May 1, 1918


On the Ordiexs of the Day:


Donald Sutherland


Mr. D. SUTHERLAND (South Oxford):

I should like to ask the Minister of Militia

with regard to the correctness of the following Canadian Associated Press cable despatch, and as to whether he has any information to give the House on -the matter:

London, April 29.-The following are gazetted as ceasing to command battalions: Lieut.-Cols. A. E. Wings, M. Barre, B. M. Green, T. P. Rowland, H. E. Cutcliffe, D. M. Sutherland.

Major-General MEWBURN: I have no

diireet information from overseas-, but it is quite fair to conclude that those officers were sfficers commanding battalions in the Fifth Division, which was subsequently broken up. As they gave up the command of the various battalions in the Fifth Division on the units* being transferred to- the reserve battalions, the battalions- as battalions would thus cease to exist.



The House resumed the debate on the motion of Hon. A. K. Maclean (Acting Minister of Finance) that Mr. Speaker do- now' leave the Chair for the Ho-use to go into -Committee of Ways and Means (resumed from April 30).


Hume Cronyn


Air. HUME CRONYN (London):

Herbert Ames), if my memory serves me correctly, that future loans should not be exempt * from taxation. Hitherto,-I speak subject to correction,- all our domestic loans have been exempt from federal taxation. Last year, when the present hon. Minister of Public Works (Mr. Carvell) brought up this point to the Minister of Finance, he was told that to issue a loan subject to taxation and to make it a success, the yield rate must be made more attractive and that therefore the matter was as broad as it was long. With very great deference to a man for whose opinion I have the highest respect, and whose experience and judgment in these matters is in quite a different class from my own, I venture to differ from him on that point. I think that if you will take a concrete statement-an absurd statement if you like, but simply for the purpose of illustration,- it will show wherein the difference lies. Let us suppose an investor with an income of $200,000 free to change his investments. If he holds no war loan, under the new scale, he will be liable to the payment of a tax of nearly $50,000; that is, that about one-quarter of his entire income will go in taxation. If, however, he be free to invest in the war loan, he escapes any taxation. I do not say that this is a possible case, because no man has his investments in such shape that he could realize on them without loss and invest in war loans, but for the purpose of an illustration it will answer. Take a hundred married men with incomes of $2,000 and let these incomes be derived purely from the war loan. They would pay no tax because their incomes are not over $2,000. If, then, we issue a taxable loan at a higher rate, the man of small means will receive the higher rate, and either pay no tax, because his income is under the limit, or pay a very light tax; whereas, the wealthy man, while he also does receive the higher rate, is subject to a tax that far more than offsets the additional amount the country must pay by way of increased interest. I would therefore strongly support the suggestion of the former speaker that the Minister of Finance and those advising him should carefully consider this phase of the question.

I quite understand that last year, when we had to issue not one but two loans, and when our financial position both with Great Britain and the United States of America was not clearly defined, it might have been a risk to attempt to take such a step. But I am inclined to think that with the work done on the Victory Loan, and with

the stimulus throughout the country caused by that work, a loan, subject to taxation could be successfully floated.

I would add to that suggestion a second one, and it is that the convertible feature of these loans should be now dropped. We all hope, just as we hope for peace, that this may be the last of these loans, but if there are others to follow, and others at a still higher rate of interest, it greatly increases the burden of the country if the holders of the former issues can convert them into those paying a higher rate. The effect of that action will perhaps not be great this year. It would only affect, if at all, the wealthy investor, but its full effect would come into operation so soon as a further loan was floated.

I now enter upon what we may fairly term debatable ground and that is the question as to the method by which our taxes are raised. As one of the former speakers has remarked, the criticism directed against the Budget was somewhat in line with the old-time debates which have for so long been heard in this House. In examining the revenue which the country secures from one source or another, we see that indirect taxes still contribute the major portion of our income. I want to say to the hon. member for Brome (Mr. McMaster), who invited us on this side of the House to partake of his simple and magic process of healing, that I was born, and have lived beside the true Jordan all my life and neither the Abana or Pharphar nor any of the rivers of Damascus hold superior attractions for me. The ideals which, one carries, more or less dormant, perhaps, throughout life, have pictured a people deep-rooted in the soil, and a yeomanry, satisfied, hardy and intelligent, who would carry on the great career of our race. Whether from prejudice or other insufficient reason, my imagination has never been greatly stirred by the appeal of huge industries and the ceaseless whirr of the wheels of commerce.

Perhaps, too, closely associated with these are the slums of the big cities, the penury and hardship of the poor, and the sharp contrasts which there exist between wealth and poverty. I make this explanation so that I may feel myself free to say, starting from such a standpoint, I would not urge during the present war any great change in tariff conditions. We have seen growing up of late years in the United States those huge combinations of capital and industry very often termed trusts. We have read much of their ruthless powers,

and their sometimes wholly indefensible methods of competition. I do not think this is the day to do anything which would deprive the Parliament of Canada of the control it should have over those who manufacture or .sell goods within her borders.

Another point, which is of still later discovery, and I think is now admitted by most military writers: No nation can undertake any part in modern warfare unless she is wholly organized in industry. That is an admission we dare not hope this war will be the last war. Whether that be so or not, it would be well to wait and do nothing to affect the standing of our industries during the present crisis. Even with more diffidence than in the case of the-former suggestion, I would like to ask the Acting Minister of Finance and his colleagues to consider the advisability of the appointment of a permanent tariff and financial commission. The whole world of finance has so altered in the last few years that most of us feel* we should be again at school in considering questions such as these. The first thing that is necessary in formulating a tariff, ot making a financial decision, is to know the facts, and so far as I am aware we are in woeful ignorance of many of the facts governing the industries which we presume either to aid, or as they claim injure, by the imposition or reduction of customs duties.

There is one other point which I would like to also mention, and that is in connection with the Excess Profits Tax. I have no interest in any institution making a profit out of the war. Nay, rather, every institution with which I am connected has been injured rather than helped, and the struggle has been rather to maintain prewar earnings than to reap benefits from war conditions. But, endeavouring to look at this question from an impartial standpoint, it does seem to me that the very sharp rise from a tax of one-fourth when profits amount to fifteen per cent to one-half of those profits

when they amount to twenty peT cent, and a further increase to a seventy-five per cent tax on additional profits will act as a check on the expansion of many of the fundamental industries of the country, and will, moreover, deter the entry of fresh capital into Canada. We must not forget that jwe can obtain a high return from the 'best form of investments which do not call for any personal energy, and where there is an almost absolute absence of risk. When, therefore, sums are put into industries

where risk is always a predominant feature, where a series of lean years may occur, it is wise, I think, both from the point of view of the industry and of the country, that that industry toe allowed to accumulate a very substantial reserve to meet the poissi'ble hard times ahead of it. Then, too, we moist not forget the effect of our increased Income Tax and of our Excess Profits Tax on future Government loans. There can be no doubt, as one [DOT]writer has put it, "the ultimate source of a national loan is the unspent income of the nation's producers." Hitherto it is possible (we have been able to find investors whose money has been lying by awaiting some suit-, able security, 'but that reservoir will soon be emptied and we must then depend upon the thrift and productiveness of the nation to yield each year a sufficient sum which can be turned over to the Government to aid in the war. As one American financial writer has put it:

When a nation declares war it is turning its face towards commercial bankruptcy, and the task of the financier at that time is to so control both the machinery of credit and the machinery of taxation that the productive power of the country may he used to make headway against 1 unproductive consumption, and at the same time to hold under control those forces that tend to wreck the industrial organization by which that power is maintained.

Canada, to my mind, is in one sense the most marvelous factory of the world, a plant ready and waiting for the workers. It is true that we may have, for the moment, too heavy, an overhead cost; we may have a multiplicity of legislative machinery, more than sufficient for our population. But, looking to the future, and believing, as I think we all do, in the progress this country will make once times become normal, every care should be taken not to place barriers against that progress.

In concluding these remarks, Mr. Speaker,

I feel sure that the country is prepared to accept any burden imposed by this budget cheerfully and in the 'best spirit. It has been said that some section or other of the country does not realize that we are .at war.

I think, sir, we do realize that we are at war; but, perhaps a majority of us do not realize the personal obligation cast upon every one to do. his or her share. The habits of a lifetime, the love of ease, the conventions which surround us, prevent us from giving full effect to the force which we could exercise in aid of the nation. We do not forget the claim of those who have

given up their all, and who say to us in the words of the poet:

O you that still have rain and sun,

Kisses of children and of wife,

And the good earth to tread upon,

And the mere sweetness that is life,

Forget not us, who gave all these For something dearer, and for you!

Think in what cause we crossed the seas! Remember, he who fails to challenge Fails us too.

I do not believe, Mr. Speaker, that this country will fail the challenge; it will rise to the heights; it will gird its loins, and bend its back to meet whatever burden may be put upon it for the one end we have in view.

Mr. A. B. Me001G (Kent, Ont.): Mr. Speaker, in rising to say a few words in this debate, I wish, in the first place, to congratulate most heartily the Acting Minister of Finance (Mr. Maclean) for the able way in which he presented his case yesterday to this House and to the country. I also wish to pay my respects to my colleague the hon. member for the city of London (Mr. Cronyn) upon the excellent matter of his maiden speech in this House.

Subtopic:   THE BUDGET.

Some hon. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear.

Subtopic:   THE BUDGET.

