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

Mr. COTNAM:: 1.	What was the cost of operations at the
forestry station at Chalk River, Ontario, during the years 1930, 1931, 1932 and 1933, respectively?	.
2.	How much was expended for material and equipment, and how much for salaries and wages ?


Mr. MURPHY:: 1.	1929-30	$	33,134 421930-	31	
32,469	531931-	32	
24,143	681932-	33	
21,365	292.	Materials,	Salariessupplies	and
equipment, etc. wages
1929- 30	$16,629 94	$16,504 481930-	31	
13,628	59	18,840	941931-	32	
6,381	47	17,762	211932-	33	
5,733	64	15,631	65


GOLDEN LAKE, ONT., INDIAN RESERVE CONTRIBUTIONS
Mr. COTNAM:: How much was contributed by the federal government to the Golden Lake Indian reserve during the years 1930, 1931, 1932 and 1933, respectively ?


Mr. MURPHY:: 1929- 30	$ 9,484 87
1930-	31	
12,986	011931-	32	
14,174	491932-	33	
10,567	901933-	34-March 27	
9,828	08


FLOUR DELIVERIES TO INDIAN AGENCIES
Mr. VALLANCE:: 1.	Were tenders called within the last nine months for the delivery of flour to the Indian agencies at Battleford, Leask, and Lloyd-minster, in the province of Saskatchewan?
2.	If so, what tenders were submitted and at what prices?
3.	Who -were the successful tenderers?


Mr. MURPHY:: 1.	Yes.
2.	Tenders submitted October, 1933, as follows:
Battleford	Leask	Lloydminster$1 95	$2 21	$2 251 70	1 80	1 85No quo.	1 90	No quo.1 75	1 S5	1 751 62$	1 62$	1 701 90	1 90	1 901 95	2 25	1 951 85	2 15	1 801 80	1 95	1 952036	COMMONS
Questions as Orders for Returns
Tenders submitted February, 1934, as follows:
Robin Hood Mills Ltd., Montreal	
Quaker Oats Co., Saskatoon	
McCarthy Milling Co., Regina	
Radisson Milling Co., Radisson	
Bishop Milling Co., Battleford	
Western Canada Flour Mills, Winnipeg	
Jas. Hawson Milling Co., Lloydminster....
Lake of the Woods Milling Co., Winnipeg.. .
Ogilvie Flour Mills, Winnipeg	
Maple Leaf Milling Co., Winnipeg	
Battleford	Leask	LlojRminster1 57i	1 53	1 54A1 60	1 61	1 62No quo.	No quo.	1 991 62i	1 70	1 67 J1 80	1 95	1 951 SO	1 80	1 80No quo.	No quo.	2 101 87i	1 87|	1 87i1 75	1 90	1 751 85	1 97i	1 82i
3. The Robin Hood Mills Ltd., Montreal, for October and February.



QUESTIONS PASSED AS ORDERS FOR RETURNS


Mr. MITCHELL:: 1.	What officials in the headquarters and in the unit staffs of the Department of Pensions and National Health are in receipt of pension at the present time?
2.	What is the amount of pension in each case?


BURLINGTON CHANNEL BRIDGE EMPLOYEES
Mr. WILSON:: 1.	What are the names and addresses of men employed on the Burlington channel bridge?
2.	What hours do they work and what wages do they receive?
3.	Is the eight-hour day in force on this bridge?
4.	What wages are paid for similar work on the Welland canal bridges?
5. Is the eight-hour day in effect on the Welland canal bridges?
6.	Are the applicants for positions examined by employees of the public works department or by the civil service commission?


PINK SALMON CATCH
Mr. REID:: 1.	How many pink salmon were caught in district No. 1, British Columbia, after September 16, 1933: (a) by gill nets; (b) by seines?
2.	What was the total number of cases of pink salmon canned after September 16, 1933, from fish caught in district No. 1, British Columbia, and (a) how many of these have been inspected; (b) how many were classed as second quality; (c) how many were classified as inferior to second quality?
3.	What was the total number of pink salmon exported to the United States from the said district No. 1, during the season of 1933, and on what dates were such shipments made?



MOTIONS FOR PAPERS


Mr. BOULANGER:: For a copy of all records and documents, including petitions, requests, recommendations,
[Mr. Murphv.l
tenders, counter-petitions and protests, with respect to the establishment of a rural mail service at Lauzon, Saint-Joseph de Levis, Harlaka, and Beaumont, with the branch post office of Saint-Joseph de Levis as a starting point, and with respect to the closing of the post office at Beaumont.


Mr. BENNETT:: There are no dates mentioned in this motion and perhaps the hon. gentleman could indicate the period.


Joseph Oscar Lefebre Boulanger: The Postmaster General (Mr. Sauve) is aware of the service about which I am asking information.


[Stage Direction]
Motion agreed to.

Mr. SPENCER:: For a copy of all correspondence, telegrams and other documents, exchanged between any person or persons and the Department of National Health or any other department of the government, relating to the division of child welfare work, and also a copy of all correspondence exchanged between the different departments of the government respecting the same question.


Richard Bedford Bennett: If the hon. gentleman
will agree to strike out all the words after the word "work" in the fourth line, the motion will be quite satisfactory. It has not been the practice to produce inter-departmental communications as they are usually of a personal character between the ministers and their officials.
Motion as amended agreed to.



SUPPLIES TO UNEMPLOYMENT CAMP AT SPENCE'S BRIDGE

Mr. FRASER (Cariboo):: For a copy of all invoices of meats and packing house products, supplied' by the contractor to the unemployment headquarters camp at Spence's Bridge, British Columbia, between September 1, 1933, and December 1, 1933.

Relief Act, 1934


Richard Bedford Bennett: The same rule prevails
with respect to this motion as has prevailed with respect to similar motions; these documents will be produced to the extent to which the department is able to secure them.


[Stage Direction]
Motion agreed to.

[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. E. J. YOUNG (Weyburn):: Mr. Speaker, some time ago I placed a question on the order paper with regard to the number of copies of "Canada, 1934" which had been printed. I have received two answers to this question. One is from the Department of Trade and Commerce to the effect that 13,000 copies in English and 4,500 copies in French had been printed, a total of 17,500 copies. Another return was made by the King's Printer to the effect that there were 2,300 copies in English and 60 copies in French, a total of 2,360 copies. Could the minister explain the discrepancy in these figures?


Hon. H. H. STEVENS (Minister of Trade and Commerce):: I cannot give an explanation offhand but I shall make inquiries and let my hon. friend know.



TREATY WITH POLAND

[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. A. E. MacLEAN (Prince):: Mr. Speaker, I have received a communication which indicates that a treaty may be entered into with Poland. If this is a fact, the fur shippers would like to make certain representations in this connection.


Henry Herbert Stevens: Obviously I could not give
any information in this form but the remarks of my hon. friend will be noted. When it is proper to make a statement on the matter, one will be made. If my hon. friend has any representations which he would like to make we shall be very pleased to receive them.



UNEMPLOYMENT AND FARM RELIEF


[Stage Direction]
The house resumed from Tuesday, April 10, consideration in committee of Bill No. 42, respecting relief measures-Mr. Gordon-Mr. Gobeil in the chair.
Mr. GRAY:: When the house adjourned last evening the Minister of Labour (Mr. Gordon) was answering an argument which had been
raised earlier in the evening. The suggestion had been made that certain words which appeared in the 1933 act had been omitted from the 1934 bill, namely:
Notwithstanding the provisions of any statute or law the governor in council may,-
(a)	-loan or advance money to or guarantee the payment of money by any public body, corporation or undertaking;
Section 2, subsection (v) of the present bill reads:
Notwithstanding the provisions of any statute or law the governor in council may,-
(b)	When parliament is not in session, to take all such measures as in his discretion may be deemed necessary or advisable to maintain, within the competence of parliament, peace, order and good government throughout Canada;
Then I would emphasize these particular words:
-and at all times to take all such measures as in his discretion may be deemed necessary or advisable to protect and maintain the credit and financial position of the dominion or any province thereof.
I submit that these words, broad in their meaning, can give to the governor in council the power to guarantee payments in the same way as the guarantee was given to the Canadian Pacific Railway last year, and as evidence of that I suggest that we should look at the order in council, prepared by the Prime Minister himself, granting the guarantee to the Canadian Pacific. First I would ask hon. members to observe the wording of clause (b) of section 2, especially the words I have just quoted, and compare them with the language of clause 9 of the order in council as drafted by the Prime Minister, reading as follows:
That the said railway company is a public corporation carrying on its operations not only in Canada but in other parts of the world; and, in the opinion of the ministers, under present disturbed economic conditions, it is desirable to prevent default by the said railway company in discharging its said capital obligations and indebtedness as they mature, and in the public interest, to grant the request of the said railway company as a measure for the protection and maintenance of the credit and financial position of Canada.
I ask the committee to note the similarity between the wording of clause (b) of the present section we are considering and the basis of the guarantee as drafted in the order in council. The Prime Minister repeated, in his evidence before the banking and commerce committee, that he gave the guarantee because he believed it to be in the national interest, and he said further, " What I then did I would do to-morrow." I submit that under this section as we now have it he could
Relief Act, 1934

do the very thing he did in granting the guarantee to the Canadian Pacific Railway. He said further that there cannot be any opinion as to an act of parliament.


Richard Bedford Bennett: What is that?


Ross Wilfred Gray: I will read the whole thing:
Q. We want the facts.
A. The facts are on the record.
Q. No, there are some facts that are only matters of both opinion and of verbal conversation.
A. There cannot be any opinion as to an act of parliament.


Richard Bedford Bennett: Hear, hear.


Ross Wilfred Gray: I submit that, learned in the law as he is, he must know that the whole legal profession makes a large part of its living by interpreting acts of parliament. I suggest to him that there may be a difference of opinion as to what he may consider the effect of this measure we are now asked to pass upon, namely, bill 42, because if he is correctly reported he evidently believes there can be no opinion as to this act. In order that there may not be any doubt as to the powers that are being granted under this section, and in view of the promises which have been made, I beg to move, seconded by Mr. Hanbury:
That section 2 of the said bill be amended by adding thereto, as clause (c), the following words:
(c)	"Nothing in this section shall be deemed to authorize the governor in council to loan, or advance money to, or guarantee the payment of money by any public body, corporation or undertaking."


Richard Bedford Bennett: It will be necessary,
before taking up this proposed amendment, first to dispose of the amendment submitted by the leader of the opposition.


Mr. OASGRAIN:: Last night I submitted certain questions to the Minister of Labour who is in charge of this bill. He is not here to-day, but possibly I may get the information.


Richard Bedford Bennett: The Minister of Labour is detained in his house on the advice of his physician and I am endeavouring to take his place. If it was asserted, as apparently it was, that he was staying away to avoid giving the information-because that is the inference from the hon. member's statement-


Mr. CASGRAIN:: 
Richard Bedford Bennett: While the information
is being looked up I may say, speaking from memory, that the money was for the purpose of fitting up ships with deck accommodation to carry cattle across the ocean. It was a contribution towards that.
Mr. CAiSGRAIN: I see on this same sheet of paper an item with regard to the agricultural stabilization fund, under the act of 1933, an amount of $35,145.71. I should like to have an explanation of these various amounts. Last year in the debate on the budget we heard a good deal about this famous stabilization legislation which was to help the farmers and other exporters of products of the land. Was this money paid in virtue of the act passed last year, and how much was given to each province?


Richard Bedford Bennett: The hon. member's
anxiety to prolong the debate is certainly very ingenious. This question has already been asked in the house by way of application for a return. At the last session of parliament the government undertook to stabilize the pound at $4.60. It was then intimated that ithe pound might probably go beyond that value and therefore the sum payable under this stabilization provision would be very small. As a matter of fact the pound very shortly after began to move up and the sum total paid under the provision was $35,145.71. I stated in my place last year that this would be charged against the relief appropriation for the year, and that was done. I am very happy to think that the movement upward of the pound obviated the necessity of a larger sum being paid.


Charles Eusèbe Casgrain: How were these amounts paid? Were they paid to the exporters, and what are the names of the persons who received the benefit?


Richard Bedford Bennett: The return will gratify
the hon. gentleman's very laudable curiosity in that regard. They were not paid to the provinces but to the persons who made the exports under the terms fixed by the regulations, which were published and indicated to the house.


Mr. FACTOR:: In the statement of disbursements there were two items in the 1930 and 1931 acts of $500,000 each on account of the board of railway commissioners. I pre-

Relief Act, 1934
sume those were the amounts granted to the board for the elimination of grade crossings. * Why have those grants not been continued for 1934?


