Mr. ROBERT JAMES MANION (Fort William and Rainy River):

Mr. Speaker,

the duty has devolved upon me, though I fear that I shall all too feebly perform that duty, of supporting my hon. colleague from Calgary East (Mr. D. L. Redman), who has moved the presentation of an Address in reply to the speech of His Excellency the Governor General.

I should first like to congratulate the previous speaker on the very eloquent and able manner in which he performed his task. Then I wish to thank the Acting Prime Minister and the Government on behalf -of my constituents in the district of Fort William and Rainy River for the signal honour which has been conferred upon them in the choosing of their representative to second the Address in reply to the speech from the Throne.

Sir, it has been the general custom in past Parliaments of Canada since Confederation, though not the invariable custom, that the seconding of this motion be given in the French language. This custom has however, been deviated from on quite a few occasions, the most recent being in the Parliament of 1906 when the Address was moved by Mr. W. E. Knowles, representing West Assini-

Mr. D. D. McKENZIE (North Cape Breton) :

Mr. Speaker, this being my first

appearance before this House as the leader of the Opposition for the time being, I think it is only proper that I should explain briefly my position. Those of you who read the newspapers, and you all read the newspapers, I suppose, saw what was done yesterday-that by a unanimous vote I was asked for the time being to lead the Opposition in this House until a proper opportunity is given in the most democratic way possible for the Liberals of all Canada to choose their leader. Until that is done, I am by the request of my friends the recognized leader of the Opposition in this House and responsible for the sayings and doings of that body to some extent. I do not think it is out of place for me to thank my friends on this side of the House for the great honour they have conferred on me. I fully appreciate it, and can only promise that whatever ability I possess will be placed at their disposal, and in a proper way at the disposal of the House. I am now getting to be an old member. I have always had the greatest regard for this institution, which is the highest institution in our country, and I trust that in the future and particularly while I occupy this position of responsibility, I shall so demean myself as to do credit and respect to this institution of which we are all so proud. If there was one characteristic which more than another distinguished the great leader into whose shoes I have stepped it was his great respect for Parliament, for the rules of this House and for everything that went to the upbuilding and maintaining of the best parliamentary traditions. As his successor for the time being, I hope that as far as my capacity will permit me, I shall follow in his footsteps. I feel assured of the sympathy and respect of hon. gentlemen on this side of the House. I hope I shall do justice to the position which I occupy, and shall conduct myself in such a way as to command the sympathy and respect of hon. gentlemen on the other side of the House as well.

Let me, Mr. Speaker, at once address my hearty and earnest congratulations to the two young hon. gentlemen who moved and seconded the Address. I am particularly proud of the way in which they ha.ve acquitted themselves. Their speeches were not too long, but they covered the ground very well; they were full of good material, and well expressed. We are glad to recognize that each of these young men is full of promise for the future. It is a great thing to know that coming up behind us, who are beginning to get old, are young

men offering such talent and promise to the service of this country. The part of the speech which particularly attracted my attention was the reference to the returned soldier. These two gentlemen, as I understand it, are themselves returned soldiers. Let me say for the Opposition and for the people generally, that we have in our hearts a very warm spot and the greatest respect for every returned soldier of this country. They have done great things for us, for which we are proud and glad and thankful. I hope we shall not be remiss in our duty to show a proper appreciation of what they have done for us by looking after their interest in a proper and becoming manner. These two young gentlemen were bold enough to rather find fault with the way in which things were done. They may not have meant that, but I, as an ordinary plain blunt person sitting on this side of the House and watching the performance rather closely, reached the conclusion that they were not quite satisfied with the way in which the Government was moving, and rather suggested that a little speed should be put on, if that could possibly be done. To my hon. young friends, who no doubt are alert to their own interests and to the interests of the country, and full of youthful animation and ambition, let me say- not by way of discouragement at all, but by way of helping them along,-that if they have any stimulant to stir up this Government to do something vvithin the life of any man that is livihg to-day I shall be very glad indeed if they will apply it. We on this side of the House, in our own mild way, have been coaxing them along; we have been offering them every inducement and every promise that we can offer, consistent with our position in opposition, but they do not seem to take our bait.. But our good friends are returned soldiers, and possibly the Government had better beware lest some of the means which soldiers use to produce results may be used in their case. There is a warning given' to them to-day, and I trust that something will be forthcoming before very long.