Archibald Blake McCoig

Laurier Liberal


I wish also to add that, so far as I am personally concerned, and I believe I am speaking for all the members on this side of the House, I am not here to oppose the financial arrangements put forward by the acting Minister of Finance yesterday for raising funds to prosecute the war; I am here to give the Government every possible assistance in raising the money required, so long as it is honestly spent for the carrying on of the war. I would even go further and place myself on record as being in favour of even more drastic legislation to secure funds for the prosecution of the war. I would support legislation that would be retroactive, and which would further 4 p.m. tax the profits already made by the food profiteers and place more of their takings in the treasury for the carrying on of the war, and for the protection of the widows and orphans of this young Canadian nation. Further, I believe it would be more commendable to do as I have suggested' than to place a tax of 5 cents per pound upon tobacco that is grown in this country, which will discourage the growing of tobacco and enhance its cost to the consumer. Indeed, tobacco should not be considered as a luxury, but as a necessity for all those who have formed

the habit of using it. Besides, it is a reflection to a certain extent upon the men who are defending this country, who must have tobacco in the trenches, to compel them to pay more for it in the future than they have done in the past. This tax will also affect those great patriotic institutions of our country known as the Daughters of the Empire and the Red Cross Society, which are raising funds to purchase tobacco to send to the men overseas. If the Acting Minister of Finance will give this matter his serious consideration, he will see that the small amount that will be raised by this particular taxation will cause great inconvenience both to men in humble circumstances and to those who are doing our fighting. I believe that the people of this country, particularly those in humble circumstances, and particularly the women who are large users of tea, will find that this tax bears very heavily upon them. I believe, Sir, that the small amount that will be realized from the tea tax could be far more easily secured from other sources which would not bear so hard on people in humble circumstances. The minister might, after considering this matter, decide not to exact this burdensome tax on tea.

I regret also that the Acting Minister of Finance did not see fit to continue to keep on the free list tractor ditchers, which were placed on the free list a few years ago. For what purpose were they made free of duty? In order that the farmers of this country could drain their land and raise larger crops, which are so essential. But, as the price of tractor ditchers has increased to over $300, which was the limit specified for free entry, farmers will now be unable to bring them in, and they will be deprived of the use of these machines in the future. This will be a detriment to the engineering organizations established by our Provincial Governments, whereby the farmers secure engineers to lay out their farms so that they will be properly drained. These engineers have been working for some months past in my section of the country, and to-day the men who have placed their orders for these ditchers will be unable to get them, because they cannot come in as formerly free of duty.

May I add my congratulations for allowing the importation of farm tractors free of duty. The Government has decided to do that, but the Acting Minister did not say yesterday whether this concession would continue or not. In purchasing one hundred tractors and turning them over to the producers of this country without the

middleman's profit, the Government has done a commendable thing; which will have a good effect.

But, Sir, it is a matter of regret that the Food Board, which has been established by the Government at a cost of millions of dollars, has ordered that farmers' hoards and organizations throughout the country which have purchased carloads of sugar, flour, potatoes and other foodstuffs, must return them to the place whence they came, permitting the middleman still to retain the profit which he obtained through the sale of the goods so disposed of. The farmers' clubs which have been formed for the purpose of obtaining goods at first cost and thus avoiding the middleman will resent this action on the part of the Food Board. Jn my city last winter the labour organization brought, their goods in by the carload and distributed them among the labouring men of Chatham with great credit to themselves and with large saving to consumers. Under the present order of the Food Board, however, this organization will be unable to carry on their work in that regard.

Is it not a fact that the arguments in favour of free farm tractors apply also to the free admission of agricultural implements? If it is a benefit to the farmers to enable them to obtain tractors at first cost, then I take exception to the assertion of the member for Brantford (Mr. Cock-shutt) the other night that this Government was put in office not to interfere with the tariff, but to pass legislation connected with the prosecution of the war. The Minister of Labour (Mr. Crothers) represents the city of St. Thomas in this House. If the member for Brantford will look up his price list for 1918 and obtain quotations from the concern manufacturing similar implements in St. Thomas, he will find that the Cockshutt Plow Company is charging twenty-five per cent more for plows, harrows and land rollers than the concern in St. Thomas. Is it surprising, then, that the member for Brantford hesitates to say that the tariff on agricultural implements should be interfered with at this particular time? I have in my possession the wholesale price list of the Cockshutt Plow 'Company, and I have invoices of similar goods-harrows, ploughs, rollers-of the same size and of equal quality, :sold by the company in St. Thomas at twenty-five per cent less than the price of the product of the 'Cockshutt Plow Company. I challenge contradiction of my assertion with regard to these prices. Other

large concerns-the International Harvester Company, the Massey Harris Company-are charging the same prices as those charged by the 'Cockshutt Plow Company. Is it not reasonable to suggest that at a time when we need greater production, at a time when we particularly require such agricultural implements as I have referred to, an investigation should be made by a committee of this House or by the Minister of Labour with regard to this matter? The people and the Government should know exactly what is going on; steps should be taken to see that unfair prices are not extracted from agricultural producers. The Government .should ascertain whether these exorbitant prices are being distributed among the men who are engaged in the workshops of those factories; whether the labouring men are getting their share of the huge profits that are being made to-day on the sale of other agricultural implements, the prices of which are practically double what they were when war broke out in 1914. I suggest that the Minister of Trade and Commerce give this matter attention. He has been energetic in doing everything that is detrimental to production, and this applies to every Bill that he has introduced during this session-daylight saving, the marketing of hay, the weighing of eggs, and so on. In order to put himself right with the producers regarding these measures which he has introduced, I suggest that he assist in the investigation of the matter which 1 have put before the House.

Last night the member for St. Antoine (Sir Herbert Ames) told the House in mournful tones that we all have to make great sacrifices. I was reminded of the statement made by a gentleman who was .so widely advertised during the last campaign, and who said on one occasion, " We have to make sacrifices; to hell with profits." Only a few months ago the Minister of Labour heard that in my city three or four cobblers had agreed to raise the price of patches five cents and half soles ten cents, whereupon the minister notified them that they would be liable to prosecution under the Combines Act if they proceeded with their intention. His letter reads as follows:

Ottawa, December 13, 1916.

Dear Sir:

I am advised that a few days * ago yourself and several others entered into an agreement to raise the price of shoe repairing in the city of Chatham from the 8th instant.

I am enclosing you a copy of an Order in Council recently passed, whereby you will see

that if any such agreement was made you have laid yourself liable to prosecution under that Order. It prohibits the entry into any such agreement.

Tours truly,

(Sgd) T. W. Crothers, Minister of Labour.

The member for St. Antoine (Sir Herbert Ames), -who was telling us so much about the way our finances should be conducted, knows that the burning question among the labouring classes is the high cost of shoes. As a matter of fact, I 'believe that the hon. gentleman knows more about the manufacture of shoes than he does about finances. The other day a man with only one arm came into my office and said to me: " McCoig, the shoes for the child that I am sending to school to-morrow cost me $3, while the shoes that I bought for his brother five years ago cost me only 98 cents." A cattle merchant who was standing by said: " I can assure you, Mr. McCoig, that the price of hides is practically the same as it was five years ago." Is it not time that this matter was taken up by Parliament and an investigation held? Many children were kept home last winter because their parents could not buy shoes for them. If it is true that millions of dollars worth of hides are stored throughout the country, should not the Government see that these hides are .manufactured and that our hoys, the great asset of this country, are supplied with shoes in order that they may be enabled to get an education?

I say thie because I believe these are matters that have very little to d'o with the prosecution of the war, tout they have a great deal to do with the peace and harmony which we hope will prevail in this country. At this particular time we lack a Postmaster General. Demands are coming from all parts of the country that the postal service be improved. We have requests for better pay from postmasters whose labours are greater than they ever were before. The mail carriers in the cities are also asking for better pay, and above all, the mail carriers on the rural routes of this country, who accepted contracts at a time when the cost of living was not as high, as it is now, have been compelled by the Government to fulfil the duties required of them. I do not mean to cast any reflections upon the Acting Postmaster General (>Mr. Doherty), but I believe the duties of the Post Office Department are such that we should have in this House a man who would give his whole attention to the department so as to ensure that the proud position that Canada

has in the past occupied, as far as our mail service is concerned, will be continued in the future.

The other night when the proposition was before Parliament to exempt the men who were producing on 'the farms of this country, I supported that amendment. My reason for doing so was that we had received letters and pamphlets up to as late a date as the 28th of March, signed by the Prime Minister, asking for greater production. I have here a resolution, passed in the provincial legislature, moved by Sir William Hearst, and seconded by Mr. Proudfoot. I believe it to. be perfectly in order to read a portion of it:

Resolved, That we the members of the Legislative Assembly of Ontario recognising as we do the grave and anxious crisis which confronts Great Britain and Fjance owing to the acute shortage of food in these countries, and the momentous issues that are thus placed in jeopardy, hereby affirm our resolve and determination to do everything that lies in our power to sustain Great Britain and her Allies in the bitter struggle that lies ahead. We realise that the world shortage of food, together with the fact that the destruction of shipping prevents Great Britain drawing supplies from Australia and South America, compels that country and France to depend almost entirely on Canada and the United States for the necessary food to maintain her armies and her civilian population. We desire to express our willingness to assume to the full our responsibility in this perilous emergency. Ontario has with a true spirit of patriotism and unselfishness risen to every demand hitherto made upon her by the war, whether for men, money, munitions or food, and must not fail now in doing her part in meeting this new and grave crisis. At a time when the whole civilian population of Great Britain is on meagre rations, when even the soldiers' rations have been reduced, and when France is threatened with famine* it behooves all the inhabitants of this ^ favoured province to examine closely their individual responsibility and privileges, and resolve upon making unprecedented efforts to increase food production.

The resolution goes on further, 'but that is the important part of it. This is the report of a statement that the Minister of Agriculture (Mr. C-rerar) made to the livestock men from the West. It is copied from the Globe of November 8, 1917:

(Mr. Crerar assured* his hearers that it was not the intention of the Government or the Militia Department to conscript men whose experience rendered their services more valuable on the farm than at the front.