Richard Bedford Bennett: Those items refer to
something that should not now be discussed before the committee. We are at present dealing with 1934 legislation. The 1930 legislation and the disbursements under it were discussed in 1931, and just why the time of parliament should now be taken up except for an obvious purpose for discussing the expenditure in 1930 is something I am sure the hon. member will be able to answer to his constituents. The appropriation was made in 1930 to the grade crossing fund and the next year a similar sum was appropriated. Those who are familiar with the operation of that fund will realize that there is still a deficiency in it; in fact it would require a very substantial sum of money to make good the amount needed to meet the demands upon the fund under legislation passed by parliament in previous years. There are pending before the board of railway commissioners applications for a very large number of grade crossings. I thought my memory was good enough to state the number, but I cannot do so at the moment. It is not improbable that something will have to be done to add to that fund this year. For instance, in Hamilton just before the advent to power of this government, certain recommendations with respect to level crossings were made and later the then Minister of Labour, the late Senator Robertson, after conferences with the city and the railway authorities, undertook that certain grade crossings would be assisted, and they have been completed, but the money that is payable to the city and the railway company under the provisions of the agreement has not yet been paid. This matter covered some of the payments that were made under the direction of the board of railway commissioners.


Mr. BROWN:: There is a matter that I
would like to draw to the attention of the government and that I hope will receive consideration when funds being provided by this legislation are being disbursed. I have already on more than one occasion indicated the situation that prevails in one part of my constituency and extending also into that of the hon. member for Souris. I would likewise like to direct attention to a resolution that came into my hands this morning and that was passed at a meeting of the reeves of four municipalities, as follows:
At a meeting of the reeves of the municipalities of Pembina, Louise, Roblin and Turtle Mountain, held at Killarney on the 6th day of 74726-129
April, 1934, it was resolved that we hereby request the government of the province of Manitoba to petition the federal government to give the same consideration to these municipalities in regard to the payment of freight charges on feed, fodder and seed as that given to the area known as Manitoba drought area "A" as given by privy council order No. 2384.
I would like to say a word in regard to this particular area. Those who are familiar with the situation will know that in the extreme southwestern part of Manitoba there is a large area that has suffered very severely from drought. The area of which I speak is not nearly so extensive but at the same time it is one that has suffered severely and from neither the provincial nor the federal government has assistance come to which I think that particular section is entitled. Because the area is somewhat smaller it was excluded from the arrangements that were made between the two governments in regard to the extreme southwest of the province. But this area of which I speak suffered very severely, not only last year but for two or three preceding years. As regards one part of this area, perhaps the Prime Minister will remember that I called it to his attention a year or two ago when I requested that the customs charges on the importation of feed should be reduced.


Richard Bedford Bennett: Potatoes first.


Albert Joseph Brown: No, I did not get consideration as regards potatoes.


Richard Bedford Bennett: No, but I say that attention was directed to potatoes.


Albert Joseph Brown: Yes, but that is another case. I dealt with feed in a preceding session and I may say that the same area received consideration from the previous government. The Prime Minister has referred to potatoes. I think his party friends in that particular section of the country would like to forget about potatoes because, now that the matter has been mentioned, I may say that it was one of the grossest failures on the part of the present government to give relief that would have cost nothing. I shall, however, not discuss that question at the moment.
The district to which I referred is a section of country included in the area represented by these reeves that for two years, one under the preceding government and one under this government, received aid through the foregoing of the customs duties. This area, not only the Pembina district, but further west, Louise, Robin, ATgyle, has suffered very severely. I had occasion to call attention to that fact twice when I mentioned the great disaster that overtook them because of the mortality among their horses. I

Reliej Act, 1934

think I mentioned that sixty-nine, as I am credibly informed, had died in one township. All that this resolution asks is that consideration should be given to the question of freight charges which were reduced to the benefit of the area further west. In the letter accompanying the resolution the writer indicates that they have the assurance that the provincial government will make such an application. I would like to have an assurance that if the provincial government makes that application, the federal government will deal with it in the same way as it dealt with what is referred to as drought area " A " in southwestern Manitoba. (Last fall I took pains to drive through all this district and I found conditions there deplorable indeed, and if there is any section of the country that is entitled to whatever assistance can be given by either this or the provincial government, I shall be only too happy to press its case with all the vigour I can.


Richard Bedford Bennett: The hon. member for Lisgar is of course aware of the fact that each succeeding year representatives of the provincial authorities have presented to the federal government claims for consideration, and those have been sometimes for the payment of freight, of feed, sometimes to move cattle from one area to another, sometimes to pay freight charges for the transport of household effects and the family itself from the south to the north; but in every case it has been a matter of discussion and consideration between the federal and provincial authorities. As the matter stands now, until this legislation is enacted no agreements of any kind can be made between the provinces and the dominion. Several matters such as that to which the hon. member refers are being pressed upon the minister from Saskatchewan and one or two from Alberta. What the hon. member has said with respect to the southwestern section of Manitoba is known to the government, not only by reason of the representations made in the house by himself and others, but also by reason of the fact that the department's communications with the provincial government have pointed out the crop failures in that particular section, which in a previous year, but not last year, if my memory serves me aright, extended, as the hon. gentleman knows, far into Saskatchewan. Last year I think there was a crop in the Saskatchewan area, but not in that area in Manitoba, to which he refers. All these matters, I assure the hon. gentleman, will receive the most careful consideration of the minister and the government if thev have

any authority to deal with them. Until this statute passes they have no such authority, either to grant assistance or to refuse; they can merely advise, as I have been doing, that until the legislation is enacted they have no power to enter into any agreement.


Edward James Young: Last night when the Minister of Labour was in his seat I asked him a couple of questions which he was unable to answer but said he would get the information. One was in relation to the $22,579,000 loaned to Saskatchewan, part of it to the Saskatchewan relief commission. The minister was going to find how much of it was loaned to the commission and for what purpose.


Richard Bedford Bennett: It was not loaned to the commission. The loans were made to the province of Saskatchewan. That item includes the expenditures made by the relief commission and the moneys loaned to the province on its treasury bills. The division is as follows:
Province	$13,987,119 84
Relief commission	 8,591,958 32


Edward James Young: On the previous page it
states that the money spent by the commissioners, was $10,752,533. Is that in addition to this $8,591,000?


Richard Bedford Bennett: No, there is no relation
between the two items. The first item to which attention was directed is the money expended after July, 1931, when I brought to the attention of the house [DOT] the shocking condition of devastation that existed in that area, which I ventured to suggest as a national calamity called for national effort. The expenditure I have just read is the expenditure made by that commission to take care of a burden that the dominion assumed in its entirety.


Edward James Young: But there was no commission in 1931, it was not set up until the fall of that year.


Richard Bedford Bennett: Oh yes, we set up a
commission to take care of that situation. But the commission that was set up later took care of the administration of the matter from the standpoint of the province as well. The hon. gentleman will recall the circumstances. The commission dealt with relief in its entirety, during the winter succeeding the July in which I made the statement. I have told the hon. gentleman more than once that at one time there were over 300,000 men,

Relief Act, 1934
women and children receiving relief in that area, an almost incredibly large number of people to be receiving relief in that particular area. The hon. gentleman will recall further that I pointed out to him that the commission took charge of that entire matter. Then the province availed itself of the commission to discharge its obligations, the Red Cross looking after the distribution of clothing. Our advances to enable the province to function, as distinguished from loans, include that $22,000,000. I fancy the hon. gentleman has seen the orders in council, because they were tabled here during the years in which the expenditures were made.


Edward James Young: What I want to get clear is whether or not all the money spent by the relief commission in area A, that is the area in which the commission took full charge of the relief, was furnished by the federal government, and if any of it is being collected from the province.


Richard Bedford Bennett: The sums expended under the arrangement by which the federal government assumed entire responsibility will not be collected from the province or anyone else, except to the extent to which some persons desiring to treat the moneys received as loans and not as gifts may make payments as mentioned by the hon. member for South Battle-ford (Mr. Vallance) yesterday. I believe some $8,000 has been received, and I stated yesterday, and I desire again to state, that no proceedings will be taken to collect any money that has thus been given. It was stated in this chamber, with the unanimous approval of the house, that this was a national calamity in regard to which the central power should assume responsibility for the entire expenditures.
The other amount consists of items that represent our proportion of expenditures under the agreements made with Saskatchewan. Do I make myself clear?


Edward James Young: Then there is still another item of $6,757,904.23 for relief expended in Saskatchewan. Through what channels was that spent?


Richard Bedford Bennett: That stands in the same position as expenditures made through the federal government in other provinces. That share of our expenditure is not recoverable.
In view of what the hon. gentleman has said, I think, he does not quite follow the matter in its entirety. I shall endeavour to make it clear. First, as to the expenditure made by the federal government, that was 74726-1291
solely federal expenditure. That applied to the province of Saskatchewan only because of the devastation that drought and other natural causes had effected in what was a papulous and rich area, but in which there had been a crop failure for three successive years, and subsequently, I believe it is fair to say, in a considerable portion for a fourth consecutive year. We discharge the whole obligation for relief in that area, under circumstances known I am sure to the hon. member for Weyburn. Secondly, there is the relief granted by the Dominion of Canada in accordance with the agreement made with the provinces, including Saskatchewan, the federal share of which is indicated in the returns that have been filed. Thirdly, there are loans made to the province of Saskatchewan as stated in the returns: (a) for the purpose of enabling them to carry on their relief operations; (b) for the purpose of enabling them to make grants to municipalities which otherwise are unable to pay their obligations, and (c) for the purpose of enabling them to discharge their functions as a government with respect to interest on their obligations, with respect to maturities which had to be met, and with respect to other provincial expenditures, including seed grain, which was one of the purposes for which advances were made by the federal government. Have I made it clear to the hon. gentleman?


Edward James Young: Yes, I thank the Prime
Minister. There was another question last night that I directed to the Minister of Labour in regard to the notes taken and amounts collected on those notes by the relief commission. He stated that the total of the notes was something over $200,000 and the amounts collected $8,000. 'I said I did not think those figures could be correct. I find on looking up the report of the auditor general that these figures apply only to the unorganized area and not to the eighty-odd municipalities under relief.


Richard Bedford Bennett: The deputy informs me
he sent a telegram for the purpose of verifying the information concerning that and has not received a reply. But the face total of the notes I would think is larger than $272,000.


Edward James Young: Immensely larger.


Richard Bedford Bennett: From what I know of
the notes given by those who accepted relief in this area I think the sum is much larger than that. That is just my memory. The repayments as indicated here are something like $8,000 I think.
Belief Act, 1934


Edward James Young: No, repayments only from
the unorganized territory, not in the whole area of the dried out district.
Mr. BEiNNETT:	They have telegraphed
for that figure. The repayments of which there is record, as disclosed here amount to $8,000. The other figure will be given as soon as received; it is not available at the moment.


Mr. BOTHWELL:: I think possibly the
misunderstanding arose yesterday through the fact that in the auditor general's report the only reference we can find to lien notes is in connection with the unorganized territory. In his report he shows immense sums charged to recipients, but makes no reference to the fact that lien notes have been taken. The figures we were dealing with yesterday we find apply only to unorganized territory, and refer to the lien notes taken from recipients in that area.


Richard Bedford Bennett: The hon. member for Swift Current, if I may say so without being -offensive, is perhaps confusing two matters. Lien notes were given with respect to feed and seed and that sort of thing; ordinary notes such as were mentioned by the hon. gentleman himself yesterday were given for general relief. They could not be lien notes under any circumstances, because the food and things of that kind had disappeared. With respect to seed and that sort of thing these lien notes were given, but that was a provincial matter. I should like to clarify that, because the hon. member for South Battle-ford dealt with it yesterday. A number ot people receiving direct relief from the dominion, when it assumed complete responsibility for relief, gave notes to the commission for the crown in the right of the dominion, that is the first point. Those were not lien notes; they were just ordinary notes similar to the note that was read yesterday, under which they undertook to repay.


Mr. MACKENZIE (Vancouver):: Promissory notes.


Richard Bedford Bennett: Yes, ordinary promissory notes. In the next place, some of those people have made payments, which have gone into the consolidated fund. In some of the other provinces small sums have been refunded as well. I think I gave the committee an illustration last year of an old lady who sent in a very small sum of money because she desired to treat the assistance receiyed as an advance and not as a gift. I think I mentioned that last year, but the amount so 
refunded is so insignificant as to be not worthy of mention in connection with a matter of this kind.
I think I should go a step further and say that the notes for hay, feed and seed were of a special character which the provincial legislation dealt with in a definite and specific manner. Under those notes-and I think it will be recalled that some hon. gentlemen directed attention to this fact last year-they took possession of the crop before anyone else could get it. I think some hon. gentlemen opposite directed attention to that fact. That was under the provisions of a provincial statute which dealt with the matter of advances for the purposes indicated, with respect to which the dominion has nothing to do.