I do not wish on this, the first occasion of my addressing the House as leader of the Opposition, to be unduly critical, but the Government has thought proper to place in the Address the subject of dealing with' returned soldiers. We heard of the Soldiers' Civil Re-Establishment Department last winter. We were very hopeful that something would come of it, but so far I have not been able to hear of any particular establishment, except, forsooth, the salary of the minister-I suppose that is

established. We have in this House a distinguished young member from the Province of Nova Scotia, full of business and enthusiasm, and a capable man. Because of his enthusiasm, his business tact and ability he was chosen to be a very material part of that establishment. Yet I find, to my astonishment, that he does not remain there. He would be the last man in the world to unduly find fault with this Government. He has been wedded to them as closely as human being could possibly be. He was willing to bear their sins of omission and commission, and to be, if necessary, the scapegoat for them on many an occasion. But matters have come to such a pass that he has written a letter to the public press of our province, announcing his resignation from that institution because nothing was done. Mr. Speaker, now is the time and the place for us to make a mild inquiry, how it comes, when we have an establishment of this kind, instituted at the request of the Government, backed up by Parliament, supported by all the necessary money and means and services and support, that the man who, I believe, was next in importance to the minister, has had to resign because nothing was being done.

I call this to the attention of the young gentlemen who moved and seconded the Address so that they, having the advantage of being supporters of the 'Government, may make inquiry and find out where the weak spot is, try to brace it up and see that the proper things are being done in the interest of the returned soldier. The returned soldier is not expecting anybody to unduly look after him. I remember our good old friend from Dundas, Mr. Broder, whose memory we all revere ,and who is much missed by the House, speaking once upon a time about the farmers. He said: The farmers' of Ontario do not want anybody to take off their clothes and put them to bed, they are able to look -after themselves; all they want is a square deal and fair play. I believe that the returned soldier who has come home in such a physical condition that he is able to look after himself, does not require, and does not want, anybody to take off his clothes and put him to bed; all he wants is a square deal. Of course, there are others who have been mutilated and maimed in the war to such an extent that we must look after them carefully and tenderly and to whom greater attention must necessarily be given than to those who came through safe and well and in regard to whom we thank God that they escaped the fate of the others. Without

following this subject any longer, I will merely say that I trust and hope that the Government have at last reached -a conclusion as to what they are really going to do and that something substantial' will be done. I might remind my enthusiastic young friends again that there is one divine attribute in connection with this Government and that has reference to the question of time. To them one day is as a thousand years and a thousand years as one day. They must not lose sight of that fact. Further, they have a good many lawyers among them, and keen lawyers too, and they have always taken care that time is not of the essence of any contract they enter into.

As far as making provisions for the couii-try generally, the soldiers and others, is concerned, the great thing for us as a Parliament, and for the people whom we represent, is that we should try and make Canada a good, comfortable country to live in; that we should so marshal our forces that the best results shall be obtained; that we should so utilize our opportunities that our people may become productive. One of the great curses of over protection in this country has been too much crowding of people into our cities and towns and the neglecting of our farms. We have too many people in the factories and in the towns and too few people producing in the country the food that is necessary for those who are crowding into the towns.

Mr. BURNHAM:

Does the hon. gentleman wish to reduce the number of factories?

Mr. McKENZTE:

If there are too many factories-yes, certainly. I am not in a position to speak as to that, but I am saying to my hon. friend (Mr. Burnham) that what has been happening in our part of the country is that people have been rushing to factories, steel works and all that sort of thing, and neglecting the farm entirely. I am not blaming any Government particularly for that but I am simply saying that that is the condition that exists and that the party in power will, to the best of their ability, have to deal with it. If there is anything that can be done to make the farm more productive than it is, to induce young men to stay upon the farm, and the people who come into this country as immigrants to go upon the farm instead of crowding into the factories and towns, if such a condition can be brought about that at least two blades of grass shall grow where only one grows now, we shall be moving in the direction of greats

production and of/reduction in the cost of living. That is what I have had in mind all the time. There is no great benefit in a man being able to get $5, or $6, a day when everything that he buys for the support of his family is three times more expensive than it was when he was getting 12 or $3 a day. What I want to impress upon the Government is that if there is anything they can do to make this a cheap, free and comfortable country to live in, and to carry on our industries as they have been going along in years gone by, that is a consummation greatly to be desired.

