, and has not resulted in the anticipated increase of population; and
Whereas, the concentration of effort towards the increase of our agricultural population, with the consequent neglect of other lines of productive effort has resulted in an unbalanced development of this country, and has adversely affected the values of farm products in relation to those of other articles of consumption; and
W hereas, the fact that the federal government has sole jurisdiction as to the number and type of immigrants who may come into this country, and the conditions under which they may make entry, and that a part of this authority has been delegated to various organizations, together with the refusal or neglect of both the federal government and the organizations concerned to effectively assume the responsibility for the after care of those who enter this country under their auspices, has thrown a great burden upon the provinces and municipalities within whose boundaries those new comers may locate;
Therefore be it resolved:-
(a)	That the practice of subsidizing various organizations for the purposes of immigration be discontinued, and that only the agents appointed directly by the Federal government shall be authorized to carry on this work;
(b)	That the federal government shall cooperate with the different provincial governments to the greatest degree possible to the end that only those immigrants may enter each province as may be usefully assimilated during each year;
(c)	That no financial assistance be granted actual or prospective immigrants, either by way of assisted passage, or of land settla-ment;
(d)	That all immigration shall be strictly selective, based upon the racial possibilities of assimilation, the physical, mental and moral qualities of the applicant, and the willingness of each to assume the full responsibilities of Canadian citizenship, and further, that no discrimination be practised as between occupations, save that brought about by the prospective employment which may be in view.

Immigration Policy-Mr. Lucas
If hon. members will study that resolution carefully I think they will agree that it offers a sound basis for an immigration policy. I know that in the past the government has been faced with difficulty because of a large body of opinion that in order to be prosperous we must have a large number of people. All governments in this country, I presume, have been faced with that difficulty, and whenever the volume of immigration decreased the opposition would claim that it was the fault of the government. Governments in the past, therefore, have always attempted, by giving assistance in various ways, to bring into the country as many immigrants as possible. Some people believe that the prosperity of a country is directly related to>
the cumber of people within its borders, and they seldom make any effort to ascertain whether the average well-being of the inhabitants has improved, which in reality is the only sound measure of a country's progress. Agriculture is in anything but a prosperous condition at the present time. Prices are low, and the prospects are not any too bright. The efforts of those who urge the opening up of new agricultural areas could lead only to a condition of further depression in the agricultural industry. Anything that will reduce the standard of living in Canada will simply mean a greater exodus of our people to the United States. Ever since confederation we have spent a great deal of money in Canada on immigration. It is hard to estimate the exact sum that has been spent every year, but when we add to-gether what has been spent by the federal government, by the Immigration department and the Health department, by the provincial governments, by our railway companies, and by all the various organizations that are assisting immigration, it must run into many millions of dollars, and yet when we look at the results we can only conclude that this vast expenditure has largely been wasted. In July of last year the Bureau of Statistics issued a statement showing that Canada's population was at that time 9,796,000, an increase of 38,000 over the previous year. When I look at the figures of the Department of Immigration and Colonization, at page 11 of that book, I find that the number of immigrants last year was 167,722. If we add to that number our natural increase, which according to the Bureau of Statistics amounted to 127,255, we find we should have had a total increase in our population of 294,977, and yet according to the Bureau of Statistics our increase was only 38,000. In other words, we lost 256,977 of our population; we lost more than our natural increase after spending many millions of dollars. It drives
one to the conclusion that there must be something wrong.
Now, agriculture is faced to-day with the condition of over-production just the same as other industries. Going back to the age of steam, we find its introduction revolutionized the industrial system of the world. For many years farming lagged behind, but in later years farming machinery has been improved to such an extent, especially since the introduction of oil, that to-day oil is doing for agriculture what steam did for manufacturing industry. In 1928 Canada produced on 24,119,140 acres of land 566,726,000 bushels of wheat. While on that point, I may say I believe that our present farm population could very materially increase that production if conditions were such that they had a profitable market for it. With this increased efficiency of farm machinery we find in the United States that for the last ten years, according to the Bureau of Statistics, they have lost something over 6,000,000 farmers and still they have increased their agricultural production. As I have said, in 1928 we produced 566,000,000 bushels of wheat, and yet we have people in Canada who are still advocating the opening up of vast new areas of agricultural land. We hear a good deal at the present time about the Peace River country, and it is estimated that there is something like 49,000,000 acres of agricultural land there suitable for wheat growing. Having produced 566,000,000 bushels in 1928 on
24,000,000 acres of land, what are the possibilities for the production of wheat if the Peace River country is quickly opened up? It would mean that we would simply have over-production to the extent that we would get not even the cost o-f the production for our wheat.
In this age of keen competition I believe our farmers will have to do just as those engaged in other businesses are doing, that is, increase their efficiency. I recognize that to-day the business man who is not running his business along business lines is going under; and the same applies to the farmer. But after he has done his part in bringing his industry to the highest degree of efficiency under business methods, if then he is to be subjected to the competition of an influx of people from foreign countries with a lower standard of living, he will not be given a fair chance. This resolution asks that no more money be spent on bringing immigrants to this country. Let us stop and look at Canada for a moment. There is scarcely any public man who does not swell up his chest when he gets on a platform and boasts about the great natural resources of this country.
768	COMMONS
Immigration Policy-Speakers' Ruling
I think we all agree that we have one of the finest countries in the world, one endowed with the greatest natural resources and the most wonderful potentialities. But, if such is the case, why should we have to go out in the highways and byways and beg people to come into this country, even paying their passage? There seems to be something radically wrong with our immigration policy. I believe the best immigration policy for any country is to have prosperous, contented settlers, because if our farmers are doing well we shall not have to spend millions of dollars to induce others to come here. Therefore I am glad to know that this resolution is receiving the sympathetic consideration of the government and I hope it will meet with general approval throughout the Dominion.