On account of these requests to produce., from the Prime Minister of the Dominion of Canada, from the Prime Minister of 'the Ontario and the leader of the Opposition in that legislature, and with this assurance given by the Minister of Agriculture, many of the farmers have made arrange-

m-ents to produce greater crops than they have ever had ibefore. I hold no brief for the farmers, because they have the same right to defend their country as the labouring men on any other class in the land; but this demand for men, has come at seeding time, just when such a demand is most inopportune, if we want to produce the results which every hon. member is anxious to have produced. In my constituency there are a number of exceptional cases, for instance, where the son. is the only man on the farm who can be depended upon to render effective service, or where the boy is the only son of a widowed mother, and the success of the farm, depends upon him, or where a 'boy is the only one available for work on the farm, his parents being in poor health. I regret very much that there was not some- exemption made in the regulations so that such men might be exempted. I hope from time to time, the Government, as these matters appear before -them, will feel justified in making such exemptions as will meet the demand. I have perhaps spoken longer than I intended to do, but I wish to say this in conclusion. We may differ in this House as far as the Budget and other legislation are concerned, as to how it will bear on the weak or the strong, the rich or the poor. I was, however, extremely gratified the other day to meet an old friend of mine who had just returned from the fibnt, having been honourably discharged. That gentleman said to me: "There is one thing, Mr. McCoig, you can depend upon, and that is that a man who is a private will receive in old England the same treatment and kind attention at the hands of the officials of the hospitals that a man of high standing will receive." He said: "I received a wound in the jaw, and I was compelled to go into a hospital in England. I was taken into the Duchess of Connaught's hospital on the Astor Estate. I had to have about half an inch removed from my lower jaw. That operation was prepared for, and I am glad to tell you that eminent physician, Col. Mewburn, was in charge of the hospital and took charge of my case, and he is a brother of Major-General Mewburn, the Minister of Militia. He gave me the same attention that I would have received had I been a colonel or a general. I am glad to tell you also that the Red Cross nurses extended their kind and sympathetic assistance." He said to me that, after he had been discharged, he went to the city of Detroit in which his brother was a practising physician, and there a number of American

physicians examined his wound and pronounced the operation one of the greatest they had ever examined, and they commended and congratulated the officials of the British hospitals on the noble work they were doing. I am glad to be able to refer to this case, because I believe it is the desire of every member of this House to give every encouragement possible to that noble organization of Red Cross nurses who have rendered such great service from the beginning of the war up to the present time.

Subtopic:   THE BUDGET.

Matthew Robert Blake


Mr. M. R. BLAKE (North Winnipeg):

Mr. Speaker-, we are at war, and with the proverbial tenacity of the British bulldog, we are quite prepared to hang on until we have brought it to a successful termination. The big thing that confronts this Parliament, and which it was elected to deal with, is the prosecution of the war; how best that can be done is what should concern ns to-day. We can well recall for a moment the old songr

We don't want to fight but by Jingo, if we do, We've got the ships, we've got the men,

We've got the money too.

The determination of our boys to fight has been impressed upon the Hun more than once. There is probably no part of the line the Huns hate to attack more than the sector that is held by the Canadians. We have got the ships. The British navy is keeping the foe from our shores. The Minister of Marine and Fisheries in this House has told us that every shipyard in the land is occupied with a ship, and he promises to keep them all full; we are going to keep on building more and more ships. The hon. member for St. Antoine (Sir Herbert Ames) is somewhat afraid lest the United States will attain mercantile supremacy, hut I say it is not within the bounds of possibility that this (country should be possessed in the not far distant future of sufficient ships to carry her own lake and ocean tonnage. I believe we can do that, and probably just as well, if not better, with the present minister at the helm of the Marine and Fisheries Department than any one else we can find. As to men, we have a lot and are getting more. Our men are producing food, making .munitions, and fighting the Huns. They are rushing to the colours so fast that the Minister of Militia and Defence is beginning to look somewhat grave from his increasing efforts day by day. It will not be very long before we shall have our five hundred

thousand, and I am satisfied we shall have more than that.

I do not wish to drive any wedge between any of the parties in this House, but I do hope -to be able to cement and bind together the two great parties probably a little better than they have been united heretofore. After all, Parliament unanimously consented to the prosecution of the war; there was a time when we were all united, and there is no reason why we should not be united now. We should not make other people's sins an excuse for our shortcomings, and that old saying applies equally well to provinces as to individuals. We have heard from the Minister of Militia and Defence the number of exemptions applied for in each province, and if the hon. members who in the early weeks of this session indulged in such fiery utterances, so much so that on one occasion the hon. member for Kamouraska (Mr. Lapointe) was inclined to regard it as throwing of mud. If they had exerted as much energy trying to remedy the conditions in their own provinces, they would have done more good than was accomplished by those exhibitions. First cast the mote out of your own eye before pointing out the mote in your neighbour's eye. Let me refer for a moment to last year's Hansard, page 5564, when Mr. McCraney, then the member for Saskatoon, was speaking of the very small concern the West had in the troubles of the East. He said:

We were very much stirred up in Ontario and Quebec over the Manitoba School Question and on election day Manitoba was the only province that gave a majority for the Conservative Government ... In 19'*5 I was in the West when the Northwest School Question was up under the terms of the Automony Act. We were not very much disturbed about it out there .... Most of the troubles that we get into in Western Canada are fomented ini Ontario and Quebec; I am glad that we live 1,500 miles away from both of those provinces. Ontario and Quebec have fattened on their religious differences and racial strifes.

It reminds me of a report on the Irish trouble many years ago, and which I think is reported in D'Arcy McGee's history of Ireland. A commission was sent to Ireland to inquire into the cause of all the trouble, and after much consideration they came to this conclusion and reported, " We found them fighting like devils for conciliation's sake, and hating one another for the love of God." I think that is about the state of affairs we are coming to. What we want in Canada is a united people, 'and I am sure we are approaching that ideal in this Parliament. The fiery utterances are falling

off and we are getting down to business. If we are ever going to make Canada the greatest country in the world, which I verily believe we have possibilities of doing, we shall not do it by fighting, but 'by a united effort. I verily believe that within the next ten years Manitoba will be the greatest gold and copper producing country in the world. The hon. member for West Edmonton (Mr. Mackde) claims that for Alberta. We shall have to wait and see. Winnipeg to-day is the greatest wheat market in the world. When I went to Manitoba ten years ago, before the boundaries were extended, if I remember rightly, only five per cent of the province was under cultivation. About five years after that the amount under cultivation in Saskatchewan was only equal to the road allowances; the fields were all untouched. When the West is producing twenty and probably thirty times as much as it is to-day, and with its minerals galore the Minister of Finance will have no trouble with trade balances; his only trouble will be how to get all the money in, and he will have to sit up at nights considering what is the highest rate of exchange he can conscientiously extract to settle these -old scores of to-day when the rate of exchange is against us.

I had the pleasure of visiting Three Rivers last Sunday with the hon. member for that constituency (Mr. Bureau) and he told me his constituency runs back to James Bay, and that it was settled for about fifty-five miles back. In the last ten years, by his efforts, forty-two corporations have been brought into the constituency, fve large pulp mills and two shipbuilding plants. The place is really going ahead at a great rate. In all fairness to the hon. member for Three Rivers, we must say that he has not been more pugilistically inclined this session than the average member, and if he continues to develop his constituency at the rate he has been keeping up for the last _ ten years, he will have a wonderful city and a wonderful constituency, and no time for fighting except for the rights of his constituents. I will not say that his city will rival .Montreal, but with its great water powers and other great natural resources, it will develop into a city that will be of no mean proportions, and one that Canada may well be proud of. Every member will find sufficient to do working for the benefit Of his constituency and for the good of his country at large without fighting on the floor of this House. The whole talk around this

building for the last few days has been how rapidly the men are coming to the colours in the province of Quebec.

I have not heard of any men in any of the other provinces lately falling over one another or breaking any legs in their rush to the colours. I think that every member of this House-I do. not say of the Opposition, hut every member of the House who has declared himself, has expressed himself as being entirely in favour of the prosecution of this war and1 will be only too glad when it is terminated. I am satisfied that when every member goes out from this House, with probably a bigger and better determination than he has ever had before to encourage recruiting, the response to the call will surpass our expectations. The people of Quebec, I am satisfied, have too much pride to take any second place to any other province when it comes to doing their duty. I am sure that Colonel Lavergne would be only too pleased to lead a battalion, and I would urge the Minister of Militia to show his good faith towards Quebec by making such an offer at once and to-day. I feel convinced, from what I have heard, that it will be accepted. I spoke a few days ago regarding France and Britain waking up, and I prophesied that soon Canada would waken up. It looks to me as if Quebec ever alert had first heard the morning tap upon the door, was already quite awake, and was going on with the business of the war with a determination unequalled by that of any other province at the present time. I want now to make another prediction. It is that before this House of Parliament meets next year the province of Quebec will lead the way in recruiting and show forth more men than any other province of the Dominion will in the same time. They have not had more exemptions in Quebec than in some of the other provinces.

Then, I want to say one other word regarding the process of securing men. With reference to the call which the Government has made, and' which takes in the agricultural class, I think the Minister of Militia and the Government will be well advised to call no more men from the farm where only one son is left. I know of one case in Manitoba, I think near Brandon, where there were four sons on the farm, all of military age, and from the Exemption Board all got exemption. I would call three of them, certainly, but I would say that one at least should be left on the farm. If a man owns his own farm and has no

help, he should be left on the farm too. Production in that way could still be kept up, and by closing down non-essential my dustries, which were spoken of in a debate in this House a few days ago, the extra men could be secured to maintain the forces at the front. Not in a thousand years would these industries ever do anything in the slightest to help to win the war while the men on the farm can do much.

I think the Government ought to give very serious and careful consideration to the question of handling these non-essential industries.

When we get the men we must have money to maintain them. The problem of money, like that of the poor, is always with us. That almighty dollar. How to procure sufficient money to prosecute the war is a question that has been considered by the Acting Minister of Finance (Mr. A. K. Maclean). I consider that he did very well in his budget, but he did not go far enough. He is a very timid gentleman. I believe that every hon, member of this House is prepared to go farther, and would have gone farther, and I think the people were prepared for greater taxation, and wobld have readily submitted to it. La6t year three-quarters of one per cent of the people were reached, and now the minister hopes to hit eight per cent of the people. But the minister is only getting started. The people are in favour of prosecuting the war and they are willing to help to pay for it. That is the essential point. Some very considerable number of the people need to be wakened up to the fact that we are at war by having their pockets touched by this taxation. If there are any who are not prepared to do their part, and to pay their money for the protection they are getting from our boys at the front, they are unworthy of this free country and they should be made to pay.