I want to say something about the glorious achievements of our soldiers. The part played by our gallant Canadian soldiers in this great war is something that should not be lost sight of. This is the first time really that Canadians have had a wide opportunity of distinguishing themselves in this way. Canadians have distinguished themselves in other walks of life. They have been great theologians, doctors and lawyers, and they have played an important part in the industrial world. It has only been in this -war that they have had the opportunity of proving themselves great upon the field of battle. They have distinguished themselves in such a way as to render glorious for all time to come the history of Canada in connection with this war. I thank and congratulate our boys, our generals and our officers upon their achievements in this great struggle. I want, on behalf of the Canadian people, and as far as I can do so, to thank our Allies for the position that they have taken and the splendid victory that they have achieved, for justice, right and humanity. I wish also to thank our neighbours to the south, our great American friends, for the position which they have taken and the marvellous help they have given us in connection with the great victory we have won.

I hope that the hon. gentlemen who have spoken so well and so eloquently this afternoon will continue to stir up our friends of the Government and to see if there are no means that they can be induced to take to establish some sort of machinery that will produce something else than Orders in Council. Of those they have been producing a surfeit. I would say to my hon. friend from West Peterborough (Mr. Burn-nam) that that is one factory that I am willing to stop.

Now, Mr. Speaker, I desire to say a few things with respect to the subjects dealt

with in the Speech. The first thing that caught my eye was the reference to a Franchise Act. In this country we are all interested in the franchise. Every man wishes to be enfranchised, and the desire of every province is that everybody who is entitled to exercise the franchise in this country should be given that privilege. It is a new and striking revival, it is a hopeful sign, that this Government is talking of extending the franchise to anybody. Formerly the policy seemed to be the contraction of the franchise and the disfranchisement of as many as could possibly be struck off the lists, Hut now that sunshine and prosperity are ahead of us the Government is willing for a season-for a season, I say-to give us the franchise again. I would point out to the Acting Prime Minister and to the Government generally, that not one cent of money should be unnecessarily expended in this Country at the present time. We had one experience with a Dominion Franchise Act during the years from 1885 to 1898, when there were revising barristers to carry out the Act. In every province of the Dominion, I believe, there were two sets of voters' lists: one list prepared by the revising barristers in question for the election of members to the House of Commons at the expenditure of hundreds and thousands of dollars, and another set of lists for the election of members to the various provincial legislatures and to the municipal councils in the different towns and cities. That I think was an unnecessary waste. However, in 1898 the Dominion Franchise Act was repealed, and we reverted to the old system of one voters' list for the election of members to the Federal, the provincial and municipal . bodies. I submit that if it is the intention of the Government, through the medium of the promised Franchise Act, to reintroduce- the expensive method of preparing voters' lists which prevailed in years gone by, it is making a mistake, because it will mean not only the expenditure of a large amount of money but the imposition of unnecessary labour and worry upon the people in getting their names, not on one, bqt on two lists, and of fighting battles to get those two lists into shape, whereas there should only be one. If my advice is any good to the Government I suggest there is one course whereby duplication of lists and machinery can be avoided. In the province of Nova Scotia we have a very simple way of preparing these lists. 'In the cities of Halifax and Sydney, and in other towns of that pro-

front. The tribute which they have so eloquently paid to the courage, sacrifices and achievements of the Canadian Expeditionary Force will be proudly and gladly responded to by the people of this country. *From Ypres to Mons, an unbroken series of victories, often against the most, desperate odds, attests the valour which has won the unstinted admiration of the world, and which will for all time be the most cherished tradition of the Canadian people.

Mr. Speaker, when this House prorogued in 'May last, it is not too much to say the destiny of Canada, of the Empire, of the world, and of civilization as we understand it, hung visibly in the balance. The enemy, after his successful attacks with massed and overwhelming forces in March and April, was pressing down the Somme towards the sea. It was clearly his intention to , throw the British troops into the Channel,-to roll up the French line upon Paris and, as he thought, to bring the war to an end with one stroke. That was what the German Emperor had in mind when, a few months earlier, he predicted a victory for the German arms and, as he termed it, a good German peace. We all know what kind of peace that would have been. How serious the situation was, how nearly the plan came tb realization, may be known to members of this House when I say that, at the time when the Prime Minister and some of his colleagues visited England in early June, Allied strategists were carefully studying the problem involved in a possible evacuation of the channel ports and even the withdrawal of the Allied line to the south of Paris. But in July, by one of the most sudden and extraordinary reversals of fortune in all military history, the change came, and at the second battle of the Marne; under the genius of Marshal Foch, there was established a new turning point in world history, and the Allies in,all theatres ,of action were able to take the offensive.