Mr. BALDWIN:: Mr. Speaker-


Hewitt Bostock: Before the hon. gentleman proceeds I should like to call to the attention of the hon. member for Athabaska (Mr. Kellner) that his amendment does not seem to be in order. It calls for the imposition of a tax:
That any company, organization, association, church or other institution bringing or assisting in bringing, any immigrants to Canada, shall deposit with the government the sum of $1,000 for each and every immigrant so brought in or assisted: and provided further that the money so collected shall constitute a fund from which payments shall be made to the governments of the provinces in which the immigrant resides, to provide for unemployment, health and other expenses.
It is termed a "deposit," nevertheless it is a tax. Bourinot says at page 432:
Though there is no rule to prevent private members moving abstract resolutions proposing changes in the scheme or distribution of taxation, or the imposition of new duties, "yet they have been uniformly resisted by the government in the English House of Commons as inexpedient and impolitic." All proposals for the imposition of taxes belong peculiarly to the crown, and custom, as well as sound policy, has long ago devolved upon ministers the duty of submitting such questions to the consideration of parliament.
This amendment calls for a deposit to be made by each organization dealing with immigration or assisting immigration, and expense is involved on the part of the federal authorities in the administration of the fund and handing it over to the various provinces. It seems to me that the hon. gentleman should draft his amendment somewhat differently, otherwise I shall have to declare it out of order. The alteration of a few words might make the amendment admissible; in its present form it is not admissible.


Donald Ferdinand Kellner: Mr. Speaker, if I might
address Your Honour on the point of order, I would point out that the creating of the proposed fund could hardly be interpreted as a tax. It might be drawn upon or it might not, according to circumstances. If the immigrant were competent to look after himself when he came to Canada, there would be no necessity whatever of expending that fund, and it would automatically revert to those who had contributed. But if there are expenditures, such as we have at the moment, to look after those immigrants, they should come from this fund.


Hewitt Bostock: What about the allocation of the fund itself?


Donald Ferdinand Kellner: It would really be bonding the companies, Mr. Speaker, in my estimation.


Abraham Albert Heaps: I would like to point out, Mr. Speaker, that there is hardly a resolution on the order paper which would not in some way involve a form of expenditure, and if your ruling is to be interpreted in the way you intend it to be on this particular occasion, then practically every motion of a private member on the order paper could be ruled out of order. I would like to call your attention to the motion on the order paper, No. 7, which actually requests increased expenditures by the federal government in relation to the provinces.