We have heard a great deal about war profiteering, and the Minister of Finance has turned his attention in that direction. But let us take the farmer. He is. making a lot of money nowadays-wheat, $2.21 a bushel; pork, $20 to $21 a hundredweight; butter, 50 cents a pound, eggs, accordingly. How many of these men keep books and how many of them have an income of $3,000, which would be the limit for a married man, or even $2,000? Very few of them. Yet they are making money a great deal faster than they have ever made it before, and they are not being touched by this tax. I am satisfied they are able and willing to. pay, I have not spoken to one who was not prepared to do his bit in help-

ing the financing of this country. That must apply to every man who owns property. That perhaps does not apply to our western cities where real estate has had a great swing and where every man is holding ten, twenty, or thirty times as much land as he has any need for or can ever hope to utilize. There will he some hardship done under those circumstances if there is a direct tax imposed, but I would strongly urge the Minister of Finance to levy, through the municipalities a rate of say, five mills on the dollar, and in that way secure about $25,000,000 from this country. It is a debatable question whether it should be put on the land alone or put upon the land and buildings. A fact to be remembered in connection with the imposition of direct taxation of this kind is that the machinery is all intact to collect it. You can require the municipalities, when they are levying their own taxes, to levy five mills more, and turn it into the federal treasury. It is true that many of the cities are heavily taxed, but we cannot help that. That does not help the federal treasury, and that is what we are here to consider. Apparently the assessments in this country are so lacking in uniformity that it is impossible to get any very accurate knowledge concerning them. It is true that assessments in certain municipalities are very low while others are high, many being up to the full value of the land and three-quarters of the value of the buildings. Some represent half the real value of the property. It would be unequal taxation, but even an imposition of two mills this year would yield half that amount which I have named and that would be no small item. People who cannot go and fight should not hesitate to pay. If the people who stay at home gave up every dollar they make over and above what they need for a bare living and to pay interest, taxation and insurance, they would not be giving up too much. That is what the people may have to do yet-give up every dollar over and above a bare living, which would include interest, insurance and taxes.

If the people had been asked to do that, they might, with some show of reason, make complaint; but as what they have really been asked to do is such a small thing it is up to the people of Canada to do their bit in this way. If they did this they would still retain their lives, their health and their property when the war is over; and yet all these are being risked by the boys who are at the front defending them to-day. The people who are staying

[iMr. Blake.]

at home are not risking their lives, and even if they did what is proposed, the discrepancy would still be very great and very much in their favour. Is there any hon. member of this House who would shirk his duty if he were called upon to stake so much? Not one, Sir. Then if the members of the House would agree to make that great sacrifice, and if the winning of the war depended upon it, surely the people of Canada also would-and I think I am safe in saying they would-be prepared to meet that sacrifice, terrible though it might be. Would even that be too high a price to pay for victory, for liberty and foi freedom? I claim it would not. The soldier is working for a bare living for himself and his family and undergoing great hardships and privations. He is doing more than that, he is risking his life-and many of them have already laid down their lives. What they are putting into this war is the risk of their lives and a bare living. Under such circumstances should any one of our people who are staying at home in comfort offer one word of criticism of the war taxes which this Government is asking, except it be this: To some of them the taxation of war profits and large incomes may not seem sufficient. If some men have made five or six million dollars out of the manufacture of shells and munitions since the war began, they should be more heavily taxed, *and the tax should be made retroactive so as to take a share of their profits from the beginning of the war. A man who had made five or six million dollars in this manner might reasonably give up one-half of those profits to the Government and still have enough to make him happy; in fact, he should be happier because he would not have so much money to look after. I think the taxation of large incomes should also receive more careful consideration from the Finance Minister and from the Government. When a man's private income reaches the limit of $50,000, in my opinion we would be perfectly justified in taxing him to a far greater extent than is here proposed. And he would not suffer any hardship thereby, because $50,000 is a fair sum to live upon.

If the people of this country are honest with themselves, honest to their God, and honest to their country and to the great cause for which we are fighting, they will acquit themselves like men, and nobly and smilingly carry out their duty. At the battle of Trafalgar Nelson hoisted the signal "England expects every man to do his duty." To-day Canada is displaying the

same signal and calling upon every Canadian to do his duty. There was only one response when Nelson issued his order to his fleet, and there will toe only one answer, I am convinced, to the call which Canada is making to-day. Canadians by coming smilingly forward and" dropping their nickel in the hat," as Kipling said, will toe doing their duty and helping to maintain .their freedom unimpaired. If all the profits were given up, which are subjected to taxation, in my opinion it would toe a small thing in order to achieve victory. But if we fail to achieve victory, and if, in consequence, we should come under German domination, what would happen? Every man would pack his trunk and get across the line out of Canada, and every interest that he held here would be lost. It has been truly said toy a distinguished, member of this House that nothing matters but tihe winning oi the war. That is how we should look at this question, and at any further levies of taxation which may be necessary before this struggle is finally ended. Canada is only now beginning to realize what was iineant at the outset of the war when a declaration was made that we were going into this fight with every man and with every dollar. We have not yet yielded up the profits that are being made from day to day out of the war, let alone the last dollar. The pledge made was a serious one, tout I think the people of this country are thoroughly determined to stand by it.

I feel, 'Sir, that we should to a greater extent pay our way as we go. Many a man in the wild and woolly West 'bought more property than toe should have done. He did not pay for it at the time, which was bad 'business, and he is having his difficulties now. Our people should pay their way from, year to year and not leave a legacy of debt to posterity, to. their descendants in this country for years to come.

The Minister of Finance might have extended the scope of taxation in the matter of musical instruments so as to include pianos. The piano, like the talking machine, is pretty much of a luxury and might very well have been brought under taxation.

We have a tax on patent medicines, and the druggist who does a fair amount of business is kept busy licking stamps and applying them to bottles of Castoria for infants and to bottles of cough mixture for adults. I am not defending patent medicines, but there are some which a medical practitioner finds it necessary to recommend. For example, there is Castoria, which is just as

useful and as much of a necessity as milk for the infant. I feel that there should be a tax on all business dealings. The dealer, when a man buys a suit of clothes, he might well be compelled to collect a tax of one per cent. In that way all commercial dealings would be reached. If it is a fair thing to get after the druggist-and the tax on patent medicines has proved to be a hardship in many cases because when a man is taken sick he should have recourse to good remedies, notably essence of pepsin-why not tax other dealers, why not tax the boot sales and the clothing sales? A tax of one per cent, or even one-half of one per cent, would yield an enormous revenue and would materially aid us in the policy of paying as we go.

The war profits tax should, I think, have been developed to a greater extent. In the case of a man who is conducting an ordinary business, who has no war contracts and is only making a reasonable profit, the income tax should be sufficient for him. But the man who is making money hand over fist out of munitions and war orders, the man who is making money out of the calamities of .the nation, should be taxed to the extent of ninety or one hundred per cent. Undoubtedly in some cases his plant will only be scrapped when the war is over, but to meet that he can establish a sinking fund as he goes along, because he knows what will he the duration of his war contracts.

Now, as to the duty on farm implements. If a heavier tax were levied upon war profits the Government could, without difficulty, cut down the duty on agricultural implements by one-half and still leave the manufacturer a fair degree of protection. If I remember the figures, the sum of $987,000 wa3 collected last year in duties on farming implements. If I am not right in that statement, the Acting Minister of Finance will correct me.

The amount realized was less than a million dollars. Half that amount could have been easily sacrificed with a slight increase in the tax on war profits. The reduction would have pleased the farmer; it would have increased production, and it would still have left the manufacturer on this side very well protected, even with the duty he has to pay on his imported raw material.

The hon. member for Brome (Mr. McMaster) in his speech last night urged the Minister of Finance to meet the trade balance by a greater increase in our ex-

ports of raw material. I think if that bbn. member would have a talk with the hon. member for Three Rivers (Mr. Bureau) the latter would tell him whether or not natural products should be sent out of this country unmanufactured. I am certain that the only way we can build up this country, despite our trade balance, is by sending out our goods manufactured; and when \ye have developed our natural resources, and are utilizing them to the fullest extent, then we will be in a position to talk free trade. I am a free trader, but I am not willing to commence to build up free trade until the country is in a position, as I see it, to adopt it. Iron is the big commodity that concerns the manufacturer most, and the Government would be well advised to pay very great attention to developing our natural resources required for the manufacture of iron. And when we manufacture sufficient iron to meet our own wants, and possibly some to export, and are able to compete with our friends across the line, then the manufacturer here will get his raw material at as good a price, if not a little better, than he can get it by purchasing it across the line. We will be in a position to talk free trade only after we have fully developed our natural resources. I do not say that the tariff might not be trimmed down somewhat. It might be an advantage if some lines were adjusted. But we did not come here to adjust the tariff; we came here to prosecute the war. I think this Budget as presented will be of much assistance; it would have been of even more assistance if we had made it just a little bit larger.

The member for St. Antoine (Sir Herbert Ames) made a great plea that part of their profits should be left with the manufacturing corporations, so that these might extend their business after the war. How many of these corporations extend their business out of profits? When they make extensions, it is generally by means of offering bonds or selling, more stock and getting in more capital; it is not done to any great extent by saving up their profits. I do not think that that matter is one to which the Minister of Finance should give very much consideration next year, because, as I said, if all profits were paid to the Government, and only a bare living allowed to everybody in this country, we would then be getting down to business, and even then we would not be paying as great a price as are the men at the front.

Subtopic:   THE BUDGET.

Arthur Trahan

Laurier Liberal

Mr. ARTHUR TRAHAN (Nicolet):

Mr. Speaker, I read some time ago a very interesting statement made in the British House of Commons by Mr. Andrew Bonar Law on November 23, 1914. He said:

I wish at all events to make this clear protest, that it is the right not only of every member of this- House but of every newspaper in this country, and1 of elvery speaker on any platform, if he honestly believes a member of the Government to be incompentent, or that he is not properly doing his work, to try to get rid of that member, even though his doing so does cause a weakening of confidence in the Government that is carrying on the war.

With that statement the Right Hon. Mr. McKenna agreed absolutely. This proposition laid down by Mr. Bonar Law is a perfectly sound one, and I give it my adhesion, because when in similar circumstances some members of the two great parties in this country individually coalesce to form a so-called Union Government there is more or less danger of abuses and corruption creeping in; and therefore it is more than necessary in the interests of the country to have a strong opposition party to watch them, to scrutinize their acts, and to exercise a general surveillance over them.