Mr. GERSHAW:: Mention of the Saskatchewan relief commission brings up a problem which has been very widely discussed in the eastern portion of Alberta, where the people feel they have a very great grievance. As the Prime Minister knows, the constituency of Medicine Hat runs adjacent to the Saskatchewan boundary for two hundred miles. To the east of the boundary relief is administered by a commission, who send men to the various districts and who seem to hand out relief in a sympathetic and almost a generous manner. This is done, of course, because the people in that section have suffered four successive crop failures largely due to the dry winds and drought. But these dry winds do not stop at the interprovincial boundary line; year after year they have also destroyed the crops on the Alberta side of the boundary. In Alberta relief is administered in a very different way. People found that not only were their crops destroyed but their garden crops were failures as well. Some of those who had trucks went to the neighbouring irrigation districts and brought back large loads of fresh vegetables which they distributed free of charge to the people. People in other provinces also generously supplied fresh vegetables to these districts free of cost, and that was greatly appreciated. The people in those districts, however, find difficulty in getting ordinary relief. In that whole strip of country, which is thirty miles wide, there are only two police officers. The people do not have automobiles; they must walk or drive their horses twelve or fifteen miles to find a police officer, and often when they get there he is not at home. Then the officer has to go back with them and investigate the case, and sometimes these officers are hard boiled. If they see chickens or cattle on the farm they feel that

Relief Act, 1934
the man is not destitute and should not get relief. So these people feel they have a grievance, because just across the boundary they see relief administered in a more generous manner.
The merchants of the district also have a complaint. They get very few relief orders. I was talking to a merchant in the Saskatchewan area who said he had two hundred customers, of whom one hundred and ten bring in relief orders, so the people there are thoroughly convinced that there is discrimination in respect to relief as between the two provinces. As the Prime Minister has said, the dominion does not expect to get any money back; usually the province does not expect to get money back, but we find that the municipalities and the improvement districts are trying to get these people to work for their relief. No one objects very much to that, but what relief is given is deducted from the allowances in the improvement districts. I know that this is largely a provincial matter, but according to my information the province has applied to have a relief commission for the eastern part of Alberta, and I hope to convince the minister of the necessity of reviewing the situation in this district.


Richard Bedford Bennett: I think, Mr. Chairman, the hon. member for Medicine Hat is not correctly informed as to an effort having been made by the province to appoint a commission in the eastern area of Alberta. The fact is that there is always the difficulty to which the hon. gentleman refers where an imaginary line divides people. I could give some striking illustrations in the older world, and they are not lacking on this continent, where that condition has brought about invidious references to these facts. The truth is that the dominion undertook the responsibility with respect to the area in Saskatchewan, and the province of Alberta set up its own commission. The Alberta relief commission was appointed by order in council dated December 2, 1932, consisting of Mr. A. A. MacKenzie, of Edmonton, as chairman, Colonel G. E. Sanders, of Calgary, and Mr. Robert Livingstone, of Lethbridge. That order in council was passed at the instance, shall I say, of the federal government; it is their commission, and it is regarded as one of the best commissions functioning in the country. The Saskatchewan relief commission is composed of Mr. Henry Black, chairman; Mr. C. B. Daniel, general manager; Mr. W. G. Yule, Mr. A. E. Whitmore, Mr. H. A. Mumms, Mrs. Pearl Johnson, and Mr. Oliver J. Dean,
secretary. In Manitoba, Mr. MacNamara, of the Department of Public Works, was secretary dealing with the matter, and in British Columbia, Mr. Griffith was administrator of the unemployment relief branch.
The representations which have been made by the hon. gentleman would be very proper representations to be made to the province of Alberta. I say to this committee very frankly that the dominion was not unwilling to assume the entire responsibility for administration and everything else in those provinces, and take it over as a dominion matter, but you have to deal with provinces who are not at the moment prepared to forego their autonomy and leave the administration of these matters in the hands of an outside authority. If the representations which the hon. gentleman has made now are successfully made to the government of the province of Alberta the matter will receive every consideration from the federal government as, if and when the request is made.


Mr. EULER:: Mr. Chairman, the observations made by the Prime Minister with regard to the division of authority as between the provincial and federal governments impels me to say what I had intended to say at some other time. It seems to me that all the efforts in connection with relief in the last few years, and as contemplated under the bill now before the committee, have been predicated upon the assumption that this is an emergency only. I should like to venture the opinion that while relieving the distress of the unemployed is an emergency in an aggravated form, unemployment has become and will continue to be a more or less permanent factor. One would hope that as the years go by and as we return to a condition of normalcy, as one statesman of the United States called it, there would not be as great a degree of unemployment; that perhaps through the sharing of work, and for other reasons, nearly everybody will have employment. I believe, however, that for some years to come there will continue to be what one might term an irreducible minimum of unemployment, and that that has to be dealt with.
The point I wish to make is this, that if the government has not yet taken any steps in the matter it might very well now, either by the appointment of a commission, or of themselves, make investigations looking to the solution of the problem of providing for the permanently unemployed. The government itself and all hon. members in the house, regardless of their political affiliations,
Relief Act, 1934

have expressed themselves as being in favour of a form of unemployment insurance. I believe it was two sessions ago the Prime Minister said that unemployment insurance was a very difficult matter with which to deal, and that a good deal of time would be required to ascertain all the implications of unemployment insurance. He believed investigations would need to be made so that any legislation brought in would operate properly, under certain actuarial conditions, and so forth. But it seems to me that if the government could see its way clear to appoint a commission, if you like-and one hesitates to advocate the appointment of a commission, because there seems to be a great deal of public antagonism towards the adoption of such a course-it might consider the question from this point of view, namely, that nearly all these social problems ought, in a sense, to be coordinated under one federal control or, at least, under some sort of reasonable system. It might become possible that with unemployment insurance legislation there could be coordinated such things as workmen's compensation, widows' allowances, insurance for ill health, old age pensions, and poor relief. Then, combined with the investigations info the possibility of coordinating these services under federal control, there would of course arise the necessity of dealing with the provinces, because I appreciate that in this connection there is the question of invading their jurisdiction. The Prime Minister has spoken about the difficulty presented by the fact that the provinces are in control of some of these activities. I rise only to say that the government would do well to consider this suggestion, because in the future time might be saved if they at once appointed a commission for the purpose of investigating these matters. There would be many other features besides the ones I have mentioned. For instance, the commission could report to the government as to what form the unemployment insurance should take, whether it should be contributory or non-contributory -although the government is already on record in that connection-as to the proportion which should be paid by employer and empIo3ree; as to the proportion which should be paid by federal, provincial and municipal governments, and where the money should come from to make the payments-bv special tax, or some other method. I am making these references in a more or less indirect way, and have not been particularly definite.
I believe, however, there is merit in the suggestion that the government might now take steps to make these investigations so that at

the earliest possible moment a definite scientific system, if we may call it that, could be evolved and enacted into law at the earliest possible moment.


Richard Bedford Bennett: The question of social
services to be rendered to the people of a country by its government is one which has engaged the attention of peoples for nearly half a century. The burden placed upon governments has increased so greatly that the taxation necessarily imposed to meet the demands is, in some of the provinces, nearly as great as was their whole taxation at the time they came into being. Mothers' allowances, health insurance and old age pensions -and then, of course, there is the Workmen's Compensation Act, which I had intended to deal with separately, because it is more than a social service-all these are administered by the provinces. It will be recalled that the Workmen's Compensation Act is the embodiment of a principle, which principle is that an assessment must be made against industry for the purpose of providing a fund to meet the damage effected by industry to those employed in it. I have used the word "damage" rather than any other word, because actions which used to be taken in the courts were taken to recover damages for injuries. This act provides that a fixed sum shall be taken from industry every month for the purpose of creating a fund to satisfy the claims of those employed in the industry of a particular province. The consumer pays that tax.
Secondly, health insurance, which is part of the modern social insurance of Great Britain and on the continent of Europe, involves the payment of a sum based upon actuarial computations as to the period of illnesses of individuals, to enable a fixed sum per week to be paid, after a given period of illness, to those who are employed in industry. That is largely paid by the consumer. Now we come to old age pensions, and we find that in this country it is paid seventy-five per cent by the federal power and twenty-five per cent by the provincial power, that it is a sum payable to those who have reached the age of seventy years, and that it is paid to the extent of 820 per month. Those payments are made by the consumers, in the form of taxation. Then, lastly, there are mothers' benefits, or benefits which are created by statute to enable those who are deprived of the assistance of their husbands to maintain their children and enable them to give-and I shall use very broad terms-such training as will be sufficient to fit the children for

Relief Act, 1934
life's struggles. That also is paid by the provinces and involves an obligation being placed upon the taxpayers.	_
Those are forms of benefit which are paid directly or indirectly by the state to those engaged in industry, to those who have attained a given age or to others who have been deprived of a breadwinner. Then, of course, there is the ordinary, normal relief, which is an obligation placed upon the provinces, and in turn upon the municipalities. In the budgets of every province one could find year after year, long before the years 1929 or 1930, provision for indigents or for the poor, administered-and I am looking at the hon. member for Vancouver Centre-in remote communities such as those in British Columbia, where municipal institutions had not been set up, by the gold commissioner, and administered in the older provinces by municipal councils. This is indigent relief, or poor relief.
There were in this dominion before the depression set in an average of 143,000 people who had to be cared for, during the period they were unable to work, either by the savings they had made or by contributions made by the taxpayers. The hon. member for North Waterloo has pointed out that the number is now much larger. Undoubtedly it is much larger, not solely because of the depression but because of circumstances to which the hon. member for Wetaskiwin referred only the other day. This is the age of machinery; four men are now doing the work that seven did in 1920. The result is that you have to seek employment for that surplus population. For instance, take the everyday business of life which any one of us can recall from the days when we were ten years of age. We see year after year a lessening of the number employed in providing services for our comfort, for our convenience, and shall we say for our pleasure as well.
The hon. gentleman should keep in mind the fact that during all the period through which we have passed an effort has been made to collect such information as would enable us to have a picture of the situation, and we have that picture in a fairly complete way. It will be recalled that in the census we set up special inquiries for the purpose of giving us some idea of what was the situation throughout Canada. We have the reports of trades unions, and we have the reports of the establishments of industry giving us the number of people employed, the capacity for employment, and the extent
to which that capacity has been taken up during the months which have passed. I say with all deference to the committee that that is a fairly simple thing. It requires patience and time and effort, but there is no difficulty in getting it if you take the time and have the patience to do it. That information has been fairly well secured in this country and we have it in fair shape.
However, when you come to deal with the problem of the creation of facilities to meet that situation you are confronted at once with divided jurisdiction. The provinces have exclusive legislative control over the matters mentioned in section 92 of the British North America Act. Unless there is agreement by them all, you will have a situation such as you have to-day with respect to old age pensions.


Ian Alistair Mackenzie: Could
not the question of jurisdiction be reviewed?


Richard Bedford Bennett: The hon. gentleman has anticipated what I was going to say. I do not intend this afternoon to enter into a discussion of this matter, because obviously it is neither the time nor the place to do it. But I do say to the committee that there is not the slightest doubt in the world that unless there is a rearrangement of the powers of this parliament and the legislatures of the provinces, in the very nature of things the problem cannot be dealt with. May I say to the hon. gentleman that a commission is not necessary.


William Daum Euler: That was only a suggestion.