Hewitt Bostock: We have not reached it yet.


Abraham Albert Heaps: That is quite true, but I venture to assert that in previous years there have been resolutions on the order paper of a similar character to the one now on the order paper in the name of the hon. member for Cumberland (Mr. Smith), and they have not been ruled out of order. As I understand the amendment, it calls for no expenditure at all by the federal government. It calls for an expenditure by certain individuals. Certainly it would not impose any tax or additional expenditure on the part of parliament, except that which might accrue, and that is not positive. If Your Honour's interpretation is to apply it will practically rule out every resolution coming from this corner of the house.


Herbert Bealey Adshead: Would it not obviate the difficulty to ask not for $1,000 but for a bond of $1,000.


Hewitt Bostock: A bond is as good as a dollar. I think some words should be changed in the amendment to conform with the

Immigration Policy-Mr. Baldwin
usages of the house. As it is, there is the imposition of a tax on a certain class of individuals or corporations dealing with immigration matters.


Donald Ferdinand Kellner: Mr. Speaker, may I inquire, then, what the position of the amendment will be while we are considering those changes? Would it be permissible at a later time to introduce an amended amendment?


Hewitt Bostock: The main motion reads as follows:
That, in the opinon of this house, the time lias arrived when the federal government of the Dominon of Canada should no longer assist immigrants to this country in any financial
*way,-
Then begins the amendment of the hon. member for Athabaska (Mr. Kellner):
That all the words after "way" be struck out and that the following words be added:
"and that any company, organization, association, church or other institution bringing, or assisting in bringing, any immigrants to Canada, shall deposit with the government the sum of $1,000 for each and every immigrant so brought in or assisted;"
It should be "should", and even then I do not know that it is regular. At least it has the form of a wish; otherwise the government is committed if this amendment is adopted.


William Irvine: Would it be in order if the house permitted us to make the amendment you suggest, in those words?


Hewitt Bostock: By unanimous consent,
the house might allow the hon. gentleman to use the word "should" instead of the word "shall".


Mr. LAPOINTE:: May I suggest that the
debate continue on the main motion while another amendment is being drafted and moved?


Charles A. Stewart: Before the
question is disposed of, may I point out to my hon. friend that if he votes for the proposal, that is, the amendment, it would be for the provinces to exact the $1,000 mentioned in the amendment, if they deal with those societies.


William Irvine: The hon. gentleman's proposal is not before the house, as I understand it.


Charles A. Stewart: Yes, but
the federal government would not be making agreements with organizations of any sort. If there were any agreements in existence they would be with the provinces, and my hon. ifriend's amendment would have no effect.


Donald Ferdinand Kellner: I would like to point
out, Mr. Speaker, that it will be several months yet before that new agreement can be made effective. May I ask the minister whether the immigration that has come into Canada since the New Year has had the sanction of the provincial governments? For instance, 290 came into Alberta in the month of January, and I think, beyond a doubt, probably twice as many since.


Hewitt Bostock: The hon. gentleman,
having already spoken cannot proceed. I rule his amendment as being out of order. Any other hon. gentleman may propose it, but it must be draftel differently. At present there is only the main motion before the house.


Willis Keith Baldwin: Mr. Speaker, I assure this house that I can speak wholeheartedly in favour of the resolution of the hon. member for Willow Bunch (Mr. Donnelly). I notice that the estimate for immigration this year has been reduced, and I am pleased at that and hope it will continue to be reduced. Whatever we do in this world, if it is to amount to anything, has to be done wholeheartedly. There has been throughout this country considerable gloom since the war, and one party has been talking, and newspapers have been talking, the whispers of death and various other things that have worked against the interests of Canada. When the farmers of the southwestern states were burning their corn there was no one to say: no farmers shall come to this land. Of course taxes were less, and they had no automobiles to buy, or the many other things that attract the people of this day. They did not require very much money; they held their land, and the advance in the price of land repaid them well for hanging on. I presume the same condition will prevail in Canada.
I do not believe that the withdrawal of assisted immigration will stop people from coming to this country. I think assisted immigration brings the people who have received grants and doles in their own country, and they are not a very desirable class of people for Canada. I notice that both systems of railway are going to extend their mileage this year. The province of Ontario will soon have her railway reaching to James bay, and considering that the great Hudson Bay railway will reach Churchill within the next two years, that will be a lively centre. And, I have no doubt, the waterways will be extended and completed to reach ports in Ontario. Then we have the important hydro electric developments that are now in process of formation throughout Canada. For instance, we have the