Then followed in dramatic succession the unconditional surrender of Bulgaria, the collapse of Turkey, the capitulation of Austria-Hungary, and finally, after most desperate' and sanguinary fighting, the surrender of Germany on November 11, 1018. Without any desire to boast, we must not fail to bear in mind the mighty part played by the British Empire in this great struggle. It is not too much to say, Mr. Speaker making all allowance for the efforts of the other Allies, and particularly that of France, whose courage and heroism have been sublime, that the very shield and buckler of world defense against Prussian DSir Thomas White.]

tyranny and aggression have been the naval and military forces of Great Britain. The casualties, Mr. Speaker, show the degree of participation of the Allies in the closing battles of this war. It was, according to Marshal Foch, the illustrious and magnanimous generalissimo of the allied forces the hammer strokes of tt.a British army, including the Canadian divisions, which broke through the Hindenburg line and brought Germany to her knees, and it will be an eternal source of pride to tne people of this country that the first troops to enter Cambrai, which was the great bastion of German defence on the west wore the uniform of Canada. It will also be a source of noble pride to the people of this country that on the last day of the war Canadian troops entered Mons from which the British forces at the beginning of the war had been driven by overwhelming enemy forces. The old saying holds true, that Great Britain always wins the last battle in any war in which she is engaged.

It is a great thing, Mr. Speaker, to be' a citizen of the British Empire to-day, and it seems to me that in addition to the pride which this war must give us in our British citizenship there must also be a distinct gain in the sense of Canadian national unity by reason of our achievements in this war, and particularly those of our Canadian expeditionary forces overseas. The heroism, the sufferings, the sacrifices and common endeavours of Great Britain, of Canada, of Australia, of New Zealand, of South Africa, and of India, must also it seems to me bind together for all time, as with links of steel, those component parts of the Empire in loyal, loving, and indissoluble union.

Mr. Speaker, the war is over, and the Peace Conference is engaged in dealing with the most momentous questions which have ever come before a congress of world's statesmen. It would be premature to discuss the conclusions to which that conference should arrive. Suffice it to say that there are seated there the ablest statesmen in the world to-day. Canada is represented by the experience and wisdom of her Prime Minister, the Right Hon. Sir Robert Borden, and those of his colleagues who accompany him. The task is, indeed, a heavy one- the settling of the terms of peace, the recasting of the boundaries of European countries, the re-grouping of nationalities, and the establishment of guarantees and securities for that permanent peace of the world which is necessary if civilization is not to be wholly destroyed. There are, however, two observations which I desire to make.

In the first place, it is clear that this was a wholly unnecessary and avoidable war. All the bloodshed might have been spared. All the treasure which was spent, all the prodigious effort which was put forth, might have been devoted to the higher purposes of advancing civilization. All the suffering on land and sea, all the unspeakable anguish of wives, of mothers, and of families, need not have been. What caused this war? Who is responsible for this war? It is clear that responsibility for this war lies with the German people in their lust of dominion, and in the criminal and insane ambition of their Emperor and the military caste surrounding him. And if this is so, must not justice be done? I put forward the view that if those who are responsible for this war are not brought to punishment it will be the greatest failure of retributive justice in the history of mankind. The indictment before an international tribunal of those in authority in Germany and the other countries allied with her, before and during the war, their solemn trial for conspiracy against the liberties of nations, for breach of public law, and for the barbarities and atrocities which have been perpetrated by land and sea, would in my view do more to prevent th'e possibility of repetition of an attempt at world dominion on the part of any nation than any league of peace that can be devised by the genius or resourcefulness of statesmen.

There is another matter, Mr. Speaker, and that is that Germany and her allies by reason of their responsibility for this war, should be made to pay to the extent that they can pay for the war expenditure to which the Allies have been put, and 1 am glad to observe that that is the position taken by Great Britain. Canada did not desire to enter this war; we were forced to take part in order to save ourselves and to assist in saving the world. It seems to me therefore that those who are responsible for the war should be made to pay to the extent that they are able to pay for the expenditure to which Canada has been put. There is no sign, so far as I can observe, of repentance on the part of Germany to-day. On the contrary, there seems to be a certain degree of arrogance by reason of the fact that Germany was not invaded. A war indemnity spread over a long period of years would do more than anything else to bring home to the German people the enormity of the offence which they have committed against civilization. That is an

argument which I am sure they would understand.