Richard Bedford Bennett: If I have the jurisdiction, I need nothing further in the way of information. I say that very frankly because we have spent enormous effort and considerable time and patience to see that that is available. All I can usefully say to this committee is that I hold a very strong opinion as to the necessity of an early revision of the provisions of the British North America Act. I am not unmindful of the fact, and I trust the committee will always keep this in mind, that sometimes there is an inclination on the part of many of us to be intolerant because of the views expressed by those who do not agree with us as to the desirability or necessity of amending that statute. I should like to remind the committee of what I am sure is in its mind always, that the British North America Act represents a compromise, and compromises are always difficult to change without the consent of all those whose interests may be affected. Every member
Relief Act, 1934

of this committee recognizes that difficulty. I need not go into it at any length, beyond stating that we recognize the difficulty and any steps we may take towards its solution will be taken in such a way as not to strain the mechanism of our existing machinery. When we have accomplished that we will be enabled to embark upon those improvements in our legislation which the circumstances clearly necessitate.
My attention has been directed to the fact that I said that before the depression period there were 143,000 who had to be taken care of, but I might state that that number does not include dependents. If we reckoned the way we do now, the number would be somewhere in excess of 400,000. The information given to me by those who make it their business to study this matter and report upon it as carefully as possible is that 143,000 would be an underestimate. I should have indicated that the 143,000 included only earners and not their dependents.
I am grateful to the hon. member for bringing up this matter, but it is clearly not a matter which we should endeavour to discuss under this measure. I have before me the recommendations which the provinces arrived at with the dominion last spring. I say very frankly to the committee that I had hoped we might be able to dispense with a relief measure this year. At the meeting in January the provinces indicated their views in these words:
That until such time as the large numbers of unemployed throughout Canada have been substantially absorbed, either by improved industrial employment or by federal works, federal assistance to the provinces should be continued on the basis of the provinces dealing with present economic conditions by the distribution of direct relief as provided in the existing agreement between the dominion and the provinces.
That is the conclusion at which the provinces arrived. I have explained how we dealt with these matters. At the conference we stated what the situation was, and each premier made a statement as to the situation in his province. They then retired for the purpose of considering how they could best deal with the difficulties which confronted them, and that is the recommendation they made. It was unanimous, but they expressed the hope, in common with ourselves, that conditions would obviate the expenditure of large sums for relief.
I should like the committee to know that there is a very distinct improvement in this country. I will admit that in the country west of the great lakes it is less apparent than

it is in the east. Shorn of their great reservoir of earnings by reason of a lack of profits, the millions of dollars which are normally available for business are no longer available. That means a diminution of purchasing power, and until there is an improvement in agriculture, in prices and otherwise, it is quite apparent that the general improvement must be delayed. However, in the camps maintained by the Department of National Defence where, as I explained yesterday, the men may leave to take positions in agriculture, industry or otherwise, the number has diminished by substantially 9,000. One industry has reported that during February it had the largest production of any month in its history, and it has been in existence almost since confederation. The same thing has happened in connection with another business. Another significant and striking fact, and one which fills us with the spirit of hope and optimism, is the increase in the production of electrical energy. I always regard these figures as an important factor, electrical energy being used to the extent it is in almost every form of industrial activity in Canada. More kilowatts of electrical energy were produced in February than in any month in the history of Canada.


Mr. VENIOT:: Could the right hon. gentleman state how much electrical energy was exported?


Richard Bedford Bennett: There have been no new customers beyond those mentioned in the order in council produced a few days ago. My memory is that the quantity exported has not changed materially over a period of years. I usually carry these matters in my mind, but for the moment I cannot recall whether there were seven or ten; at any rate, there was a limited number of customers and they have been given permission to purchase and the producing company to sell electricity or gas in this country-natural gas in the far west and electricity in the east- for I think a matter of fifteen years or thereabouts, perhaps a little longer. There has been no substantial change in the matter since then.


Mr. NEILL:: Might not the increased consumption of electricity be due to the abandonment of steam rather than to increased industry?


Richard Bedford Bennett: It well might be, but the fact is that that usually is gradual, and the striking figures with respect to electricity give one at least some cause for hope. Take the harbour of Halifax, which is one of the finest

in the world; the business transacted in that harbour during the month of March was greater than in any year in the history of the port, and that is in itself a striking record.


Samuel Factor: Why ask for all these extraordinary powers, then?


Richard Bedford Bennett: A Daniel come to judgment, O most noble Daniel! Perhaps I should not apply the Merchant of Venice's figure of speech, but one hearing that observation is almost inclined to do so; even some of the hon. gentleman's colleagues see the force of it. I merely answer the questions put to me by hon. gentlemen, indicating that we had hoped we might avoid dealing with the matter as we have. The provinces thought otherwise, and after discussing it with them fully we have introduced the measure now before the house. Far from having failed to realize what the hon. member for North Waterloo has referred to, we have endeavoured to accumulate and have accumulated all the information necessary to deal with the problems of social betterment. But we have not yet approached the problem of an amendment to the British North America Act. That is in the offing, and I suppose that in the course of human events, and when an indulgent and grateful electorate have honoured us with their support, we may be able to make such changes as may be necessary.


William Daum Euler: I have no intention of carrying the discussion further at the moment. I brought the matter up merely because of my desire that what is done in an emergency should also be dealt with in a permanent manner, because it will be a continuing emergency, if you care to put it that way. My suggestion of a commission was merely to secure information which the Prime Minister says has already been secured. I am rather surprised to hear that. I realize also the difficulty with regard to conflicting jurisdiction between the provinces and the dominion. I realize that, and that was one of my reasons for bringing the matter up. I am glad I brought it up if only for the fact that we have got from the Prime Minister a statement that he believes the British North America Act should be amended.


Mr. DENIS (Translation):: Mr. Chairman. while accepting as a fact the statement of the right hon. Prime Minister in connection with the improvement of business in this country, could he explain why the government, according to the provisions of section 2, desires unlimited powers to relieve the unemployed? Could he not state the amount necessary to end this crisis from which we
Relief Act, 1934
are suffering for the last three years? Are the requests which he received-either from provinces, municipalities and private or public companies-so numerous that it is impossible for him to state the amount necessary to solve this problem? I wish to inquire from the right hon. Prime Minister whether he can supply us with a list-I do not ask for a complete one, but at least of some of the requests which the government has received heretofor.
'Mr. BENNETT: My hon. friend knows that I follow him with a little difficult}'; I can follow the meaning that attaches to a few of his words and from that, with the help of my friends, I can understand the whole. If I were to produce all the demands made upon us by all companies, municipalities and communities, then I might be within the words of Scripture, in saying that so many books could be written about them that they would be beyond the mind of man to remember. The truth is that we have been inundated with requests for assistance with regard to everything and when we have referred them to the province that usually has been the end of it, for reasons which I think are fairly obvious, especially to my hon. friend from Charlevoix-Saguenay. Under those circumstances I feel I can add nothing to what I have said.


Peter John Veniot: In connection with the
remarks of the Prime Minister touching the exportation of electricity, did I understand him to say that there were some orders in council laid on the table?


Richard Bedford Bennett: The orders in council
are referred to every year in the departmental report indicating the extent to which exportation has been permitted, and I think you will find in the trade and commerce report the reference to them.


Peter John Veniot: Another question. The
Prime Minister, referring to the census returns and the number of unemployed, mentioned 143,000 as reported by the census returns. Was not that, as reported by the census returns, the average for the previous ten years?


Richard Bedford Bennett: It was not a census return at all and I did not say it was. The only difficulty is that the hon. gentleman is wrong on two counts: first of all it was not a census return, and I did not say it was. I said that the average reported by the statistical department-


Peter John Veniot: They got it from the census of 1931.
Relief Act, 1934


Richard Bedford Bennett: No; the average for a
period of years was 143,000.


Peter John Veniot: I was not so far astray as
the Prime Minister suggests, because the census returns contain a definite statement. They say that they find there were 140,000 or 141,000 of unemployed on an average for the previous ten years. That is what the census returns say, and the statistical department no doubt got their information from those returns.


Richard Bedford Bennett: The report to which I
referred was prepared by the Department of Labour for 1920-29, and on the basis of information received there was indicated an average of 143,000.


Mr. POWER:: I should like to obtain
some information from the minister with respect to an order in council dealing with a guarantee to the Dominion Steel and Coal Corporation. I have the order in council before me, but I fear very much there mudt have been a previous one. This is order in council P.C. 1229, as follows:
Certified to be a true copy of a minute of a meeting of the committee of the privy council, approved by the deputy of His Excellency the Governor General on the 28th June, 1933.
The committee of the privy council have had before them a joint report, dated 21st June, 1933, from the Minister of Railways and Canals and the Minister of Labour, representing:
That, in order to assist in the relief of the existing unemployment situation in Nova Scotia, an arrangement was made under date of May 25, 1932, with the Dominion Steel and Coal Corporation, Limited, to manufacture steel rails amounting to 15,000 gross tons at $46 per ton, to be delivered f.o.b. cars at Sydney on March 1, 1933, up to which date there were to be no extra charges, but after March 1, 1933, the government agreed to pay the interest charges on the value of such rails unless previous to that time the Canadian National Railways had taken over the rails.
The question which I should like to ask is: Was an order in council passed prior to this one authorizing the agreement, or was this an agreement made between the Canadian National Railways and the steel company?


Richard Bedford Bennett: So far as I know there
was no previous order in council. The matter was discussed between the president of the Dominion Steel and Coal Corporation and the Minister of Labour, and in 1934, that is this year, the matter was again discussed, because the order in council refers to a 30,000-ton rail order received from the Canadian National Railways and the guarantee was given to the Bank of Montreal in respect to the same. Is that the one?


Charles Gavan Power: Probably the Prime Minister misunderstood me. He is referring to the Algoma Steel?


Richard Bedford Bennett: Yes.


Charles Gavan Power: I am referring now to the
Dominion Steel and Coal order. In the order in council there is a reference to an agreement entered into between, I assume, the government or probably the Canadian National Railways and the Dominion Steel and Coal. I would like to know something with respect to that arrangement.


Richard Bedford Bennett: The agreement was made between the railway company and the Dominion Steel and Coal Corporation. The memorandum of the Dominion Steel and Coal Corporation is as follows:
The action taken by the federal government in aid of the imperilled coal and steel industries of Nova Scotia during recent years has included transportation subventions linking up rail and water movements in the navigation season; assisted rail movement in the winter; encouragement to the use of Canadian coal in coke ovens; both in regard to metallurgical coke and domestic coke supplanting imported anthracite; and release of orders for steel rails as an unemployment measure.
The results of this coordinated action of the government have been more stimulating and beneficial than the most optimistic anticipation. The steel plant in Sydney, because of the backlog to its operations given by a 50,000-ton rail order given in the spring of 1933, has been enabled to quote successfully on two rail orders from South Africa, and to obtain substantial orders for export to Great Britain of wire nails, rods and billets.
The direct result of the rail order has been to enable the Sydney steel plant to work on a 50 per cent basis over a period that it is hoped may extend into the summer of 1934. The activity of the steel plant thus made possible has required greater coal consumption, and is on the eve of being reflected in ore and limestone production in Newfoundland, thereby favourably affecting Canadian exports of a general nature to Newfoundland by increasing the purchasing ability of the island. The wisdom of the action of the government taken in aid of the distressed coal mining industry of Nova Scotia has been equally demonstrated by the results in increasing employment.
Coal mining is the life of Nova Scotia. One-quarter of its population, as actual workers, or as the dependants of workers, obtain their livelihood within the province through the mining and transportation of coal, through supplying of mine materials, and in the allied steel industry which is built upon local coal supply. There are other numerous workers beyond the boundaries of Nova Scotia whose livelihood is gained by the handling and distribution of Nova Scotia coal; the benefits of Nova Scotia coal mining in respect to employment being felt throughout all eastern Canada.
A substantial part of the provincial revenue comes from coal royalties.

Relief Act, 1934
Then after discussing the assistance given by coal subventions, he proceeds:
Side by side with this condition in Nova Scotia, coal of non-Canadian origin-the employment from its production benefiting other countries-was being imported into eastern Canada to the extent of 8,000,000 tons of bituminous quality annually, identical in its uses and grade with Nova Scotia coal.
The cost of production of coal in Nova Scotia was increased to a crippling extent by operation of mines at less than half normal rate. The competitive ability of Nova Scotia coal was becoming smaller all the time as the financial resources of employers and workers became exhausted.
The existence of the coal mining industry, which is almost the same thing as the commercial and industrial health of Nova Scotia, was gravely imperilled.
In these imperative circumstances the granting of transportation subventions enabling Canadians to use Nova Scotia coal instead of imported coal was no less than the plain duty of the federal government. As a result coal mining in Nova Scotia has been kept in being, and the use of Nova Scotia coal has been extended to areas formerly exclusively supplied by imported coal, where it has proved to be at least as good quality and as suitable for all kind's of purposes as imported bituminous coal.
The expenditure on subventions has avoided much greater expenditure in necessary workers' relief, has averted calamitous commercial collapse of employing corporations and bankruptcy of municipalities. The assistance given has necessarily been proportionate to the need. The scheme of the coal subventions has in mind the lessening of expenditures as business recovery proceeds. The assistance so far given, based on a need that it is hoped is lessening, has certainly averted conditions requiring such great assistance as to be beyond the powers of government.
Taking all the attendant circumstances into consideration, the action of the government in encouraging the use of Canadian coal by Canadian consumers was plain common sense and has been abundantly justified by what it has accomplished.
I read the whole of that because it covers both the question of subventions in regard to coal and the order for rails.


Charles Gavan Power: Who was that from?


Richard Bedford Bennett: From the president of the corporation, Sir Newton Moore; it is in his memorandum to the government.


Charles Gavan Power: I d-o not think the Prime Minister understood my question. My question is: What arrangement was entered into by the government or by the Canadian National Railways in 1932? The order in council speaks of an arrangement.