"70	COMMONS
Immigration Policy-Mr. Baldwin
great Beauharnois project. We also have the extensive terminal project of the Canadian National railways in Montreal, requiring an expenditure of $50,000,000. Considering all these things, we need a vigorous class of people to enter Canada, and I believe we will get them if we all wholeheartedly talk for Canada. Supposing that every ten of us brought one good working man into Canada, it would not be a very great accomplishment on our part, but it would bring a million people into this country annually, and that is more than we could very well absorb. I have spoken about the shroud of gloom affecting the life of the country. When we are on the other side we go around with our heads hanging down and with humps on our backs, saying " We come from Canada." Why do we not hold up our heads, square our shoulders and say, " We are Canadians and proud of it." When they ask about our country let us say, "Yes, it is an amazing country with the greatest opportunities offered anywhere on the face of the earth. We have a population of vigorous people, but we always can assimilate newcomers." The hon. member for Willow Bunch (Mr. Donnelly) mentioned the Chinese, but our climatic conditions will prevent those people from coming here. We will only get the best people from all parts of the world.
It has been arid that American tourists spent over $300,000,000 in this country last year. Why should not those tourists go back to their country and say. "Canada is a wonderful country; the people are optimistic, cheerful, bright, thrifty and doing well." I believe in that way we could bring a great many good people to this country. We want capital here and we want labourers. Some of the official labour organs from Washington indicate that conditions in the United- States are none too happy. I own a number of farms in the United States as well as a number of farms in Quebec, and as between the two I much prefer the farms in Quebec. If I do not make anything from a farm I help some poor mortal get a living, even though I pay the taxes. On my farms in the United States, on the other hand, in many cases I pay the taxes and get nothing in return.
There is too much gloom shed by hon. gentlemen opposite and by different newspapers throughout the country. I would pass a law whereby any paper which belittled this country would have to shut down, and would be -prohibited from publishing another issue.
I certainly think we should take some action of that kind.
For a number of years we prohibited immigration from Germany and from some other northern European countries, and I think we

made a mistake. Look at the states of Minnesota and Wisconsin; they have been built up largely by people of -this class, and I believe our government went a little too far in those days in keeping those people out of Canada. However, now we should work unitedly; let us not bring politics into this question; we should not proceed with the idea that more immigrants will come if we are in power and fewer will come if you are in power. Let us work together with the love of our country uniting us, and when we go to the United States let us be proud of being Canadians and let us tell them Canada is a wonderful country with a glorious future. Here any honourable man can work out his destiny; here there is an opportunity for anyone who is willing to work and abide by our laws. It is appalling to me to think that a whole decade or more has gone by with such a small increase in our population, and I believe that lias been caused very largely because we have not sufficient love of country and patriotism to stand up for Canada all the time and everywhere we may be.
Another hon. member wishes to speak for five minutes, Mr. Speaker, so I will resume my seat.


Mr. OSCAR BOULANGER (Belle-chasse) (Translation):: I do not intend to discuss
at length the resolution at present under consideration. My views on this question have long been known. I h-ave already had the opportunity of placing them before the house. As the speaker who has just preceded me has left but an interval of five minutes before the house adjourns, I shall not long delay the discussion of a resolution of which I approve. I simply wish to congratulate my hon. friend from Willow Bunch (Mr. Donnelly) for having introduced in the house tojday this resolution, and thereby afforded an opportunity to the Acting Minister of Immigration (Mr. Stewart) to make a statement. His statement pleased us very much We rejoice in seeing that the government intends to change its immigration policy in this country. We are glad to note that reason and common sense have triumphed, for after all, what the hon. member for Willow Bunch requests by his resolution is but rational and a matter of common sense.
When this question was introduced in the house a few years ago, it did not meet with as much sympathy as the resolution of the hon. member for Willow Bun-ch has to-day. This shows that a sound policy is always accepted in the long run; it proves that common sense is sure to prevail through a change in public opinion. Judging from the