Now, Mr. Speaker, the armistice having been declared, the Government of this country, like the governments of all other countries, was at once confronted with the problem of reconstruction. The Government could not, of course, forecast events. But we had taken concerted measures, to be put into effect immediately after the conclusion of peace. Those measures related to two principal things, demobilization and reconstruction. The problem was a great and difficult one. In one sense it is easier to get from a peace basis to a war basis than from a war basis to a peace 9 p.m. basis. We have a longer time to get to a war basis from a peace basis than we have to get from a basis of war to a basis of peace after the war. We had four years to mobilize,- four years to organize the industry, the agriculture, the commerce, the trade and finances of the country, upon a war basis. We have had a few weeks to demobilize and reconstruct, so that the country may be once again upon a peace basis. Consider the problem involved in demobilization. We have over 300,000 soldiers overseas, and 50,000 dependents, to be brought home, all naturally desirous of returning to their homes and their dear ones as soon as possible. It has been the policy of the Government, notwithstanding . the economic problems involved, to bring those men home just as quickly as possible; in order that they may again meet their friends from whom they have been separated for years. That has been the policy of the Government, and since November, 1918, over 50,000 soldiers have been returned to this * country, and some eight or ten thousand of their dependents. In addition, there have been demobilized in Canada, struck from off the strength of units here, some 50,000 additional. So that there have been demobilized, since the conclusion of the armistice, over 100,000 of the troops of Canada, and many thousands of their dependents. Consider the situation,-the scarcity of shipping, troops to be returned, not only to Canada, but to Australia, New Zealand, South Africa and India. There are forces still in all the principal theatres of war. Transport is required for supplies for those forces. There is a great shortage of world shipping. Notwithstanding that, notwithstanding the fact that it is winter, that we have but two ports on our Atlantic coast, that we have limited railway facilities, we have been bringing back our men at the rate of 25,000 to

30,000 a month. In addition to that, many convalescents have been brought back. Many thousands have been tieated in our hospitals. The problem is a great one, complicated by after-war conditions, but I submit, Mr. Speaker, to this House and to the country, that it is proceeding quickly and satisfactorily. Then, consider the question of reconstruction. Canada

had engaged in munitions and in other war industries some 200,000 men and women. Immediately after the armistice was declared 120,000 or 130,000 of those immediately lost their positions, and became unemployed. They were engaged in munition industries and in other war industries, which necessarily ceased as soon as the war came to an end. The problem for the Government was to find business to replace business represented by the output of the munitions and war industries which had come to an abrupt cessation. In addition to the 120,000 or 130,000 out of employment there were returning, as I have said, some 25,000 or 30,000 soldiers per month. It was winter. The problem which the Government has had to deal with has been to find, so far as possible, employment for all those men and women who lost their positions and for the soldiers who are returning home. That is the problem to which we had to address ourselves.

I appeal, Mr. Speaker, to the verdict of results. I do not know of any country today, whether it is Great Britain, France, the United States or any other country, that is in a better position, or has less industrial unrest within its borders, than Canada to-day. The hon. gentleman who preceded me referred to the labour situation in Canada, and -I desire to say this, not only as showing the efforts which the Government has made, but the attitude and loyalty of labour, that there have been,

I believe, less labour disputes in this country since war broke out in 1914 than in any other country in the world. Take the situation in Great Britain to-day, take the situation in Belgium, the situation in France and the situation in the United States-there is great industrial unrest. We have, Mr. Speaker, considerable unemployment in this country, but I believe that when the measures of which I shall now inform the House are in full effect and operation, as they will be within the next few weeks, all the slack of unemployment will be taken up, and that there will within the next two or three months be an actual' shortage of labour in many parts of Canada.

What are the measures which the Government have taken in its reconstruction problem. Let me mention a few of them. When the munition industries ceased our steel plants found themselves without a market for their product. We at once took up with the railways of Canada the question of placing orders for steel rails, and within a short time after the conclusion of the armistice, orders had been given by the Government of Canada, on behalf of the Canadian National Railways, on behalf of the Canadian Pacific and on behalf of the/ Grand Trunk system, for 200,000 tons of steel rails at a cost of $13,000,000, as the Minister of Railways (Hon J. D. Reid) informs me. We took up also with them the question of placing as many orders as they could for rolling stock and locomotives, irrespective of the question of expense, because it was an immediate and urgent matter, having regard to the labour conditions. The Grand Trunk railway and the Canadian Pacific railway are manufacturing their equipment in their own shops. The Government railways have given orders for 2,500 cars and 25 locomotives. That will keep our car equipment industries, with those businesses that are allied and associated with them, very busy. In addition to that, the Government will present to this House within the next few days, estimates providing for an extensive programme of railway betterments and improvements and the construction of branch lines, especially in the West.