But, Sir, to scrutinize, verify and control the administration of the country does not involve the making of captious and useless criticism. It involves rather

5 p.m. co-operation, and I sincerely believe this co-operation to be necessary. Ministers, although they may be able and perspicacious, do not verify everything themselves. This verification is generally done by their officers who are not infallible. And when these officers have made mistakes, do you not think, Sir, that, instead of trying to make amends for their faults, they will rather try to excuse their own errors. Consequently, the control of the administration by the representatives of the people must be added to. the purely administrative control of the Government. Even if the ministers were able to see to everything for themselves, yet, as Mr. Bonar Law said in the speech referred to, they are human, and he continued:

If they find they are not criticised and that they can exercise powers of all kinds without being called to question, the powers grow and they become more and more inclined to be dictatorial. [DOT]

They, as does the present Government, rule the country by ukases and Orders in Council, without consulting Parliament even when it is in session.

It is with the intention of faithfully serving my country, and of fulfilling my duties as a representative of the people, and of preventing, if possible, abuses of power, that I shall make some observations on the Budget now under consideration. Hon. gentlemen opposite may argue that the great outstanding issue is the winning of the war, that all other matters must be subordinated to that supreme task, and that therefore, criticism, verification, suggestions and scrutiny should be postponed until after the war. I respectfully submit, Sir, that there are occasions when we must prevent evils, which once perpetrated are incurable. Contracts badly or tardily concluded, errors in providing for clothing, ammunition, provisions; mistakes in the sanitary service, are evidenced by deaths which the most elaborate reports are unable to change into resurrections, and are the causes of disasters that the most eloquent speeches cannot transform into victories. We must prevent what is irreparable. The right hon. leader of the Opposition was, therefore, acting very patriotically when in the last Parliament, with .the able aid of his followers^-some of whom ,are now occupying the Treasury benches and will not, I am com vinced, be bold enough to reproach us for o.ur criticism-he vigorously denounced the war scandals and the nefarious financial policy of the Government.

Sir, the objection that- all criticism should be postponed is unfounded. During time of war, as in time of peace, Parliament has a paramount duty as a legislative or controlling body. In England it has never been thought for a moment that Parliament should- stand back during a tremendous crisis. On the contrary, it has always been held that a war should be conducted with the assistance of Parliament and of the nation; that every member of Parliament and every citizen has an absolute right to legitimate criticism, and that an. arbitrary limitation of such criticism, .to use the words of Mr. Bonar Law, " .might be found to be detrimental to the real interests of the country and to the successful carrying on of the war."

I had opportunity as a member of the Quebec legislative assembly to express officially my views on the war in moving the address in reply to the Speech from the Throne on January 8, 1915. After giving in detail the generous subscriptions of the provincial government for the war, Which at that time amounted to nearly $700,000, I said:

Let the Government continue this policy which is completely in accordance with the

. aspirations of our people towards nobleness and justice, and this House will do right to vote all legitimate measures in order to help those whom we cherish and who fight for the triumph of liberty, right and humanity.

Having been since twice re-elected by acclamation in the county of Nicolet, I can truly say that this policy concerning the war has been heartily approved by my constituents.

I am desirous that the Allies .shall be victorious and triumphant and that Canada shall do her part in this war, but I submit that our participation in the war must be proportionate to our resources, and be kept within just bounds. We all desire, Sir, to win the war; we differ only as to the method of participating in it. Why? I will try to explain that in a very few woTds, and to demonstrate that our viewpoint is based on the purest economic patriotism.

The striking feature of the Unionists, or Imperialists, is that they have a great regard for the British Empire generally. But one part of the British Empire they seem always to forget, and that is the Dominion of Canada, consisting of 8,000,000 people. Perhaps this is due to the fact that being new-comers in this country, although they admit no divided allegiance to Canada and her interests, they cannot deny that they have at least a divided affection as between the Old Country and the new. Such an affection, kept within reasonable limits is, I concede, right and creditable. On the other hand, we, who are by birth British Canadians, and have no divided affections, speaking of Canada, we are always proud to say: "This is my own, my native land."

Allow me to quote part of a speech delivered by Colonel Rankin during the Confederation debates, in which he describes well the nature of our feelings. Colonel Rankin then represented the county of Essex; he was in favour of confederation; and he said, on March 10, 1865:

Even those who are adverse to the scheme have not been behind its greatest advocates in their declarations of attachment to British institutions and British rule on this continent. And I am not disposed to insinuate that there is a solitary member of this House who entertains sentiments of disloyalty to Great Britain. We all have a right to express our views, and in fact it Is our duty to do so, since we are sent here to consider what is best for the interests of Canada first; for though we owe allegiance to England, Canada is our country, and has the strongest and best claims to our devotion. I, Sir, am not one of those Canadians who place the interests of England first, and hold those of Canada in secondary estimation.

These are the fundamental differences of mentality between the Imperialists and

Subtopic:   THE BUDGET.

Arthur Trahan

Laurier Liberal

Mr. ARTHUR TRAHAN (Resuming):

is the cry from the front! Gold! gold1! gold! is the chuckling undertone which comes up from the mushroom millionaires, well named a shoddy aristocracy. Nor do I think the army Interest, the contracting interest, and the tax-^athering interest, the worst results that have .grown out of this war. There is another and equally serious interest-the change that has come over the spirit, mind and principles of the people, that terrible change which has made war familiar and even attractive to them.

Well, Sir, we now have in our country all these cries, and the Government has answered each of them. By their military service law they try to satisfy those who cry "blood! blood! blood !" and as a consequence of this they are obliged themselves to cry "tax! tax! tax!" By their war scandals, their iniquitous railway transactions they have been very, very kind-to the detriment of the country-to the shoddy aristocracy who always want gold! gold! gold! Let us hope that soon that calamitous situation will end; let us hope that the people of this country will realize the unfathomable precipice to which the Government carries them.

We understand and share the sufferings of the people and desire with all our souls their early termination. We pray the Almighty to 'give to the world the benefits of a solid, profound and lasting peace which will be a permanent guarantee of safety, confidence, concord, harmony and progress for all civilized nations. Our earnest desire is that in every part of this our dear country will prevail the very noble sentiments expressed by the great Sir John A. Macdonald:

We all feel the advantages we derive from our connection with England. So long as that alliance is maintained', we enjoy, under her protection, the privileges of constitutional liberty acording to the British system. We will enjoy here that which is the great test of constitutional freedom-we will have the rights of the minority respected'. In all countries the rights of the majority take care of themselves, but it is only In countries like England, enjoying constitutional liberty, and safe from the tyranny of a single despot or of an unbridled democracy, that the rights of minorities are regarded.

If these ideals are realized; if the rights of minorities are regarded, protected, and safeguarded in every province of the Dominion, all racial and religious prejudices and appeals will disappear; we will have a real national unity; every race, every creed, every citizen will be faithful to Canada and her fortune, and will happily and enthusiastically endeavour to expand that faith in Canada which we should entertain, not only in the home, in each

province and in the Dominion as a whole, but also throughout the entire world.

Subtopic:   THE BUDGET.

Robert James Manion


Mr. E. J. MANION (Fort William and Eainy Eiver):

Mr. Speaker, as a new-comer in this Parliament I should like to congratulate very heartily the acting Minister of Finance (Hon. A. K. Maclean) on his extraordinarily fine effort in his Budget speech of yesterday. Probably he has made mistakes in that speech, but the statement may be made without fear of contradiction that a Finance Minister who never makes mistakes never makes anything.

To pay taxes, Sir, is always abhorrent. I have no doubt that if you could find in this world a human being who pays taxes with pleasure, you would find at the same time a curiosity worthy of being put in the British museum. For example, I have no doubt that pork-packing baronets would rather literally live up to the dictum " to hell with profits " than pay those profits over in taxej to this financially hard-pressed Government. Hon. gentlemen preceding me who expressed the opinion that these taxes on food profiteers should be retroactive have touched a chord which will find a responsive ring in the hearts of most of the Canadian people. Sir, it is easier to criticise Budgets than to make better ones. I have no intention of engaging tonight in any criticism of this Budget; I leave that to hon. gentlemen who are better political economists than I am. I purpose dealing with a branch of the subject which has not yet been touched upon during the course of this discussion of the manner of raising revenues tb meet Canada's great obligations. The subject with which I am going to deal has only a general application to the question of revenues, hut if the matter is given proper attention by the Government the prosperity of the country will be increased and additional revenues will be indirectly produced. The subject of which I am going to speak is the greater development of the mineral resources of this country.

The principle of free trade is held by some hon. .members on both sides of the House. I know, Sir, of one on each side of the House. who holds that principle- the hon. member for Brome (Mr. McMaster) on your left and the hon. member for Bed Deer (Mr. Michael Clark) on your right. The principle of protection is held by many hon. members on both sides of the House, but there is one principle which I believe, is held by all the members of this House, and that is the principle of developing the prosperity of this country of ours. After this w,ar is over raw materials will

rule the world of commerce. Canada possesses those raw materials in great abundance, and to my mind, all that Canada needs is a national awakening to make her realize her great future, and to make her help to develop thos# great natural resources. There are hundreds of millions of tons of iron ore scattered from the Atlantic to the Pacific, from Nova Scotia and the other Maritime Provinces on the East to British Columbia on the West. In the Canada Year-book, of 1916-17, the author says:

So far no great beds of high grade ores have been found in Canada, but it must be noted that the supplies of high grade iron ores within the convenient reach of the blast furnaces of the great iron and steel making countries are now almost exhausted, and the low grade ores of Canada will not have to compete with them very long. In a paper read before the American Institute of Mining Engineers, Mr. James Galley says: There are vast deposits of magnetic iron ores in the United States and Canada that are too low in iron for use at the present time, but which can be mechanically concentrated into very rich material. The reclamation of these ore beds will add tremendously to the ore supplies of Canada and the United States.