Richard Bedford Bennett: The order of June 2?


Charles Gavan Power: This is order in council P.C. No. 1229, dated June 28, 1933, and it refers to an arrangement made under date of
May 25, 1932, with the Dominion Steel and Coal Corporation, Limited, to manufacture steel rails amounting to 15,000 gross tons at S46 per ton to be delivered on March 1, 1933. I would like to get some information as to the nature of that arrangement and who were the parties to it.


Richard Bedford Bennett: Prior to the passing of the order in council, to which the hon. gentleman has referred and which authorizes payment, an order in council was passed guaranteeing to the bank the sum of money that represented the cost of the rails. The arrangement referred to is between the railway company and the steel company whereby the rails were to be rolled to a certain specification and all the particulars that the railway company required. Then the government on June 2, being a few days after the arrangement was made for the purchase of the rails, guaranteed the account to the bank to the extent of SI,100,000.


Ian Alistair Mackenzie: To one
bank or several?


Richard Bedford Bennett: There were three banks: the Bank of Montreal, the Royal Bank and the Bank of Commerce. Then the order in council to which the hon. member has referred was passed for the purpose of authorizing the department to make the payments.


Charles Gavan Power: Can the Prime Minister give the number and date of that order in council?


Richard Bedford Bennett: P.C. 1076, June 2, 1933.


Charles Gavan Power: May I ask that it be produced?


Richard Bedford Bennett: I am informed that it has been tabled.


Charles Gavan Power: This order to which I now refer is one, I take it, authorizing the payment of interest only.


Richard Bedford Bennett: Yes, it was order number 1229 of June 28, 1933, authorizing payment:
Out of the consolidated revenue fund in accordance with the provisions of The Relief Act, 1933, to the Dominion Steel and Coal Corporation Limited of the amount or amounts of interest at the rate of 5 per cent per annum upon the value of the quantity of rails rolled, as per the inspection certificates, the said quantities to be valued at $45.25 per gross ton for No. 1 rails and $45.25 less 5 per cent for No. 2 rails, such interest to be paid to Dominion Steel and Coal Corporation Limited in respect of the balance of the value of rails that may at any time after March 1, 1933, be outstanding for settlement by the Canadian National Railways in respect of tonnage remaining to be taken over by the Canadian National Railways.
The ministers observe that the quantities certified to in the inspection reports are esti-
Relief Act, 1934

mated quantities which are subject to verification upon final weighing of the rails as and when to be taken over by the Canadian National Railways, and that final settlement will be based upon the quantities ascertained through actual weighing at the time of final taking over.


Charles Gavan Power: May I ask if the original order in council number 1076 of 1932-


Richard Bedford Bennett: No, 1933.


Charles Gavan Power: Of June 2?


Richard Bedford Bennett: Yes.


Charles Gavan Power: -was passed under the Relief Act of 1933 which provided that guarantees could be given to corporations?


Richard Bedford Bennett: Yes.


Charles Gavan Power: But prior to the passing of that act a contract must have been entered into between the government and the steel company, because reference is made to an arrangement made under date of May 25, 1932.


Richard Bedford Bennett: That arrangement was between the railway company and the steel company, not with the government.


Charles Gavan Power: Does this amount of $1,100,000 become a liability of the Canadian National Railways?


Richard Bedford Bennett: It is a liability of the Canadian National Railways, and it stands for payment as the rails are taken into use. In the meantime, under the provisions of the order in council to which I have just referred, interest payments were made. Then the rails have to be paid for as they are taken into service by the railway company.


Charles Gavan Power: Referring now to another order in council, P.C. 1285, passed and approved on June 28, 1933, it is rather long to recite but it deals with a guarantee by the government to the Bank of Montreal of an amount of $660,000 to provide for the manufacture by the Algoma Steel Company of 30,000 tons of rails for the use of the Canadian National Railways. May I ask the minister to give some details of that order in council?


Richard Bedford Bennett: Perhaps the hon. gentleman is aware that the Soo mill manufactures rails, and has supplied rails in large quantities to the Michigan Central and other American roads operating in Canada as well as to the Canadian Pacific and Canadian National. As a large number of persons were unemployed at the Soo, an order was sought from the railway company. If the railway company required rails they thought they should have

part of the order. The government was then asked whether if the railway company ordered rails the government would give a guarantee to enable operations to be carried on. I suppose it is within the knowledge of this committee that the Algoma Steel Company was in the hands of receivers. Therefore the assistance which I have mentioned was sought. The letter which was written to the minister states:
Our rail mill started on the 30,000 ton unemployment order December 4th and has been operating on single turn in order to distribute the work as much as possible. The order is about one-half rolled and will run to the first week in March.
The operation of the rail mill on this unemployment order has not only restored employment to rail mill employees but has enabled us to secure orders for other material to operate the two merchant mills through the winter. We now have approximately 1,600 men employed, and a payroll of $150,000 per month.
During last summer we had in Sault Ste. Marie over 1,500 families on relief and this would have been increased materially this winter had it not been for the steel plant operation.
That letter is dated January 26, 1934. It is from one of the receivers, the operating receiver.
That is a case in which an arrangement was made between the railway company and the rolling mill, and the rails that were supplied will be taken possession of and paid for as required. I think some of them have been recently shipped into service. The guarantee was given because the company, being in the hands of receivers, could not secure the necessary capital without having some assurance that these rails would be paid for.


Charles Gavan Power: By whom was that letter signed?


Richard Bedford Bennett: The present receiver, Mr. Franz. He is one of the receivers and managers. The names given on the letter paper are: W. C. Franz, Sir W. E. Stavert and John A. McPhail, receivers and managers.


Charles Gavan Power: Had the plant been closed for any length of time before this?


Richard Bedford Bennett: I am not in a position to say definitely, I think it had not been operating for some time.


Charles Gavan Power: The member for the constituency is standing right behind you.


Mr. SIMPSON (Algoma):: The Algoma Steel mill at Sault Ste. Marie had not been operated except part time for probably the past three or four years; I think during the years 1932 and 1933 not more than three

Relief Act, 1934
months. They had a considerable quantity of raw material, iron ore and coal and limestone, as outlined in the order in council. As stated by the Prime Minister, they were in the hands of receivers. The bank was not anxious to advance money to enable this raw material to be manufactured into steel rails, and so the government were approached. As a matter of fact they were approached by representatives of the city of Sault Ste. Marie, not by the company. They were asked if they would guarantee a sufficient portion of the cost of manufacturing these rails to take care of the wages of the men and the cost of such raw material as it might be necessary to purchase. It was done as an unemployment relief proposition entirely. Sault Ste. Marie, as my hon. friend probably knows, has a population of about 23,000 or 24,000 people, 75 per cent of whom are dependent, either directly or indirectly, on the operation of that steel mill for their living. Over 2,000 men are ordinarily employed in the mill. The great majority of these men have been living there for many years. Many of them had their own homes, some of them not entirely paid for. As a result of the mill not operating at all steadily during the past few years these men were unable to find work, unable to provide for their families, and many of them were on relief. As stated in the letter from Mr. Franz, there were some 1,552 families receiving direct relief in the Soo last summer. It was stated by the relief committee, as well as by the mayor, that that number would be undoubtedly increased to much over 2,000 families unless work were provided. After the arrangement was made and the mill put in operation about three months employment was given in the rolling of the rails and approximately another month in getting the mills in shape for operation. This meant about four months of operation, at about $150,000 per month in wages. In other words at least $500,000 was distributed in wages as a result of the order, and instead of there being 1,552 families on relief, as there were last summer, the number fell to something like 640. The saving in direct relief, estimating 1,000 families for four months at $25 per month per family, would be about $100,000. Even if the government had to pay the interest on this guarantee for a period of three years it would not amount to as much as the saving in relief, but I do not expect that the government will have to pay interest for anything like that period of time because, as the Prime Minister has stated, already delivery has been taken of a portion
of the rails. When the Canadian National take delivery they pay for the rails; the money is deposited in the bank and to that extent the guarantee of the government is reduced.


Ian Alistair Mackenzie: Can the hon. member tell me what quantity has been delivered to the Canadian National?


Thomas Edward Simpson: I do not know the exact tonnage that is carried on a railway car, but eighty carloads have been shipped.


Charles Gavan Power: To what point in the country did they go?


Thomas Edward Simpson: My information is that they went to western Ontario, in the vicinity of London, where the Canadian National have need of replacements.


Charles Gavan Power: I have been given to understand lately that, because of the pooling arrangements that have been made, a great many railway lines are being given up. If I did not misunderstand the statement made by Judge Fullerton only a few days ago, on some of these lines the pooling will be permanent, so I suppose eventually the rails in use will be torn up. I am therefore asking myself the reason for the urgent need of rolling more rails at this particular time and particularly of charging the Canadian National with them, when in some districts, such as my own, the Canadian National rails are being abandoned altogether. According to my recollection of the deliberations of the railway committee for the past few years, these rails are good; in fact they are practically new. I stand to be corrected, but it seems to me that on several occasions the late Sir Henry Thornton stated that one of his great problems was to replace the sixty pound rails with rails weighing eighty pounds and up to one hundred pounds, but that he had carried out that replacement to a considerable extent throughout Canada, and in fact the operation was almost complete. If that were so I fail to see, with all due respect to my hon. friend from West Algoma, and without in any way criticizing him for having endeavoured to do his best to provide employment for the unemployed in his constituency by reopening a mill which had been abandoned for three or four years-


Thomas Edward Simpson: Not abandoned.


Charles Gavan Power: Well, a mill which had been in the hands of a receiver and had not been operating for three or four years. I rather fail to see the justification for the govern-
Relief Act, 193i

ment guaranteeing a transaction such as this and forcing the rails on the Canadian National, which, as I remember it from last year, was to be kept entirely free from political influence, either sectional or local. That was why we appointed all these trustees. I remember at that time pointing out to the members of this house that the difficulty under which the Canadian National had laboured in the past had not been due to petty political pressure but had been due to large demands from large sections or provinces, and that there was nothing to prevent the Canadian National trustees from submitting to such sectional pressure, that nothing in the act we passed last year could bring about that result. Of course I was told that the views I then expressed were altogether without foundation, but now we find that we have unloaded on the Canadian National fifty thousand tons of rails from Nova Scotia and thirty thousand tons of rails from the Algoma Steel Company. I fail to see what justification exists for these orders in council from the standpoint of looking after our greatest problem, namely the Canadian National Railways, and I should be glad to have that explained to me.


Mr. MacDONALD (Cape Breton):: Coming from the city of Sydney and having a fairly intimate knowledge of this transaction I want to say that nothing this government has done can be justified quite as easily as the action taken in this connection. There is no doubt at all, as every person who uses the Canadian National knows, that rails must be replaced. There is need of replacements in the eastern section now, and it was simply a matter of justice and good business for this government to agree to guarantee the payment to the banks of the money which was advanced to supply those rails. The effect of these orders has been to transport a large section of the industrial east from the depths of despair to a fair measure of prosperity at the present time. The steel company at Sydney was not operating; true, the fires had not been put out but it was just lingering on. Delegations not only from the steel company but composed of representative men from all parts of the county of Cape Breton came here and laid their case before the government, showing them that the rails were needed and what would be the effect of such an order. The result, so far as the city of Sydney is concerned, where we had fifty per cent of the people on relief, was to take at least seventy per cent of those people off relief, and these rail orders have also affected the production of coal, with the result that

to-day our mines in Cape Breton are being operated to a greater extent, considering the time of year, than has been the case during the past ten years. The steel company is employing perhaps seventy per cent of the men it formerly employed, and in the city of Sydney relief distribution has fallen to perhaps twenty-five or thirty per cent of what it was three years ago. I would suggest to hon. gentlemen opposite that when they discuss a matter such as this they do so having in mind the Canadian point of view.


Charles Gavan Power: The Canadian National point of view.


Finlay MacDonald: Simply because these rails come from one or two parts of Canada is no indication that there is not equally as great an effect upon the western portion of our country. This is one country, and the lines separating the provinces are purely imaginary. If the province of Alberta prospers, the province of Nova Scotia prospers, and vice versa. I have no desire to criticize the managements of the Canadian National Railways who held office in days gone by. It is true, as one railway man has said, that they spent money like drunken sailors. We are now suffering for it. But if the fact remains that the Canadian National Railways must in a certain number of years have their rails relaid I say that the mills in Canada should be allowed to furnish them. Because of this increased work relief which would otherwise be necessary is rendered unnecessary.


Ian Alistair Mackenzie: I should like to ask a question regarding the guarantees. What number of tons of steel were actually delivered to the Canadian National Railways first, from the fifty thousand tons ordered from the Dominion Steel Works, and secondly from the thirty thousand tons to be delivered by the Algoma Steel Corporation?