To give an idea of the amount of money which will be involved in the programme which I have outlined, it will be sufficient to say that it is estimated that there will be required $35,000,000 for rolling stock and material such as steel rails. In addition to that a sum exceeding $20,000,000 will be needed for railway extensions and more than $10,000,000 for betterments and improvements. The Government lost no time in taking up these important plans which are useful and advantageous from the national standpoint in adding to our national railway plant and equipment and which will, at the same time, provide employment for thousands of men.

In addition to that, Mr. Speaker, the Government provided by an Order in Council, for a loan of $25,000,000 to the provincial governments for the purpose of promoting better housing conditions throughout the Dominion, and this action Parliament will be asked to approve. I am happy to say that the loan will be taken advantage of by all, or nearly all, of the provincial governments.

FEBRUARY 25, ISM 31

I have been so advised. It will not only materially improve the living conditions and the health of the people but in carrying out that policy there should be provided work for thousands of those who lost their positions when our munition and war industries came to an end and of our soldiers returning from overseas. In addition to that the Government at once resumed the great public work of the construction of the Welland Canal and the completion of the Trent Valley canal. My hon. friend the Minister of Public Works (Mr. Carvell) will tell you, when he addresses the House, of the programme which he has in view and of the preparation of the plans and specifications in anticipation. .

Then, in order that Canada may be in a position to participate in the export trade arising out of reconstruction in Europe the Government promptly constituted a Canadian trade mission in London, with its counterpart, a Canadian trade commission in Ottawa. It is necessary to-day, and it will be necessary possibly for some years to come, for Canada to provide credits to a large extent, in connection with the business which we shall obtain overseas. In order that our agricultural and manufactured products may be sold, it will be necessary, owing to the condition of exchange between Europe and America, that Canada, like the United States, shall provide credits from which our products shall be purchased. We have actively and continuously taken up the question of furnishing credits for the purchase of our agricultural products, of our wheat, our meats, our cheese and our other products from the field. In addition, we have offered to provide credits whereby France, Belgium and some of the Balkan countries, shall be placed in a position to buy of the products of Canadian agriculture and industry. The figures involved in these transactions are large. I desire to say that I agree with my hon. friend the leader of the Opposition ip his expressions regarding the desirability and the necessity of spending no money wastefully or unnecessarily, but I also desire to say that for the next year, two years, or three years, those in charge of the Government of this country will require resourcefulness and courage to raise whatever money is necessary to establish the credits which will enable this country to market its products. The people will stand behind the Government in that. It is absolutely vital to the continuance of our agricultural and business prosperity.

I have spoken of several of the measures which the Government has taken in order to meet the situation which has arisen owing to the sudden conclusion of the war. The speech from the Throne indicates the further measures, all of a constructive character, which we are taking for the purpose. A Bill is to be presented providing for aid in the construction of highways. I do not know of any more useful or immediately productive public work that could be undertaken by the Government than the improvement of the highways of Canada. This is a country of enormous resources, the greatest being agricultural. The significance and importance of good highways in connection with our farming communities are too well known to this House to make it necessary for me to refer to the matter at any length. A large amount of money will be provided by the Government for the purpose of aiding, by way of subsidies, the several provinces, in the improvement of their highway system. That will not only be beneficial to the country itself, but it will provide a great deal of work for those who need employment.

It will not be necessary for me to speak on the other features of the speech from the Throne-the department of Public Health, to which reference has been made by hon. members who have spoken before; the measures which we shall take in the interest of returned soldiers, and the other policies indicated in the Speech. These matters will all be taken up in due course when they come up before the House for discussion.

My hon. friend has spoken about the Franchise Act. He is evidently of the opinion that there is machinery in all the provinces whereby women are enabled to vote. I think he is in error as to that. In Quebec, New Brunswick and Prince Edward Island I believe they do not have that machinery. Further than that, I understand that the measure brought down at the last session of this House was declaratory of the principle and that it does not provide the machinery which will effectually enable women to vote in Dominion elections. There is another reason why a Franchise Bill is necessary at this session. The War Time Elections Act was to last during the war and during the period of demobilization. It should remain upon our statute books until a satisfactory Act takes its place.