At the Easter recess I w.ent down to New York city, and in my hotel I offered, in payment of my hotel account, a Canadian $100 bank bill. I was charged $2 exchange on it. Before I had left this city I had visited my bankers here and asked for some American bills. They had none, and they told me that if they had had any, they would have to charge me one and a half to one and three-quarters per cent premium on those bills. I may say in passing that when I returned to Ottawa I had fifty or sixty dollars in American hills, and I offered them to the same bank, but the bank refused to buy them, In other words the banks will sell American bills at a premium to their depositors, but they refuse to buy them from their depositors. That is one of the methods by which the banks are able to pay large dividends. But the fact remains that the exchange between Canada and the United States' is against us at the rate of 14 to 1J per cent at the present time. The reason for that is because we import so heavily from the United States. The acting Minister of Finance (Mr. A. K. Maclean) quoted figures yesterday to show that we import nearly two dollar's worth of goods to one dollar's worth of goods that we export to the United States, and one of the heaviest imports is iron ore for use in our blast furnaces and steel plants. Last year we imported iron ore to the extent of 2,084,231 short tons, whereas of the Canadian ores

we used only 92,065 tons, or about 4 per cent; that is four per cent o,f the iron ores used in the blast furnaces and steel plants of this country were of Canadian production. In 1916, the year previous, we imported 1,964,598 short tons and of Canadian ore we used only 221,773 short tons, or about 11 per cent. The percentage of Canadian ores used is getting less all the time. In 1896, it was 67 per cent of all the ore used in this country; in 1897 it was 49 per cent; in 1898 it was 42 per cent and it has kept decreasing until in 1909 it was 17 per cent; in 1916 it was 11 per cent and in 1917, only 4 per cent. In 1896, we imported from the United States 1,270 tons of iron ore and last year, twenty-two. years later, we imported 2,084.231 tons, about 60 per cent of which came from United States and 40 per cent from Wabana, Newfoundland, or altogether nearly 2,000 times the amount we used in our steel plants and blast furnaces in 1896. Are we going to admit that the Almighty, in making this continent, put all the good iron ores on the southern side of the International boundary and all the poor iron ores on the northern side of the international boundary? I do not believe we should admit any such contention. I know the mining branch of the Government is not altogether optimistic as to the mineral deposits of this country, but I shall take the opportunity of quoting a few lines from some of the reports in which the writers are optimistic. On page 4 of volume " Iron Ore Occurrences in Canada," put out by the Mines Branch of Canada, the authors state:

In consideration of Canada's iron ore resources, a point that should not be lost sight of is that the total area comprised in the Dominion is very large and that much of it is practically unexplored so far as its iron ore possibilities are concerned. By reference to the general map at the end of the volume it will he seen that with very few exceptions all the known occurences are situated in the older and more or less settled and known districts. In the comparatively unexplored regions of the north large areas of iron bearing rocks occur at a number of points, but on account of their inaccessible location there is at the present time little to induce a thorough exploration of them in search for ore beds.

The authors also speak of the British Columbia deposits. By the way, a large deputation from British Columbia is in the city at the present time, asking for some assistance to the ore industry of that province. The authors, speaking of the British Columbia deposits, say:

There is little doubt also that active exploration would disclose many beds of iron ore at present unknown.

A little later oni, speaking of northwestern Ontario, north of Lake Superior, they say:

The most promising of the more accessible portions of the province have been pretty well gone over by the iron ore prospector, and the discovery of any large new ore beds in them is more likely to be made by the underground exploration and diamond drilling of known occurrences, rather than by ordinary surface prospecting.

This emphasizes the fact that the development of our ores 'would be very likely to bring forward heavy deposits of good iron ore.

In a report on examination of some iron ore deposits in the districts of Thunder Bay and Rainy river, Ontario, by F. Hille, mining engineer, also gotten out by the Department of Mines in 1908, Mr. Hille, after discussing the likelihood of the exhaustion of the immense iron ore deposits of the United States in the near future, says:

Africa so far is an uncertain quantity and by the time that continent would be able to furnish any iron ore, this mineral will already be classed among the rare ones. Whence then can the deficiency be made up? The only possible source that I can see is Canada. The Province of Ontario alone contains immense deposits of ore scattered over a very large area, sufficient to furnish supply to the smelters both on this side and the other side of the International boundary^ for many years to come; although these ores to some extent consist of low grade magnetites it will not be long before the iron masters will be glad to get them at whatever price they are put upon the market.

A little later he says:

These deposits are all situated in the Province of Ontario, but if an estimate were made of what is already known of the iron ore reserves throughout the whole Dominion, there can be little doubt that Canada would stand very high, if not first, among the nations of the world as a prospective iron producing country.

To any one who is interested in this subject, Mr. Hille's report would make interesting reading.

Sir, I believe that there are hundreds of millions of tons of iron ore scattered from the Atlantic to the Pacific. Along the north shore of lake Superior, along the Canadian Northern railway line east and west of Port Arthur and Fort William are immense iron deposits.

In reality we shall not know much of the real quantities of ore in Canada until further developmental work is done, as development will inevitably lead to a more thorough examination of deposits already known and the prospecting for others. This is what has happened in other iron-producing countries of the world.

The rich ores of the American ranges on the south shore of lake Superior come into this country free. I am not arguing that we should put an embargo upon these American ores, but I do believe sincerely that by having a bounty on all Canadian ore used in the blast furnaces of Canada we could aid in the building up of a vast new industry in this country. I am told by capable mining engineers that ore with 33 per cent of iron is workable^m a paying basis, and there have been hundreds of assays made from various properties with much higher percentages. Ores from the porth shore of lake Superior run much heavier in iron than this percentage with very little foreign substance, some running as high as 60 per cent.

In this year's estimates, which we have been discussing in this House for some time, I note the following amounts allowed for different departments of this Government:

The Department of Mines $ 427,900.0'0

Immigration 1,135,000.00

Mounted Police Department. . . 1,127,777.00Dominion Lands and Parks. .. 2,531,645.00Fisheries


991,600.00Scientific institutions

405,000.00 *

Every one of these departments, with the ,exception of the last, and I have chosen only the least important departments of the Government, is allowed two or more times the amount allowed for the Department of Mines; even the caring for our criminals costs over twice as much. Our country's expenditures are running four and five million dollars annually. With all this spending surely we can allow a couple of million dollars a year for the purpose of developing the mineral resources of the country.

Immigration at the present time is practically at a standstill compared with immigration into this country in the past, and yet the Department of Immigration is spending nearly three times the amount spent by the Department of Mines. I do not wish to be misconstrued as criticising the administration of the Department of Immigration or any other department. I simply wish to insist that as they are getting these generous allowances the Government should bring forward a constructive policy to develop the mineral resources of this country. The war is costing us four to five hundred million dollars annually. We voted five hundred million dollars for the war in this House only the other day, and I feel that we ought to spend two or three million dollars for the peaceful and prosperous de-

velopment of the mineral resources of out country.

The other evening the Minister of Trade and Commerce, in discussing the fuel situation, dealt at some length with the process of briquetting which is going to be fostered by this Government in conjunction with the provinces of Manitoba and Saskatchewan. In almost the same breath he said he did not believe it was the duty of this Government to aid financially in the development of our mineral resources. I agree that we should help in the briquetting of lignites in the western provinces; it is a development of our natural resources. I also maintain that the Government dhould assist in the development of the mineral resources of this country. Canada's mineral production in 1915 was $137,109,171, in 1916 $176,357,454, and for 1917 the estimated amount is $192,982,837. The value of the fisheries product amounted, in 1915, to $31,264,631, .and in 1916 to $35,860,708. In other words, you will find, on comparing those figures, that the fisheries brought in one-fifth the value of tihe minerals, and yet the cost of the fisheries was twice the amount spent on mineral development. The taxes of this country are increasing, and they are bound to continue to increase. There is only one method by which we can cut down the taxes per capita in this country, and that is by increasing our population. If we double our population we cut the per capita tax in two. Europe, excluding Russia, has an area only one-half the area of Canada; that includes England, Ireland, Scotland, France, Italy, Switzerland, Norway, Sweden, Denmark,

Holland, Germany, Austria-Hungary, and every other country with the exception of Russia. Though that area is only half the area of Canada they have about three hundred millions of people. It seems to me, therefore, we have plenty of room for an increase in population, and I maintain that mineral development will increase our population. A hundred years ago the population of Canada and that of the United States were not very far apart in numbers, and yet to-day we have between seven and a half and eight million people while they have one hundred and ten millions, and it is partly due to the fact that we have been assisting them to develop their natural resources and build up their commerce instead of developing our own natural resources.

As soon as the war is over our soldiers will be returning to this country to the


il might go on at great length and take up the question of the railways and1 point out that we have 1,300 miles of railway on three different lines between Ottawa and Winnipeg, and there are many people in this country, and I am one of them, who think there is at least one line too many through that territory; but we have

of this House know that the United States and Germany were rapidly forging in advance among the commercial nations of the world. The United States, Great Britain, Germany .and France are the great iron producers of the world and are also the leaders in commercial progress. Iron and steel are necessary basic elements of commercial progress. If we do not develop our resources we are progressive and aggressive commercial qualities. Boards of trade, legislatures of different provinces, and mining conventions have passed resolutions, and the press has presented arguments in favour of the Government of Canada taking a hand in the development of our iron ore resources. Just the other day I cut out from .a western trade journal, the Grain and Trade News, the following editorial:

At the present time there is no diminution of consumption of iron and steel in sight, and in face of the fact that we have the raw material in undoubted quantities we are amply justified in seeking public assistance to establish this country in the one business aside from agriculture that will enable us to meet the demands for interest and principal caused by expenditures made on account of the war.

I respectfully lay this suggestion before this Government for its serious consideration. As to my mind it is one of the possible methods by which we may increase our prosperity, produce a market for our agricultural products, give employment to our returned soldiers, develop freight revenue for our over-developed railway systems, and generally help to give this great Dominion the propulsive power to place if, after the war, .among the advancing commercial countries of the world.


.(Laurier-Outremont): Mr. Speaker, we listened with great pleasure yesterday to the able speech delivered by the Acting Minister of Finance, and I must congratulate him upon the manner in which he discharged his duty, because he had a hard and ungrateful task to perform, to submit in some presentable form the difficult financial statement of Canada. The financial position of this country is not flourishing, nor does it give any cause for rejoicing, I therefore expected to hear from the Acting Finance Minister sbme proposition that would tend to alleviate in some degree the conditions of the masses in this country. I am sorry to say, however, that the only measure proposed in the Budget Speech was the imposition of still heavier taxes and still heavier burdens on the people.