Richard Bedford Bennett: I am sure the hon. member will realize that this is not information the government receives. The accounts we had to pay with respect to interest were entirely outside the question of deliveries, and I am not in a position to give information as to the quantities delivered. I do know, however-and when I say I know I should add that I have been informed-that a part of the Soo order has been placed on track.
I should like to say this: I cannot think that any good purpose is being served-with one exception and if that is the purpose I am perfectly willing that the discussion should continue, namely, that of prolonging the discussion-by dealing with matters in a discussion of this bill in the way we have been

Relief Act, 1934
dealing with them this afternoon. To assert that we were endeavouring to force rails upon the Canadian National Railways is, in my judgment, rather-shall I say-insulting to the intelligence of the committee.


Charles Gavan Power: I don't mind what the right hon. gentleman says; go ahead; shoot.


Richard Bedford Bennett: I shall not reply to the hon. member in kind; I think perhaps he can deal with his own condition. But I do desire to say this, that the trustees were not appointed until January of this year, and that these transactions were those of last year. The transaction supplying rails to the Canadian National Railways was one carried on between the railway company and the mills. But the mills could not carry on, so far as the financial position was concerned, without assistance from the government in the manner indicated. To suggest that this government was endeavouring to force the Canadian National Railways to buy rails at the "Soo" when it has already put into track something like 2,500 tons of them is not, I suggest, quite what should be said with respect to a matter of this kind. Everyone who is familiar with modem railroading knows that the heavy engines used on both railroads in Canada have necessitated the relaying of track. The old 60-pound steel has been changed not only to 80-pound, but to 105-pound sections. And the old 56-pound rail, which was laid on the Canadian Pacific railway when I went west, was a rail produced by Krupps in Germany and by the Barrow firm. I believe there is not now between Vancouver and Montreal a single rail on the main line which does not bear the name of a Canadian mill. Of course on the American end of the Canadian National Railways' line to Chicago, Canadian rails are not laid. Heavy rails put in place in consequence of heavy motive power have cost a great deal of money, and the lighter weight rails have been taken out of track and put into branch lines.
I understand-and I want to be very careful about this because I am not definitely informed-but I understand that the 2,500 tons of rails which have already left the "Soo" have been put in the London section of the Canadian National Railways which, as the hon. gentleman knows, is on the main line to Chicago, a line on which heavy motive power has been used necessitating a rail section much heavier than the old rails before used. I do assure the committee that no effort was made to induce the Canadian National Railways, as a matter of politics or otherwise, to order rails they did not want.
The answer is that if in March of 1934, 2,500 tons had been taken out for the purpose of placing in tracks, one will readily realize that the rails were needed. For instance, to my knowledge, from a statement made by one of the officials, the "Soo" mills are now continuing to roll rails for the Canadian Pacific Railway, which also requires replacements. Those who are familiar with the strain upon rails brought about by modern highspeed trains, and the efforts which have been made to secure rails which will withstand the tremendous pressure of high speed and heavy loads, will know that the railway companies are always, shall I say hungry, for new rails. The only question is that of holding them down, so far as possible from spending unnecessarily in rail purchases.
If there is anything in this transaction which should not have been done I should like to know what it is. I was here when at least one contract was completed, and I know of nothing that any business man would not have done. As a matter of fact the transaction saved money. To be perfectly frank about it, that is the fact: It saved us money. In other words the interest we pay was less than the sum we would have been obligated to pay under direct relief measures for the community in question. The prices paid for rails were the standard prices prevailing at that time. I think that if the hon. gentleman will take the trouble to look up rail prices he will find there was no addition to the ordinary prices for rails of a similar type.


Charles Gavan Power: I shall not endeavour to
follow the right hon. gentleman in a discussion of his dissertation of an hour's duration. He has indicated that my few questions on a matter of public importance, namely, as to why the country had undertaken to guarantee large sums of money, were more or less insulting to the intelligence of the committee. That, I think, is a matter which should be left to the judgment of the committee.
The point is this: Here are certain orders for rails. If the Canadian National Railways needed rails they could give their order to any Tom, Dick or Harry who could go to the rail market and have them rolled. I doubt very much whether there was any necessity for a government guarantee. The point I make is as to whether or not there was any necessity for a guarantee.


Thomas Edward Simpson: How many rail mills are there in Canada?
Belief Act, 1934


Charles Gavan Power: Probably two. I have no
doubt, however, that if the Canadian National Railways, without any governmental intervention, had given an order for rails, either of the steel companies mentioned would have been only too glad to accept. I am under the impression that for many years the Dominion Iron and Steel Company did business with the national railways.


Finlay MacDonald: The
Dominion Steel and Coal Corporation could not finance the rails.
"Mr. POWER: I understand an order was given to the Dominion Steel and Coal Corporation by the Canadian National Railways before the government guaranteed payment. I may be wrong in that statement but I am subject to correction. As I understand it, there were two orders and in the case of one of them I cannot understand why the Dominion Steel and Coal Corporation could not finance an order for twenty, thirty or forty thousand tons of rails. It seems to me that any bank would be only too glad to finance an order from the Canadian National Railways.


Finlay MacDonald: Unfortunately the banks refused to do it.


Charles Gavan Power: In the case of the Dominion Steel and Coal Corporation, apparently the order was completed before the government intervened. The order in council reads:
That in order to assist in the relief of the existing unemployment situation in Nova Scotia, an arrangement was made under date of May 25, 1932, with the Dominion Steel and' Coal Corporation, Limited, to manufacture steel rails amounting to 15,000 gross tons at $46 per ton, to be delivered d.ofb. cars at Sydney on cars March 1, 1933.
My information is-I am subject to correction-that that order in council was not passed until June, 1933, three months after the order was supposed to be completed. A moment ago the minister stated that the order in council was number P.C. 1076, dated June 2, 1933, for $1,100,000. The work on this order was commenced on May 25, 1932, and apparently delivery was made sometime in March, 1933, prior to the guarantee. If the company were able to pay their men and purchase their ore from a foreign country in both cases, they must have been in funds or have received assistance from someone. If the Canadian National Railways really needed the rails it seems to me that there would have been no difficulty in the railway company financing the order instead of the government giving a guarantee. It is for these reasons that I am making my inquiries this afternoon.


Richard Bedford Bennett: Perhaps the difficulty of the hon. gentleman can be explained. He has not allowed for the fact that the rolling mills were not in a position financially to carry a loan from the banks until such time as delivery was to be made. In other words, the delivery was enlarged far beyond the period of time that it is usual for the purpose of getting money. I do not think it is necessary to go into the financial position of the companies. One of them was in the hands of receivers and the banks had advanced all that they cared to advance. I suggested that they might get a further advance on receivers' certificates but that was found not to be practicable. The order in council was passed in the form in which it is because the advances made by the banks were quite substantial and they were thus able to know that the money advanced for wages would be repaid.
The hon. gentleman has referred to the fact that the ore was purchased in a foreign country. The fact is that there was on hand a substantial quantity of ore, limestone, and the other commodities which go into the production of steel. This applied both to the company at Sault Ste. Marie and the one at Sydney, although the position at Sydney was not perhaps just the same as at Sault Ste. Marie. I do not think I am discussing the private business of the company when I say that the banks felt that under the then existing economic conditions they had advanced all the money that they should advance. If they were going to make payments against the production of rails which would not be paid for immediately, during the time between the completion of production and the time the rails were taken by the purchasers to put on the track they would find themselves with substantial moneys locked up under conditions with which they did not care to deal. Hence it is that this arrangement was made.
As far as the forcing of rails on the Canadian National Railways is concerned, I appeal to any hon. gentleman who has sat on the committee to state if he has not found that the difficulty is to prevent rails being required by the railway. The flattening out of rails by the heavy high speed steel trains and motive power has necessitated the laying of new rails, and all members who have sat on the select committee-I observe one of them in front of me now-will realize that what I say is correct. The general manager and president of the railway has always stated that he is compelled to put in heavy rails,

Reliej Act, 1934
not because he wants to but because he could not prevent it.
The reason this guarantee was given was the lapse of time between the date of the completion of the order and the uncertainty as to when the railway company would take possession of the rails to put them on the track. They required financial assistance and it was given to them in this manner.


Charles Gavan Power: The financial assistance was not really necessary in order to permit them to begin operations. From the statement if the Prime Minister I understand that botu companies had large quantities of raw materials on hand. With an order in their possession and large stocks of raw materials on hand there would be a strong argument against the necessity of a guarantee. I have sat on the special committee ever since it has been inaugurated-I sat on that committee even before the right hon. gentleman came into the house-and I know as well as the Prime Minister that there has always been a demand for rails. But I know also that there has been a preaching in this house and throughout the country day in and day out for the cutting to the bone of expenditures on the Canadian National Railways. I know also that lines are being abandoned right and left, trains are being pooled, and men are being thrown out of work. We are told we must not put too much pressure on the Canadian National Railways, and it seems incomprehensible that we should order rails in advance. As the Prime Minister has pointed out, the government is to pay interest during the time which elapses from the completion of the contract and the time the rails are taken by the company. In one order in council arrangement is made for the payment of $13,000 in interest and in the other there is an arrangement between the corporation and the bank. Order in council, P.C. 1285, which deals with the Algoma Steel Corporation, reads:
That the corporation and the said bank will give to the dominion government such assurances as may be requisite to provide that fifty per cent of the rails manufactured under the terms of this proposal shall be earmarked and held as security against advances made under the dominion's guarantee to the bank and upon payment being made for the said rails by the railway company, in whole or in part, the money paid therefor to the bank by the railway company shall effectually release the dominion government from the guarantee to the extent of such payment.
So that there was a kind of joint arrangement there, as I understand it. I do not intend to proceed very much further with the matter; I simply want to make myself clear.
I think I am within my rights in inquiring into the reasons which brought about the guaranteeing of such large sums to the banks, who have been stating in the public press and elsewhere that they had any amount of money to lend to good borrowers, and I know of no better borrower than a man who has a government order in his pocket; I have never heard of any better borrower anywhere throughout the country. It has been almost an axiom that a person who had an order from the government could go to any bank and, by transferring the order, obtain the money to carry it out.


Ian Alistair Mackenzie: I asked the Prime Minister a sensible question in regard to the amount that had already been delivered to the Canadian National Railways, of the order of 50,000 tons in one instance and 30,000 in the other. That question I think has a distinct bearing on the actual necessity for meeting the demands made by the railway company, and this committee is only doing its duty when it inquires into the matter. We have here $111,000,000 which this government has guaranteed under the relief legislation. The select standing committee on banking and commerce has already been investigating two of these major items, one the $60,000,000 to the Canadian Pacific Railway, and the guarantees to Canadian Cooperative Wheat Producers Limited. In addition, there are some provincial guarantees. There is a guarantee of over $15,000,000 to Beauhamois.


Richard Bedford Bennett: Half of the recent issue
made the other day goes to reduce that.


Ian Alistair Mackenzie: I was
going to ask about that. The next two major guarantees are $1,100,000 to the Dominion Steel and Coal Corporation and $660,000 to the Algoma Steel Corporation for the production, respectively, of 50,000 and
30,000	tons. Surely this committee is entitled to know the exact situation in regard to each of these guarantees, and I suggest that if the information is not available in detail, the railway committee during the present session could find out how many tons of these steel rails have been delivered in each case-that is, from the Dominion Steel in Nova Scotia and from the Algoma company. Next, we should like to know what requests were made by the Canadian National Railways as to their requirements for steel rails and, further, whether these rails are required immediately by the Canadian National system. We are entitled to that information, and it seems to me that the right hon. gentleman took an

Relief Act, 1984

improper course in trying to castigate my colleague and, inferentially, the whole committee, for asking sensible questions in the public interest. I repeat, we are entitled to know, and if we cannot get the information now we can get it later on. In the first place, how much has been delivered by the Nova Scotia company?


Mr. MACDOUGALL:: 


Ian Alistair Mackenzie: This is
the first time we have received a reply to that part of the question. In the second place, how much has been delivered by the Algoma company to the Canadian National Railways? Further, following what has been said by my hon. friend from Inverness (Mr. Macdougall), I should like to know how much of the proportion of the rail tonnage delivered to the Canadian National by the Nova Scotia company has already been used by the railways up to the present time.


Isaac Duncan MacDougall: I cannot answer that.


Ian Alistair Mackenzie: The committee should have that information, because we want to know what necessity there is for the company utilizing these rails at the present time, or whether the rails were ordered in advance by the Canadian National Railways. My colleague pointed out the stringency that has prevailed throughout the country and the unemployment condition which has necessitated the introduction of the bill now before the committee, and if very substantial orders have been given for steel rails in advance of actual requirements-I do not know whether that is so-then I suggest very seriously that it is a question that merits investigation by the railway committee.