Mr. Speaker, I was impressed with what my hon. friend said in regard to the importance of taking our duties in this House with high seriousness. The world has come

Mr. A. R. McMASTER (Brome):

Mr. Speaker, when a death occurs in a family the sympathy of friends is always precious, and to the Liberal family sitting on this side of the House the sympathy extended by our friends, irrespective of party allegiance, is a very dear and precious thing, and I wish on behalf of hon. gentlemen sitting to your left, Sir, to tender my sincere and hearty thanks.

To the eloquent eulogy to the work done in the field by our Canadian army offered by the leader of His Majesty's Government, I say, Amen and Amen, but may I be allowed to add- something else. There is another side, alas, to the medal: during the last four years we have often thought of John Bright's great saying, when, speaking in regard to the Crimean War he said:

The. Angel of Death is abroad in the land. One can almost hear the beating of His wings.

To the members of this House, and to the men outside the House-aye, and the women too-who have lost their dear ones, I think it is only proper that the representatives of the people at large should give their humble, their hearty, their sympathetic condolence, and the prayer that the Comforter of all will comfort them in their grief.

I w'as delighted to hear, Mr. Speaker, the adherence of the leader of the Government to the plan of a League of Nations, because I believe that without a League of Nations, without some international organization for the enforcing of peace, we are likely to have a recurrence of war. I agree with him when he says that the immediate cause of this conflict was the boundless ambition of the German empire and its military caste, and

the desire for domination of the Prussian people. Yes, that was the immediate cause, but there were underlying causes deeper than that, Mr. Speaker. There was first f all this fact-that we lived in a world where force was the ultimate arbiter, and until we live in a world where force is not the ultimate arbiter, that is to say force used by one nation against another, wars are almost bound to occur. It occurs to me, Mr. Speaker, that before the war broke out the civilized world was like a western mining camp, where each man was dependent for his own safety and security upon the revolver or the bowie-knife he carried. But in a western mining camp the good sense of the community revolted at such a condition of affairs, because it always led to murder and sudden death. Therefore, they erected Judge Lynch's Court, and Judge Lynch called upon the respectable citizens to band together and put down the outlaw, the bandit and the desperado. That is the situation in the world to-day. Judge Lynch's Court, the League of Nations, is in process of formation, and it is for all the well-intentioned peoples of the world to rally round a league to enforce world-wide peace. And it is something to be said for the North American continent that the great protagonist of that idea comes from this side of the Atlantic. I refer to the work of Woodrow Wilson whose name will go ringing down the ages as that of a man who tried to reconstitute the world on a better basis. He has been supported by nearly all the great men of the Motherland-by Lloyd George, by Lord Robert Cecil, by Viscount Bryce. Viscount Bryce said in a letter which he wrote to a great meeting for the purpose of promoting the ideal, "we must destroy war or war will destroy us." Not only was the fact of force being the only arbiter one of the causes of war, but there was the vast interest which certain classes in every civilized nation had in manufacturing armaments; there was a personal interest in keeping up international friction in order that private gain might ensue. And last, but perhaps not least, was secret diplomacy, the international relations of practically every country in the world being conducted not by the representatives of the people, but by a small group in each country. Time after time this was the case; instance after instance might be cited where the different civilized nations of the world did not know to what their governments had committed them.

I have a suggestion which, in view of the financial experience of the Acting Prime Minister (Sir Thomas White) and my own inexperience, I offer with a good deal of diffidence, but it has such a common sense ring about it that I believe he and 'the rest of the members of this House will regard it as reasonable. We have a vast expenditure outlined. I do not believe that the Canadian people know to-day in what financial position we are, and I suggest that the Acting Prime Minister, who carries also on his broad shoulders the heavy burden of being Finance Minister- a burden which, I am sure, is grievous to bear these days-will bring down and place before the House at the earliest possible moment a succinct statement of the liabilities of this country. It is quite true that we may have to spend vast sums for reconstruction and in order to provide employment during the term of reconstruction.

But we must be careful about it. A large amount of this money will be borrowed. If we borrow too much the lenders will begin to look askance even at our boundless resources and even at the ability of those who are conducting the affairs of the country, and say: We cannot lend you any more money. That would be a sad condition; so I think it would be proper and fitting that such a statement be laid before the House at an early date.

We all hate taxation. In a few days I will have to write a cheque, with great regret, to the order of the Receiver-General of Canada for income tax. Although personally I am glad that it is as small as it is, as a citizen I know that it should be a great deal larger; and if I may offer advice at this time to the Finance Minister it is that the income tax of the country should approach the scale of the income tax in the United States and in the United Kingdom. So far, the rates of taxation imposed on large incomes in Canada have been away below the rates imposed in the United States and in the United Kingdom.

