Mr. MEIGHEN:

The only rule you can

have is in the regulations. One man might have a homestead in which thirty acres would be required; another right across the road might have a homestead where eighteen acres would be required, and some one else to the north might have one where twenty-five would be required-all depending on the varying character of the soil.

Mr. BUREAU:

It is concentrating everything in the minister's hands.

Mr. MYERS:

I suggest to the minister

that he incorporate in this provision some discretionary power to reduce the area of cultivation where land becomes flooded, and it is impossible to get under cultivation the number of acres required by the Act. i

Mr. MEIGHEN:

I see no objection to inserting the word "flooded" after the words "wooded, rocky."

Mr. BUREAU:

Do I understand that certificate to have the same value, so far as the rights of the entrant on the land are concerned, as if he had the patent? He can dispose of his interest?

Mr. MEIGHEN:

Yes.

Mr. BUREAU:

But 'before the patent is issued, the patentee, or whoever gets his interest in the land, has to pay the purchase price. What is the particular object of this? Has there 'been any hardship on the homesteader because he could not get the money?

Mr. MEIGHEN:

Hon. members Who were in the last Parliament will remember that this subject was pressed upon the House by the hon. member who then represented Saskatoon. Very many cases arise where the holder of a pre-emption owes the preemption moneys to the Grown. He has performed his cultivation duty; he desires to raise a loan with which to pay off the Crown; but he cannot do so; he can do nothing at all with his land until he secures his patent. In order to meet difficulties of that kind in relation to homesteads, there previously was a provision in the law for granting certificates of recommendation for homesteads, but those were abolished in 1908. There was not the same reason for the certificate of recommendation for homesteads that there existed for certificates of recommendations for pre-emptions, because there could be no money owing to the Crown

m

in relation to homesteads, homesteads being free. But where a pre-emptor finds himself in the position that he wants to pay off the Crown, but there is no means by which he can put a loan on his pre-emption in order to pay off the Crown to get the patent, he is practically forbidden access to the money markets. This provision gives him that access for the period of a year, which period may be extended at the discretion of the minister. The effect is that he can deal with his homestead, as if he owned it, subject, of course, to the possibility of that certificate of recommendation failing unless lived up to within the year.

Mr. BUREAU :

In a case like that, would the lender put his mortgage on record before the Crown was>

paid off? What would 'be the effect, supposing I advanced a man $1,000 upon a pre-emption and he gave -me a mortgage and I put my mortgage on record before the patent was issued?

Mr. MEIGHEN:

The certificate itself sets out what he owes to the -Crown, and any rights -he has to mortgage or deal with his land are naturally subject to the indebtedness to the Crown.

Mr. BUREAU:

That is the same thing as for pre-emption. *

Mr. MEIGHEN:

The same thing in the case of a purchased homestead.

The CHAIRMAN:

Mr. Myers moved to amend section 10 by adding the word " flooded " after the word " rocky ".

Mr. McMASTER:

Might I point out that by adding the word " flooded " there, you make it possible of interpretation that the land must always be flooded? I would suggest it would be better to say " or subject to floods from time to time ". I believe that is the meaning of the amendment. I do not apprehend that, in order to have the benefits of this proviso, the land must always be flooded. I would imagine it would be subject to floods from time to time so that it could not be cultivated as fully as if it were not subject to floods.

-Sir SAM HUGHES: I think the point is very well taken. In the Northwest there are tens of thousands of acres of good land that are flooded at times. Such land could be made arable by drainage. Rocky land could not be made good by any process known to farmers. In my opinion the word

"flooded" should not he inserted at all. I can point out to the Minister of the Interior tens of thousands and hundreds of thousands of acres of such land in the Northwest of Canada that in time will be the best land in the country, and all it wants is a little drainage. Although that land is flooded to-day, it should not be exempted.

Mr. MEIiGHEN: The section as it has

been amended at the suggestion of the hon. member for Kindersley (Mr. Myers) is the best possible for the following reason. It is not intended to exempt land that ie only subject to flooding, that may be all right one year and perhaps flooded another year, .because the homestead duties can be performed the second or third year. If you make it simply "subject to floods," then the door is opened too wide, because there is a great proportion of land, as the hon. member for Victoria (Sir Sam Hughes) has said, that is subject to floods. But- take the case of land say adjoining lake Manitoba, which is near my own home. A man may homestead a quaTter-section there, and there may be only .a fraction of that quarter-section that is really capable of cultivation. Why? Because the rest is flooded :by the lake. It is not only subject to the floods, it is flooded land, and it is only right and proper that in a case of that kind his duties should be proportionately reduced. ,It has been the practice of the department so to reduce them. To put the word " flooded ", as suggested by the hon. member, covers a case of that sort. If you use the words "subject to floods," the door is opened too wide, and it would enable a reduction to be made, because merely in a certain year the land was covered by water, and in such a case the duties might be capable of being performed the next year.

Sir SAM HUGHES:

As the minister is aware, two or three charges of dynamite properly placed might drain all the flooded land around lake Manitoba. I can point out one place in the Northwest, that I have had in view for a long time, that is flooded on account of a beaver meadow. We have not secured it yet, but we are watching for an opportunity to get hold of it. A week's digging will drain it. Although that land is flooded to-day, at an expenditure of less than fifty dollars it can be made arable.

Mr. MEIGHEN:

In a case of that kind it will be the duty of the minister to reduce the area of cultivation.

Sir SAM HUGHES:

If he has the authority, that is all right.