Richard Bedford Bennett: I did not in any sense object to furnishing such information as the government had, but I did say to the hon. gentleman, and I think he must have heard me, that the government had no information as to the extent to which the rails had been used. I tried to make that abundantly clear. In addition to that, I have only to say that the whole transaction was based upon the assumption that the rails were not immediately required. I said so very early this afternoon, and that is the reason the government entered into the transaction at all. Because of the fact that the rails were to be used in the future and that the company producing them had to make immediate payments, and inasmuch as it would not be paid for until some time in the future, they would not be reimbursed unless they got the money from the banks for the sums necessarily ex-

pended for production of the rails. The extract read with respect to a portion of the rails referred to the fact that the bank had the security of the raw material, that is, the ore and the limestone, and when the ore and limestone became steel the bank wanted to make it perfectly clear that they did not thereby, in the finished product, lose the lien they had under the Bank Act with respect to the raw material. That is a commonplace with those of us who practise law; it is provided for in the Bank Act itself.
The government has not from day to day asked the extent to which rails have been delivered. I cannot say to-day whether at the Sault they have delivered 2,500 or 2,600 tons, nor where they have delivered them. My colleague from Inverness intimates that delivery has been taken of the whole of the production at Sydney. I was not aware of that fact myself. The extent to which the rails are delivered will of course vary from day to day while delivery is being taken. The hon. member for West Algoma (Mr. Simpson) pointed out that a trainload of some eighty cars of rails had, he understood, gone to the London division. That I estimate would be between 2,500 and 3,000 tons of rails-he informs me that about 4,000 tons have been taken. I suppose the amount changes. I should like to impress once more upon the committee the fact that all that was involved in the transaction was a guarantee to enable the producers of the rails to finance a transaction for which they would not be paid until the future. That is the story.


Mr. DUFF:: 
Joseph Philippe Baby Casgrain: On the eve of an election.


William Duff: We do not do things like that in Nova Scotia. Perhaps my hon. friend from Cape Breton South had something to do with the premier of Nova Scotia at that time in getting that order. There is no doubt that the Canadian National Railways did not then need the rails; there was no demand on their part for this order and while I say to my hon. friend that it is quite possible and no doubt was possible that by the giving of this order many people in the city and vicinity of Sydney benefited, nevertheless there is no question in my mind that there was another motive in giving the second order and guaranteeing the amounts of both orders, and that was the forthcoming election in Nova Scotia.


Isaac Duncan MacDougall: What about the steel workers who were out of work and starving there?


William Duff: My hon. friend did not quite catch all I said; perhaps my voice did not carry. I said that the steel workers did benefit by the order and I am not complaining very much about that. All I am saying is that the second order and the guarantee of both orders were done only when the Nova Scotia government was in extremis and it was necessary to give an order to the Dominion Steel and Coal Corporation so that the premier of Nova Scotia might be elected at that time in his own constituency.
In view of the fact that this government has guaranteed $1,100,000 to the banks for the cost of these rails manufactured by the Dominion Steel and Coal Company; in view of the fact that the government has guaranteed $660,000 to the Algoma Steel Company, and in view of the further fact that another railway enters into these guarantees -and I am not complaining very much about that; all I want is fair play and I hope the hon. member for Inverness, the hon. member for Cape Breton North-Victoria, the hon. member for Cape Breton South and the hon. member for Cumberland before we get through will see that fair play is given.
74726-130J


Isaac Duncan MacDougall: Fair play for the steel workers.


William Duff: And also for other people whom I will mention in a moment.
In addition to those two amounts I have stated, another railway enters into this guarantee to the extent of not $1,100,000 for the steel workers in Sydney or $660,000 for the steel workers in Algoma, but $60,000,000. Again I say that at the moment I am not quite clear whether I should very strenuously object to this. The Prime Minister and his colleagues must have known the importance of the matter and I suppose they gave it very serious consideration before giving those guarantees to the banks.
Let me, however, go a little further. For instance, Manitoba gets a guarantee of $12,000,000 and Beauharnois one of $15,000,000. Hon. members will remember all the fuss we had in the house about Beauharnois, yet this government, after hon. members sitting opposite had made all that fuss, guaranteed $15,000,000 of the credit of the country to that terrible Beauharnois corporation.
Let me go a little further. The government are not even satisfied with guaranteeing money in Canada; they go outside the country. I am glad, of course, they went to my native land when they did so to make guarantees on the credit of Canada. They guaranteed the Newfoundland government the tidy sum of $625,000. Good, splendid business, no doubt, but nevertheless that large sum was guaranteed.
Let me go a little further. British Columbia gets a guarantee of $626,000; Manitoba one of nearly $6,000,000, and I notice included among these guarantees is an amount of $15,000,000, the heading being:
Prime Minister's estimate of maximum amount of guarantee given chartered banks for advances to Canadian Cooperative Wheat Producers Limited.
My information is that this $15,000,000 is the estimate of loss at the moment on this transaction and not the guarantee to the banks at all. My information is that instead of $15,000,000, the banks have been guaranteed nearly $150,000,000 in connection with this transaction in each of the last four years.
In this country there are people other than steel workers and farmers. There are fishermen who are just as important as other people. AVhat has the government done for our fishermen in the last three or four years? It is quite true that several delegations came to Ottawa in order to save the industry, but did the Prime Minister give a guarantee of $60,000,000 to the fishermen? Did he guarantee
Relief Act, 1934

the banks on their behalf? Oh, no. He could guarantee the western farmers or give them advances and take notes from them for binder twine, seed grain and everything else, but when the fishermen of Nova Scotia came here and wanted a small pittance to save a great industry, this government turned them down flat.


Isaac Duncan MacDougall: What is the attitude of the hon. member on the beam trawler
question?


William Duff: My hon. friend knows my attitude on the beam trawler question.


Isaac Duncan MacDougall: Nobody does.


William Duff: He cannot draw a red herring across the trail. In spite of the fact that delegations from the great province of Nova Scotia came here in order to save an industry which is now practically on its last legs-and I doubt if it will ever recover-this government turned them down flat. In spite of the fact that at that time they were guaranteeing $60,000,000, $10,000,000 and $150,000,000 to the railways, wheat pools and so on, the government did not give the fishermen one dollar. This clause in this bill, entitled an act respecting relief measures, gives the government power to guarantee or advance moneys for certain purposes. I am not going to ask for $1,000,000 or $100,000, but I have on my desk a telegram from the mayor of Canso. My hon. friends opposite from Nova Scotia know what a prosperous town and community was Canso five or six years ago and they know perhaps nearly as w'ell as I do the deplorable condition in which that town has been in the last year or two.


Isaac Duncan MacDougall: As a result of Liberal policy.


William Duff: I hear my hon. friend interject "As a result of Liberal policy." I am not discussing politics at all and I have tried to keep away from it.


Some hon. MEMBERS:: Oh, oh!


William Duff: I hope my reference to the fact that the Dominion Steel and Coal Corporation was given an order on the eve of an election does not lead my hon. friends to believe that I was talking politics. As, however, I said a moment ago, no matter who is to blame for the situation in Canso, it may be the beam trawler as my hon. friend suggests-


Isaac Duncan MacDougall: Is it?
(Mr. Duff.]


William Duff: I am not saying it is; I say
it may be. Probably the Prime Minister would like to get through by six o'clock, without entering on a discussion of steam trawlers. May I say that there is a deplorable condition existing in this town and vicinity, which is purely a fishing section of the province of Nova Scotia. I have a telegram from the mayor of Canso in which he says:
Owing to present adverse condition majority of fishermen in Canso are unable to equip themselves for fishing. Therefore this council-
Meaning the town council.
-urges the federal government under the proposed marketing and credit legislation to establish a fund of not less than-
You will be surprised when I mention the small amount.

$15,000 to be applied immediately through a system of loans to bona fide fishermen in Canso for the purchase and equipment of boats and fishing gear. As season is about _ to open immediate action is imperative. In this manner only can our fishermen once more become selfsupporting.
I say to the Prime Minister that this matter can be very easily handled, especially in view of the fact that his government has been guaranteeing such large amounts to different institutions in this country. The matter can be handled in exactly the same way as were the amounts given for binder twine and seed grain. All the Prime Minister has to do is to tell the general manager of the Bank of Montreal-I mention the Bank of Montreal because they are the only bank having an agency in Canso-to-morrow morning that his government will guarantee $15,000 for the fishermen of Canso to buy equipment for their boats, and fishing gear. I am sure every fisherman will be glad to sign a note for the amount he requires. I am sorry to say that the financial position of the town of Canso is such that it cannot guarantee the bank. That is all the Prime Minister has to do, and he has done it before; there is a precedent for it. As he said in his remarks a Short time ago when stating the reason he gave the guarantee for the Algoma Steel Corporation and the Dominion Steel and Coal Company, it is not only a matter of the employment directly given to the men in the rail mills; the money which comes into circulation from the rolling of these rails is spread over perhaps the whole of Cape Breton and other parts of Nova Scotia and the locality in which the mill is situated, and goes into the manufacturing centres as well. The Prime Minister knows enough about the fishing business to know that if the small sum

Reliej Act, 1934
of $15,000 is guaranteed by his government to the Bank of Montreal, hundreds of thousands of dollars' worth of fish will be caught by the fishermen of Nova Scotia, with the result that these people and their families will be able to live during the summer, and a great many other people all over Nova Scotia, wholesale grocers, hardware men and manufacturers of all kinds of material, will benefit thereby. Therefore in view of the fact that this precedent has been established, that hundreds of millions have been guaranteed to different industries, I strongly recommend that this plea of mine for the fishermen of Canso be dealt with immediately so that these men can get their boats and gear ready to start fishing some time this month.


Richard Bedford Bennett: The non-political observations of the gallant admiral have filled us all with admiration, and I have extracted a modicum of enjoyment from them, as I usually do. The difficulty I see is this:	I
would suggest to him the desirability of having his fishermen friends communicate with the government and not with him. I merely suggest that.


William Duff: I happen to be the member
for Antigonish-Guysborough, and that is why they communicate with me.


Richard Bedford Bennett: Well, I would suggest
that they communicate with the government.


William Duff: They might be turned down.


Richard Bedford Bennett: I suggest that they let
the Prime Minister know about it. They have chosen a most unfortunate medium of communication.


Some hon. MEMBERS:: Oh, oh.


Richard Bedford Bennett: They have not shown
that perspicuity which is the usual characteristic of fishermen as I know them. Having selected the hon. member for Antigonish-Guysborough to whom to send the telegram they apparently did not attach much importance it, or they would have sent it to someone who had power to deal with it. I would suggest that it is desirable that they send a telegram either to the Minister of Labour or the Prime Minister or communicate with the premier of their province. I always held in high regard the hon. member for Antigonish-Guysborough. I have read of Capton Kettle and of the exploits of many of the distinguished figures of fiction and of history, but I have never found anything that excelled the stories I have listened to from the hon. gentleman. But this afternoon he seems to have exceeded anything he ever tried
before, because he has communicated to us that he has been the chosen, the elect of the fishermen themselves to present their claim at the bar of the House of Commons-where there is not one-for the purpose of making known their immediate wants. Now just let me say this: if the province of Nova Scotia will deal with the fishing difficulty exactly as Saskatchewan, Alberta and Manitoba dealt with their difficulties, namely start with the unit, that is with themselves, and from that to the provincial government, and have the provincial government ask the dominion government if they will assist them in discharging this very pleasant avocation, the most serious consideration will be given by this government to every suggestion that may be made in that regard. But that can be done only when we have the power to do it, and at present we have not any such power. Some ten days ago the power lapsed, and until such time as this parliament again confers the power we shall not be able to help the fishermen of Canso either through the government at Halifax or otherwise.
I do not desire to traverse the ground that has been so fully covered on previous occasions as to all these guarantees. I suppose one will have to discuss them many times hereafter and give explanations many, many times, but I think I can summarize all I have to say in a single sentence-


Albert Joseph Brown: Oh, no, no!


Richard Bedford Bennett: I am glad to note that my hon. friend from Lisgar is so pleased to listen to me that he hopes I shall not limit my statement to a single sentence. His anxiety to be instructed is so great and his craving for knowledge so sincere that I shall endeavour to satisfy that want which is always so apparent. May I merely indicate this, that if in the national interest the executive of the day decides to take certain action I do not think it serves any useful purpose to suggest that their motives are improper, because peradventure they have as high a conception of their duty as those who criticize them. If in the discharge of their duties they make mistakes, all people make mistakes, they are fallible; but they exercise their judgment to the best of their ability in the national interest and while they are here they will continue to do so. If the province of Nova Scotia in consequence of representations made to it by the fishermen of Canso request this government to deal with the fishermen of Canso as it dealt with those who required binder twine or seed grain or any other assistance, it will receive exactly
Relief Act, 1934

the same measure of consideration as was dealt out to those others. In the meantime I only hope the hon. gentleman will now give evidence of the faith that is in him by enabling us to get this legislation one step further advanced for that purpose.


