I do not wish to speak again on the general question, hut to say a word about the document that has just been read. The inconsistency of the statement made is shown by the reference to the values of land In the city of Winnipeg thirty years ago. There happened to be no city of Winnipeg thirty years ago. I believe it was incorporated in 1874. Before that time, it was only an Indian settlement, and its lands had no value at all. This letter involves a contention that I have often discussed with the labour unions. They wish us to believe that in bringing immigrants and settling them on the land, developing the prairie country and raising forty, fifty or sixty million of bushels of wheat a year, we do not increase the price of labour. I think that is one of the most ridiculous things that could be stated before this House. For instance, take the Canadian Pacific Railway in 1890 and 1891, how much of their rolling stock was standing idle in their round-houses? In some seasons practically 50 per cent of that rolling stock is idle, and. of course, the crews of the engines are thrown out of work. In seasons when there is a large crop, not only are none of these men Idle, but a large number of extra men are employed. We need only look at the facts to see at once the fallacy of this argument.