The Acting Finance Minister estimated that for the fiscal year 1918-1919 we should be able to meet our ordinary and capital expenditure out of revenue, and have, as in the past two years, an appreciable sum .over, which we could apply to war purposes. I cannot agree, Mr. Speaker, with that anticipation, because I do not think there .will be any surplus left out of revenue when all the expenses for the current year are paid. The estimates submitted to the House call for a vote of $252,000,000. In *addition the Minister of Railways a short .time ago asked for a vote of $50,000,000 with which to purchase rolling stock for the .Government railway system, and in doing so asked for authority to expend an equh valent sum annually until a year or two after the war had terminated. We also .know that the Government has purchased, or acquired, certain railways in Canada, the revenues from which will not be sufficient to meet the outlays, and the deficit from which the Government will have to make good. The hon. member for Brome ,(Mr. McMaster) figured this amount at $10,000,000 per annum, and probably at the end of the present year we shall have to face a still larger deficit. No doubt, the Minister of Railways will say that the $50,000,000 should be charged to capital account, but I cannot concur in that contention because the annual depreciation of rolling stock which has to be made good every year is so large that in all probability for many years to come the $50,000,000 in question will be required to be expended by the Government. Now if we total the three items which I have enumerated it will yield the huge sum of $317,000,000. In order to meet this immense sum what revenue is there available? The Acting Minister of Finance has told us that he hopes this year to realize a revenue of $270,000,000, which will leave a deficit of about $47,000,000, to meet which we must have recourse to borrowing. Therefore, of what avail have been all the sacrifices of the people of Canada? For 9 p.m. some years past, especially since the outbreak of the war, heavy taxes, including direct taxes, have been levied upon the people. We are now paying duties on cheques, stamp duties and various other forms of taxes, and the Government still comes forward with fresh impositions. The people have heretofore cheerfully paid them in the belief that the revenue thus derived would be expended for war purposes, but they will be sorry to learn, after all their sacrifices, that the large sums of money taken from them in

the form of fresh taxation are devoted to meeting the internal expenses of the country, and that not a cent from all these taxes is going directly towards war purposes.

-And what is the financial situation of Canada to-day? We have voted at the request of the Prime Minister the very large sum of $500,000,000. We did so after stating our objections, but the responsibility for the expenditure of this money rests upon the Government. Canada will be called upon at some time or other to finance the purchases of England in this country, which will, in all probability, approximate $350,000,000, of supplies of food and munitions of war. Taking all these -facts into consideration, if my figures are correct, and I think they are, we -shall have to provide this year sums reaching the enormous total of $1,167,000,000, and not as the Acting Finance Minister states, $980,000,000.

I am sorry to differ with the figures of the hon. minister. Therefore, Sir, the deficit of this country including current expenses and war purposes will amount to about $467,000,000, which sum will have to be found by the Minister of Finance.

Why are we in such a poor financial position to-day? I do not hesitate to say that it is on account of the extravagance practiced by this -and the previous Government since 1911. It was conclusively proved last night by my hon. friend (Mr. McMaster) that we could have saved each year since 1911 about thirty million dollars. If the business of the country had been properly carried on, therefore, we would have bad a few hundred million dollars to our credit for the pressing needs of today. What will the Government be compelled to do now? As has been pointed out, they cannot borrow in the United States or in England. They will have to go again to the Canadian people probably this fail to borrow half a billion dollars. I was somewhat astounded yesterday and this afternoon to hear the Acting Minister of Finance and other hon. gentlemen opposite glorify the success of these loans. These loans have been many times over-subscribed by the people, as s-tated by hon. gentlemen. That is a proof that there was a lot of money in this country, I admit. It is- also a proof of the patriotism of our people. But it is not a proof of the business acumen of the Government. Why? Because the fact that these loans have been oversubscribed prove! that it was easy to obtain the money, and that the Government could have obtained these loans at smaller rates of interest than they are paying. The Government has been

making rapprochements with the United States. But the people of the United States are receiving only three and one-half per cent interest on the money they have loaned to their Government, while this Government is paying five per cent and over on the Victory Loan, and it also paid a large sum for commission, and spent a lot of money for advertising. Consequently the floating of the loan has cost the country a great deal. These loans are for periods of ten, fifteen and twenty years. If you make up the difference of one -and a half per cent between the interest paid by the United States and the interest paid by the Canadian Government, say for fifteen years on $700,000,000, it represents the sum of $157,500,000 that will be paid by the Canadian people to the subscribers to these loans. If I have any suggestion to make to the Minister of Finance it is that, instead of proposing in the future, possibly, to impose a tax on these loans, he should offer the coming loan -at three and a half per cent, as was done in the United States.

As I said at the commencement of my remarks, I had hoped that the Government would offer some proposal to relieve the high cost of living. Some time ago, the Government appointed a commission to diminish the consumption of foodstuffs in Canada. That is not sufficient. In countries like Australia and New Zealand, not to mention England, the boards appointed have authority to fix the price of foodstuffs. In Australia, especially, the Board of Food Control has had such success that in certain necessaries of life, such as flour, the price paid to-day is less than before the war. Bequests to fix prices of foodstuffs were made some time ago by the representatives of organized labour, when they assembled in the city of Ottawa, and the Women's Conference, if I am not mistaken, made a similar request to the Minister of Labour. The people generally are asking the Government to do something along that line. To-day, I received the last issue of the Labour Gazette, which shows how the *cost of living is -increasing. Details are .given showing the amount necessary to *maintain a small family, and it appears that in the month of March, 1914, $7.68 a week was required for the maintenance of a small family budget, which increased in February last to $12.54, and in March to $12.65, representing an increase of nearly one hundred per cent since 1914. I submit that the income of the labouring man has not by any means increased one hundred pe-r cent. Under the Act passed

a short time ago the. Government have power to appoint one or two ministers. I suggest that a Minister of Food Control be appointed, with power to. investigate this matter, to examine witnesses, to confer with wholesalers, to fix. the price of foodstuffs and thus help the people.

What else could he done to diminish the high cost of living? This. Government could help the farmers, could help agriculture, in many ways. .Hon, 'gentlemen who have spoken in this delbate have suggested that foods coming from the United States should be allowed into Canada free of duty, thus not only enabling consumers to obtain these foods at lower prices, but preventing the packers of Canada from controlling the market as they do at present. I realize that it is a difficult problem to increase farm production. If the Government send all available men to the other side; if they continue to refuse to listen to the good advice of the British Food Controller; if they do not grasp thoroughly the position of the country, the increase in the price of foodstuffs will continue.

During the last election I told my electors that I was against conscription. I represent a constituency which bears the name of Laurier-Outremont, in the city of Montreal. This riding consists half English-speaking and .half French-speakihg people, and I am glad to say that I received the support of the majority of the Englishspeaking men voters in my constituency and of the French-speaking people. I am still against the principle of conscription because I think we could iby other means help the Allies and this country moTe than we are doing to-day. Therefore I hope the the Government will appoint a commission whose uuty it will (be to investigate and report what steps shouiu be taken to decrease the cost of living. [DOT]

As to the taxes imposed by this new legislation, the revenue to ibe obtained is fair enough, though there is certain injustice; the new provisions will not fall upon all with equal fairness. The taxes upon tea and tobacco should not have been increased. But, as T said at the beginning, all these taxes would b'e received, 1 would not say with pleasure, but at least without any murrmurings, if the people were confident that the moneys received through the imposition of these taxes would be devoted to the carrying on of the war. But the more money this. Government have, the more they spend for carrying on the [iMr. DuTremblay. ]

business of the country, and that condition is not satisfactory to the people of Canada.

The member for St. Antoine (Sir Herbert Ames) told us that during the war the Government did not intend to change the tariff; or at least that before doing so they would consider the matter carefully. I quite understand that those who like 'high tariffs and those who are profiteers do not approve any proposed change of tariffs which protect the manufacturers to -the detriment of the people. But I submit that the Government should now prepare for the conditions which will prevail after the war. What steps is the Government taking to look after our people when the war is over? I understood that a commission was to be appointed to go to Europe with a view to finding out what we could sell to Europe after the war. As you know, Sir, those countries which have been devastated by the war will need many things that Canada can supply. This market will belong to the country that is the first to go out after it. We can supply wood, steel and many other materials. Nothing, however, has been done. We know that after the war, there will probably be stagnation in many industries in this country, and that probably thousands upon thousands of our labouring men will not have employment. We on this side of the House seme weeks ago suggested that the Government should appoint a commission to look into this matter and should seek to encourage technical education in this country so as to give our workmen the necessary skill, thereby relieving us of the necessity of looking to other countries for skilled labour. We have technical schools at the present time in certain provinces We have in the_ city of Montreal a technical. school which gives great assistance to the labouring people of the province of Quebec. Why should the Federal Government not grant subsidies to those technical schools? All these are measures that we would like to have seen provided for in the budget, but I am sorry to say that we did not see any hope held out in that direction. There was nothing to help the people, but only more taxes and still more taxes, the money received from which will be spent not only in the prosecution of the war but in carrying on the ordinary affairs of the country. We on this side of the House are anxious to help the Government in carrying on the war, but we want the Government to act in accordance with the resources of the country. I trust it will not be forgotten, as it was well said this after-

noon, that we are first of all Canadians, and that we shall always, above all things, be Canadians.

Subtopic:   THE BUDGET.

John Flaws Reid

Unionist (Liberal)

Mr. JOHN FLAWS REID (Mackenzie):

Mr. Speaker, as a new member, I crave the indulgence of the House. The first and greatest need is the recruiting and training of men to send overseas to back up our brave soldiers at the front. I am prepared to support this Government in every measure that will forward the prosecution of the war, and my address to-night will be along the lines of greater production.

The great need of Canada is farm production. The great need of the Empire and her Allies is foodstuffs. Canada cannot render better service to the Empire or make a better contribution towards winning 'the war than by increasing farm production. The Empire needs food for her men on all the battlefronts and a larger supply of foodstuffs to maintain heT armies of industrials. The armies and citizens of her Allies are also calling for more food. The Empire and her Allies are willing to pay us enhanced prices-a double incentive- patriotism and profit. Canada needs an increase of farm production to meet financial obligations already incurred as well as to maintain her armies now fighting side by side with the Empire's soldiers. No commodity enters so much into the commercial life of the nation ae does the product of the farm, and no other commodity contributes so much towards the maintenance of its transportation companies, financial institutions, commercial and industrial undertakings. Hence we see the importance of encouraging farm operations. This self-evident proposition has been recognized by all interests as manifested by the amount of exhortation given to farmers by all classes of the community. The press, the pulpit, the professions, commercial and financial institutions have indulged in a display of their patriotism by imploring farmers to increase production. No matter how anxious the farmers may be to help the Empire, no matter how keen they are to raise crops while high prices obtain, unless they are provided with the means of production their operations will be limited. It is encouraging to note that our Governments are alive to this fact. If we are to meet our obligation in the matter of farm production, something more than exhortation has to be undertaken.