William Duff: I am sure we have listened with interest to the jocular remarks of the Prime Minister on this very important and serious subject concerning the fishermen of Canso, and when the fishermen of Canso read of it in the Halifax papers or in their own paper to-morrow evening they will appreciate the way in which the Prime Minister has handled this question as presented by me. It may be true, of course, that I am an unfortunate medium through which to present this request to the government, but I may say that I received the telegram only to-day. I have not kept it in a pigeon hole; I have not been discourteous even to the government, and it was only after I received the telegram this morning that I realized that I would have an opportunity to-day to lay this matter before not only the Prime Minister, who likes to deal with these big questions himself, and his cabinet, but also before parliament. I consider, sir, that I have done only my plain duty this afternoon in reading this telegram from the mayor of Canso and taking up this matter with the government.
A few moments ago the right hon. gentleman spoke of insulting the intelligence of this committee. Let me say to the right hon. gentleman that he has insulted not only the intelligence of this committee but also my constituents in the town of Canso, and I resent it very much. I may be an unfortunate medium, as I said before, but there are several other unfortunate mediums in this house. I refer to my hon. friend from Cape Breton South. He was unfortunate, of course, in having to come to the Prime Minister to ask for help for his constituents, but from the guarantees which the government gave the different banks in and around Sydney it would seem to be proved conclusively that my right hon. friend the Prime Minister dealt with the matter, so far as the Dominion Steel and Coal Corporation was concerned, from a political point of view, and he is trying to deal with the matter I am bringing up this afternoon in the same way. The same thing applies to the chief whip of the Conservative party, the hon. member for West Algoma; he was also an unfortunate medium, but he had better luck. It may be all right for the Prime Minister to say that this matter should be taken up by the provincial government; let me say that the 
provincial government is doing something already, not directly for the fishermen of Canso but for the fishing industry in the town of Canso. I can say also, without boasting, that in order to help along the fishermen of Canso I purchased 1,200,000 pounds of fish in 1932 which I did not need and almost
1,000,000 pounds in 1933. I did not make a dollar on that fish; I bought it in order to help out the fishermen.


Charles Gavan Power: No guarantee?


William Duff: With no guarantee at all, and I got the money from the Bank of Montreal without even an endorsement. Now I say, Mr. Chairman, that in my opinion it is not quite fair for the Prime Minister to say he is going to wait until the provincial government approaches him in connection with this matter. Surely he did not wait for the provincial government to approach him when he gave a guarantee for $60,000,000 in connection with the Canadian Pacific. In a number of other instances he did not wait for the provincial governments to approach him, so why should he wait when I lay this matter before the government, the committee and the house? Therefore I say he is only putting off this matter. It is important to the people in my constituency but it is only a small matter to the government; it amounts only to a guarantee of $15,000, and in my opinion before the snow flies next fall the fishermen of Canso will have paid this money back. My suggestion is that notes be taken for the amount and placed in the Bank of Montreal, and all the government would have to do would be to guarantee that amount.


Isaac Duncan MacDougall: How about the
fishermen in Nova Scotia generally?


William Duff: I thought perhaps my hon. friend from Inverness would speak, and I did not want to butt into his territory; I thought he would want to talk about his own fishermen. I thought the hon. member for Cumberland would want to say something, and that the hon. member for Cape Breton South would advocate the condition of his fishermen when he was talking about the steel company. I am sure my hon. friend from Queens-Lunenburg will back me up in what I say, because he was a member of the delegation which waited upon this government two years ago asking for some assistance, which request was turned down. My hon. friend knows the condition of that great fleet which operated out of Lunenburg county ten or fifteen years ago. It is a shame and a disgrace that, because of the lack of a few dollars or a small

Reliej Act, 1934
guarantee a few years ago, this great fleet has been reduced from one hundred and fifty to twenty-five sail. I say this is no time for delay. This is a serious matter. These men want to get to work, to earn some money for their wives and children, and I say to my right hon. friend: Never mind the red tape; cut the red tape, and arrange with the bank that the $15,000 or whatever is necessary may be forthcoming to those fishermen so they may earn their living.


Richard Bedford Bennett: I trust the hon. gentleman knows that this government has no power to give a guarantee. That power lapsed at midnight on March 31.


Mr. HANBURY:: That is a quibble.


Richard Bedford Bennett: It is not a quibble, and I ask the hon. gentleman to withdraw that Temark. That is the fact; we have no power to give a guarantee for a five dollar bill.


Peter John Veniot: You will have, when this bill goes through.


Richard Bedford Bennett: Quite so.


William Duff: Will you give a guarantee then, please?


Some hon. MEMBERS:: Oh, oh.


Richard Bedford Bennett: I will answer that too. The hon. member for West Lambton very properly pointed out that there has been withdrawn from the bill the power to make guarantees to private enterprises, and no such power is conferred upon this government with respect to any body except a province. When this bill is enacted and the provincial legislature asks for such a guarantee, it may become the subject matter of the terms of an agreement, just as binder twine and seed grain are dealt with in the western provinces. The government does not guarantee seed grain for the farmer, nor does it guarantee him in connection with binder twine, directly. This is what it does: it deals with the province that passes the legislation. The words to which I have referred were taken out of this statute this year because of the criticism offered with respect to them. To-night there is no power in the executive government of Canada to give a guarantee to the Bank of Montreal or any other bank for $15,000 or for any other sum with respect to fishermen or anyone else except through a provincial government.


Alan Webster Neill: I have much pleasure in supporting the plea presented by my hon. friend from Antigonish-Guysborough on behalf of those fishermen who have suffered the loss of their gear. In doing so I am heaping
coals of fire upon his head, because I remember the attitude of the Nova Scotians a few days ago when I was pleading for a fair deal for the British Columbia fishermen in the allocation of a certain grant.
The Prime Minister has said, and quite properly, that at the present moment he has no funds and no authority with which to make this grant, but I suggest that he has a place from which he can get the necessary funds;
I refer to the amount of $160,000 already voted for the development of deep sea fisheries in Canada. That is a sum which is voted every year, and it is available now.


Richard Bedford Bennett: Only two-twelfths of that sum is available, and that is for the maritime provinces.


Alan Webster Neill: This matter is in the mari-times and the Prime Minister can use the two-twelfths available. While I am not good at mental arithmetic I think two-twelfths of $160,000 would more than provide the amount for which my hon. friend is asking.
I make this further point, because it may be said by hon. members from Nova Scotia that this money should be spent as it has been spent in the past, in miserable little handouts of a dollar a ton to this boat or $2.75 to that fisherman. Several reports have been made in connection with the maritime fishermen; in fact they get altogether too much attention as compared to those in British Columbia. The last report, I think, was made by a firm called Cockfield, Brown and Company, or some such name, and if I remember rightly it cost the government of Canada $10,000, which was about S9,000 more than it was worth. One of the recommendations it contained was that this $160,000 granted annually, which has been frittered away in the manner I have just indicated, as they admitted, should be used in a way more calculated to promote the interests of the fishermen. Here is a case where that money could be profitably used; the Prime Minister says he has not the money and has not the authority to guarantee it, but under that act of 1882 he has the authority, the power and the cash available to-day. By using it in this way he would be doing some real, practical good to the fishermen of Nova Scotia-I am asking for nothing for the fishermen of British Columbia at the moment-instead of having the money frittered away as it has been in the past.


William Daum Euler: I have no knowledge whatever of the merits of the question which has been brought up by the hon. member for
Relief Act, 1934

Antigonish-Guysborough, but after listening to the Prime Minister reply to the request of the hon. member I venture to say that he has made statements, when he reads them tomorrow in Hansard, he will very much regret.


Richard Bedford Bennett: Thank you.


William Daum Euler: Surely he has not laid down this principle-if one may so describe that which he has said to-day-that the member for a constituency has no right to make representations in parliament and to the Prime Minister as to the grievances of his constituents.


Richard Bedford Bennett: I did not make any such statement.


William Daum Euler: I gathered that, most distinctly.


Richard Bedford Bennett: You usually do gather distinctly, but that is not what I said.


William Daum Euler: I did not interrupt my right hon. friend. If I am wrong I am ready to receive any explanation he may wish to make. But I have this impression of what the Prime Minister said in reply to the hon. member for Antigonish-Guysborough, namely that he was the unfortunate selection-unhappy medium if you like-to represent the views of his constituents.


Richard Bedford Bennett: I did not say that.


William Daum Euler: And, if no one else does it, I wish to protest against the idea that any hon. member of this House of Commons cannot make any representation he may wish, at any time, with regard to his constituents. If I have misinterpreted what the Prime Minister said, I should like to have his explanation.


Richard Bedford Bennett: Not only does the hon. member entirely misinterpret what I said, but if he will take the trouble to read in Hansard what I said, he will find that what I said I shall be glad to repeat.


Joseph Philippe Baby Casgrain: I associate myself with
the remarks which have been made by the hon. member for Antigonish-Guysborough in connection with his request for the fishermen in his constituency. I did not receive any telegram, myself, from the people in my district asking for assistance or support. I, also, may be the unhappy intermediary or medium to lay requests at the door of the government. I do know however that I have had occasion now and then to lay requests before the government for certain public works to be done in my county, and that those requests have on some occasions been turned down

apparently on account of the fact that I was asking for far too much. I feel, as does the hon. member for North Waterloo, that one cannot but be a little apprehensive of the remarks which have been made by the Prime Minister; he left the impression that when hon. members on this side of the house make representations or ask for something from the government they are going to be told that they are unhappy mediums, in a representative capacity, and not the proper people to bring requests to the floor of this parliament from the constituents who elected them to act as their representatives, and to deal with the matters appertaining to their respective counties or districts.
There is another matter I should like to stress. I know that certain requests were to be made to this government and petitions to be signed. Apparently a certain man in my constituency was to be in charge of the patronage, and a petition was sent to him for presentation to the government. I was asked to sign it, and refused to do so for the simple reason, as described by the hon. members for North Waterloo and Antigonish-Guysborough, that the elected member of the House of Commons, whether he be on the opposition side, the government side, or belong to an independent group, is as much a member as is any other member in the house, and is entitled, when he receives a request, to lay it before the government, before hon. members in the house, before the whole country, before any minister of the crown or any other government official.


Mr. McINTOSH:: And also ask any question he may wish.


Joseph Philippe Baby Casgrain: Yes, and ask any question pertaining to a matter before the house. I did not continue the discussion I began this afternoon because I knew some other hon. members wished to speak. I must say, however, that I did not like what the Prime Minister said when I was speaking about the stabilization fund. If I remember correctly he said that I had an ingenious way of delaying matters.


Richard Bedford Bennett: Hear, hear.


Joseph Philippe Baby Casgrain: We are not. Mr. Chairman, I wish to protest once more against that statement. If we have not the right to put questions, and to exercise our judgment in asking reasons why expenditures have been made and guarantees given, I should like to know why we have not 6uch right. We have asked the Minister of Labour and the Prime Minister for a detailed ex-

Death of Lord Aberdeen
planation as to why the guarantees were given. When we present certain requests to the house we are told that we are the unhappy mediums, and that we are not the proper persons to act between our constituents and the government.
Now, Mr. Chairman, the Prime Minister has said that I was ingenious in delaying matters. Last night we did not delay matters. Who delayed last night? We were ready to vote on the amendment, but at that time the Minister of Labour delayed his own bill, and spoke until eleven o'clock. I say that it is most unfair for hon. members on this side of the house to be told that we are simply delaying matters. The government have made a mess of affairs, even with the powers and authorities with which they have been clothed for the last three years. That fact is brought very forcibly to our notice every time we turn to the estimates.
I suggest that I am entitled, as is the hon. member for Antigonish-Guysborough and the hon. member for North Waterloo, or in fact any other hon. member, to appear in this chamber and make statements. To-morrow I shall have one or two further questions to ask in connection with these matters, and other hon. members on this side of the house will have questions to put.


Mr. GUTHRIE:: There is no doubt about it.


Charles Eusèbe Casgrain: There will be a few
discussions, as there have been to-day. When the bill becomes law we will be able to say to our constituents and to the people at large that we have not shirked our duty, and that we have been able to show where, in the administration of the laws the government has enacted, it has failed.
Progress reported.


[Stage Direction]
At six o'clock the house adjourned without question put pursuant to standing order.
Thursday, April 12, 1934