Immigration Policy-Mr. Boulanger
discussion in the house this afternoon, no one seems to favour any longer subsidized immigration; there appears to be unanimity on this point. Everybody seems to agree in requesting the government to cease subsidizing people to settle in Canada; all have realized that such a policy or scheme was beneath our national pride, and contrary to Canada's dignity. In fact, if Canada is as great as one hears, as prosperous as one says, it strikes me that it is contrary to the dignity of Canada and our national pride to subsidize people to settle here. This is a feeling that every speaker who preceded me in this debate has expressed, it is also one that I expressed in this house a few years ago, when, perhaps, this feeling was not so unanimously shared as at present.
There is also another motive for opposing subsidized immigration; it is, in our opinion, an entirely useless expenditure. Figures were quoted to show that we had not derived the benefit expected; that the increase in the population was not in keeping with the outlay.
There is also a further reason which I wish to explain briefly, a reason which convinces the opponents of subsidized immigration that this expenditure is useless and that the country does not derive the benefit which it should expect; it is that as soon as we begin to subsidize immigrants, there seems no way of discontinuing such a practice; there are no halts provided on this pathway. The people we draw to this country by paying their fare exjiect the government to help them in settling, and moreover to partly supply them with farm implements; no doubt they expect the government to look after them for the remainder of their lives. Proof of all this came out at the inquiry carried on, by the committee on agriculture two years ago, I think, in connection with the question of immigration. I recall, among others, a chap who complained to the committee that we were not bringing in enough immigrants from the British Isles; he gave as reasons, that we lacked in this country insurance against unemployment, that we had no mothers' allowances, that we had not such and such forms of assistance as they exist in the British Isles. He gave as bis opinion, that in order to encourage British immigration, we should adopt in this young country all the systems of insurance and assistance as exist on the other side.
Another witness even went further, she suggested to us that life should be made pleasant and easy to immigrants in order that they 2419-49J
might not be too lonesome for their native land, once they had settled in Canada. The same witness told us, that one readily understood that people having lived in towns in England or Europe found themselves somewhat out of their element, after settling on the prairies or in our rural districts; especially in winter time life is not very gay on the prairies. This witness made the suggestion that we should place these people in the towns during the winter months. She even went so far as to agree that these people be left on the farms during the summer season providing always that we brought them back to the towns, where it was less lonesome and gayer in winter. She further suggested that we should -build for immigrants cottages or houses with all modem conveniences, so that they might not seem lost on their arrival in Canada.
I mention these two witnesses simply to show that should we continue to assist these people, there will be no end to it, they will for ever be requesting assistance.
Complaints are heard at present-the western towns especially complain-that unemployment is astonishingly large. Astonishingly large is not perhaps the right expression, because conditions are not as bad as some wish to make them out, however, we can state, I think, that there is more unemployment this year than there usually is. Many people place the blame for th-is increase o-f unemployment on subsidized immigration, on the assistance given to immigrants to settle here; and on the propaganda we have been carrying on towards recruiting more and more immigrants. This policy is of a nature to stir discontent among the oitzens of this country and create a feeling of reaction against our immigration policy. Those who are out of work are prone to criticize and blame this immigration policy when they witness people newly arrived working, while they themselves cannot find anything t,o do. This is a widely spread feeling among the people.


Hewitt Bostock: Is it the pleasure of the
house to adopt the motion?


Richard Bedford Bennett: No, Your Honour, it is
six o'clock.


Hewitt Bostock: Mr. Boulanger moves the adjournment of the debate.
Motion agreed to and debate adjourned.


[Stage Direction]
At six o'clock the house adjourned without question put, pursuant to standing order.
772	COMMONS
Pensions and Soldiers' Problems
Thursday, March 20, 1930