Deprived largely of man-power, the best substitute farmers can secure is an ample supply of modern machinery. The Federal Government recognized this fact, and to

help meet the case removed customs duties off tractor engines for a year, thus placing this help within the reach of many farmers. They also entered into arrangements to supply a large number of farmers with tractor engines at cost. Of course, there is no misunderstanding the Government's intentions in this regard. They want to supply tractor engines at a price a larger number of farmers can afford to pay and operate at a profit. If it is a good thing to remove the duty from tractor engines .as a war measure to encourage production which only .affects a comparatively few farmers, how much better service could we render to the Empire and Canada if the Government would remove the duty from all farm implements, as a war measure? Of the (two hundred thousand farmers in the prairie provinces, probably not more than fifty thousand can purchase and operate tractor engines, all the rest of them require the latest improved farm implements so as to increase their efficiency and productive power, and nearly the whole of them are prepared to buy improved machinery, could it be purchased at reasonable prices. I know many farmers in western Canada who, early in the season and before prices for farm machinery were fixed; gave orders for new and larger implements, such as .seed drills, but who cancelled their orders when they learned what the price was to be. Farmers who were using a 16 shoe drill wanted to purchase a 20 or 22 shoe drill, thus increasing the working power of a man 25 per cent in seeding. The same thing applies to harrows, ploughs, etc. Many farmers who have an extra colt or two ready to put to work would use a 6 or 8 hoTse team in place of a 4 horse team, and the 2 horse farmers would use 4 horses, but they are prevented from thus increasing their effective power by the excessive cost of machinery. Increased factory cost and war tax have increased the duty more than double. For instance, in 1914, the duty on a 20 shoe seed drill was $12.90, this year it is $32. Add to that the profit of the dealer, and the cost on account of customs duty would be $40. Eight dollars and thirty^six cents duty was imposed1 on a 12-inch two bottom gang plough in 1914, this year it is $19.60. A triple gang plough carried a duty of $13.50 in 1914, and to-day it is $32.65, and so on all along the line.

Those who know the needs of agriculture and the limit that will be placed on production by the lack of farm labour are convinced that the expansion of production can be brought about more by placing

modern, farm implements at the disposal of farmers at a reasonable rate, and that it will contribute more to increase production than any other one thing the Government can do.

While there are many farmers in the prairie provinces who realized very satisfactory results from the operations of the farm during the last three years, there are many whose operations have not yielded more than a bare living. For instance. the provincial government reports indicate that in all centre and southern Manitoba the average yield of wheat for the last crop was around nine bushels an acre. A great many did not get the cost of production. This also applied to large areas in Saskatchewan.

The annual conventions of the three provincial grain growers' associations strongly urged the placing of farming implements at once on the free list, as a war measure. The business interests of the country towns and villages are joining with the farmers in this demand. Their knowledge of farm needs acquired by close proximity has convinced them that farmers must be supplied with the latest machinery, that the loss to them of man power due to the war can in a large measure be offset by the use of modern and improved, farm implements. As business men acquainted with the situation they recognize that the loss of revenue to the Government through removal of custom duties from farm implements would be small compared to the advantage the country would secure by the efficiency and increasing capacity on the farm due to ample machinery of the right class and type. Many farmers are no.w supplied with all the implements of production needed, for efficiency. The bulk of farmers, however, are not so situated.

It is easy to conceive that supplying farmers with farm machinery at the price that would rule were the duty immediately removed might easily increase the capacity for production, and the improvement of cultivation that would follow would result in an increased production of at least 5 per cent for 1918 and a larger increase for 1919.

We are all urged to make sacrifices for the sake of the Empire and to win the war. We are all urged to do "our bit." Cannot the Government submit to a small loss of revenue, and the few others who might be affected adversely by the removing of duties from farm implements submit -to a reduction in profits in an effort to increase the farm production of Canada which all

[IMr. J. F. Reid.]

agree is so greatly needed by five to ten per


Again, Sir, many of our returned soldiers are anxious to go back on to the land to make homes for themselves and their families. Is it right that our Canadian manufacturers should be allowed to tax o-ur brave heroes who have risked their lives at the front for the protection of our Empire and for the cause of liberty, civilization, and democracy, and who now return to us suffering from shell-shock, 'and nervous wrecks? It is up to the manufacturers of agricultural implements to go " over the top " like men, with organized agriculture, and to ask our Government to remove the tariff on implements as a war measure, and thereby help in the great drive for greater production. Then thousands of souls now almost starving for the lack of bread would- bless the generous action of our Canadian manufacturers whose chances of entering the realms of eternal bliss would thereby be greatly enhanced, if not assured. Let us remember, "even a cup of cold water, etc."

While there was nothing in the Budget speech about -a reduction in the tariff, I have here the customs tariff of 1907, revised up to 1914, and find in it a provision whereby the Government can by Order in Counbil remove the duty on implements as a war measure, and I am sure if such a measure came before the House it would receive the unanimous support of hon. members.

The hon. member for London (Mr. Cronyn) suggested the appointment of a tariff commission. On behalf of the western organized farmers, I welcome the suggestion, provided the organized farmers have a representative on the commission- something we have not had in the past.

One thing more, Mr. Speaker. I wish to draw to the attention of our Government the loyalty of our western farmers in subscribing to the Victory bonds last fall. Many of them put every surplus dollar they could gather up into Government bonds, with the understanding that our chartered banks would loan them money to finance their business until the crop of 1918 came in, and to-day hundreds of our farmers are paying our chartered banks eight and ten per cent for moneys to finance their business until the fall, the banks deducting the interest from the principal. That is, .when a farmer asks for a loan of one hundred dollars, he is handed out not one hundred dollars but ninety-two dollars, and ,in many cases only ninety dollars, for which he signs a note in full for one hun-

dred dollars. The small borrower is nearly always hardest hit.

This, I understand, Mr. Speaker, is for the purpose of evading the law and compelling the borrower to become a party to the agreement. I feel that it is the duty of our Government to bring in legislation to effectively stop this pernicious system prevailing in banking practice.

Subtopic:   THE BUDGET.

Joseph Read

Laurier Liberal

Mr. JOSEPH READ (Prince, P.E.I.):

Mr. Speaker, I want to assure you and the House that if the bon. gentleman who has just sat down will move an amendment to the Budget resolutions for free agricultural implements he will have the unanimous, suport of hon. gentlemen on this side of the House. Before entering on the principal question I intend to discuss, which is more or less a concrete one, I want to congratulate the Acting (Minister of Finance on his concise and splendid presentation of the Budget. The only mistake in it, apart from taxing the poor man's tea and tobacco, is that he did not go far enough. At least two hon. gentlemen on the other side of the House have said that this was not an opportune time to discus's tariff questions. Mr. Speaker, if ever there was an opportune time for a Government to tackle the tariff it is now, when both classes are incorporated in the Government, the high-tariff and the low-tariff men. Surely there is enough judgment among them to get together and arrive at a compromise that will commend itself to both sides of the House so that this question of tariff reform can be put out of politics. Now is their opportunity.

Subtopic:   THE BUDGET.

Daniel Duncan McKenzie

Laurier Liberal


There was a marriage settlement.

Subtopic:   THE BUDGET.

Joseph Read

Laurier Liberal


Some of them deny that, but if there was such a marriage settlement, it is time to go to the divorce court. There is one other point which I wish to discuss. While I know that the Government is composed of different shades of politics in regard to the tariff question, it appears to me that there are members in it who are afflicted with what I would call cerebral embolism; that is some trouble in the brain that gives them the power to hypnotize the whole cabinet. The other evening the Government showed that it is a Government of hysteria. The last Order in 'Council doing away with the principle of selective conscription showed to the whole country and to the hon. gentlemen themselves that they were acting under the impulse of hysteria when they passed it without making any qualification whatever with reference to young men between

twenty and twenty-three who are the owners, occupiers and tillers of farms all over Canada. I have had letters and telegrams by the dozen from men in that position and their friends. 1 just received a letter this afternoon from a gentleman who occupied in the local legislature the honourable position that you, Mr. Speaker, occupy here as the first commoner, the Hon. John Agnew. This gentleman has a son at the front, he has a son on the farm twenty-two years of age and he has another son near nineteen years of age who is willing to take his brother's place at the front. I went to the Militia Department about this-I did not go to the minister himself because I did not want to ask the minister to go against the law laid down by this peculiar Order in 'Council.

The writer of this letter says:

I wrote you a few days ago in reference to the exemption of Sandy-

I might say that the Hon. John Agnew, late Speaker of Prince Edward Island, is an old country Scotchman whose loyalty nobody can impugn.

Subtopic:   THE BUDGET.

Rodolphe Lemieux

Laurier Liberal


A good Scotchman.

Subtopic:   THE BUDGET.

Joseph Read

Laurier Liberal


A good Scotchman, a good Britisher and a good Canadian, and not all old countrymen are that when they come out here.

I enclose a clipping of General Mewburn's speech at Toronto in which he said that only Simon-pure farmers would be exempted.

In the name of common sense why should they pass an Order in Council contradicting the speech of the Minister of Militia and Defence at Toronto delivered only a few days before, in which he said that Simon-pure farmers would not be taken off the laad. In the little island of Prince Edward alone there will be 150 of the best farms in Canada untilled this year unless the Government take some method of putting a stop to the enforcement of this iniquitous measure.

Subtopic:   THE BUDGET.

Edgar Nelson Rhodes (Speaker of the House of Commons)



I regret to have to call the hon. genleman to order 'but it is not in order for him to discuss a measure which has already been passed by this House during the present session.

Subtopic:   THE BUDGET.

Joseph Read

Laurier Liberal


What would that measure be?

Subtopic:   THE BUDGET.

May 1, 1918