It has been stated that the War-Time Elections Act should remain on the statute book of Canada until it is superseded by some other Act. I take issue with that statement, and I believe that my feelings will be shared by many sitting on the opposite side as well as by those sitting on this side of the House. The War-Time Elections Act, Mr. Speaker, is a blpt on the statute book of 'Canada. I am not allowed, I believe, to characterize as iniquitous, legislation passed by the House of Commons and the 'Senate and signed by the Governor-General. But I will take the

words of the minister (Mr. A. K. Maclean)- now, there are so many ministers that I have forgotten what department he is in charge of, but, he acted as Minister of Finance last session, and in bygone, happier days he acted as financial critic of the Opposition. He said, when this War-Time Elections Act was under consideration that it was a horrible Bill, and I believe that the Minister of Public Works (Hon. F. B. Carvell) who sits beside him, characterized it in even stronger language. I call upon these men and I call upon every man who loves liberty and justice and British fair play to see to it that this War-time Elections Act is wiped off the statute book of Canada at the earliest possible moment. It was passed for the purpose of winning an election. It was a tampering with the electorate by a body of men who proposed to appeal to the electorate after it had been tampered with. It goes to the very root and to the very basis of our representative institutions. I ask the Acting Prime Minister to he worthy of himself; I ask him to be worthy of those high ideals which he has placed before us with such eloquence and, I believe, with such sincerity, and not to allow his leadership to be sullied and besmirched by the retention of this Act upon the statute book of Canada.

Now I pass to a more agreeable task-I would far rather be complimentary, Mr. Speaker, than denunciatory. It is, perhaps, presumptuous for me, a member of the same age as the member for Calgary (Mr. Redman) and the member for Fort William and Rainy River (Mr. Manion), to attempt to say anything about their remarks. But their speeches were of such high quality, so eloquent, and breathed such a true spirit of harmony and unity and proper national aspiration, that I must be allowed to give them a meed of praise. Their tone was admirable. Both asked for national harmony and national unity, and the member for Fort William and Rainy River, who showed that the Surgeon in Arms is as eloquent with his tongue as with his pen, told us, almost in the words of Abraham Lincoln, that a house divided against itself cannot stand. May I continue the quotation. Abraham Lincoln went on to say that this house shall not fall; it shall cease to be divided.

There are divergent influences among the Canadian people. There is a difference of faith; there is a difference, apparent rather than real, of economic interest, and there is a difference of tongue. All these5 differences lead to misunderstanding. The

French have an expression: De tout com-prendre est de tout pardonner-to understand everything is to forgive everything. What can we do to bring the nation together, to promote understanding?

As far as religious differences are concerned, the solution is very easy. We have only_ to put in the background everything that divides us and to put in the foreground everything that unites us. Although I come of Scotch Presbyterian parentage, I do not pretend to be a theologian, but I suppose some remnant of theology is in my blood, and I submit that the things upon which we are in accord are infinitely more important than the things upon which we differ. I, therefore, imagine that the way to get over the unfortunate differences which have existed between Roman Catholics and Protestants in the past is to think more of our common Christianity and less of the differences in our creeds which divide us. As far as our economic differences are concerned, those differences would be better got rid of by the application of the principle of liberty and freedom than by the application of the principle of restriction. As far as the language difficulty is concerned, why, it is no difficulty at all. I am very familiar with that part of the province of Quebec where French-speaking man and English-speaking man live side by side on neighbouring farms, and there is no difficulty. Why is there no difficulty? Because they understand each other. I remember once being called upon to visit a small place lying on the boundary between Quebec and Ontario. I went into a Scotch woman's house, the house of a Scottish Canadian. I was talking to her son, and he was not only bilingual, but trilingual. He spoke French and he spoke English, and he had the Gaelic. I say this, Sir, that never have I come in contact with English-speaking people living right amongst French-speaking people but I have found that both not only respect but like each other. Why? Because they know each other. I would suggest, as one means of healing all breaches which may have existed in the past, in order that we may go on rejoicing to that future which I hope Providence has in store for us, that we English-speaking people should endeavour as far as possible to learn and have our children learn French, as the Frenchspeaking people in this country learn and nave their children learn English.

The statement is made that Labour is not altogether satisfied in this country. I

agree with the Acting Prime Minister when he says-and he does honour to the workers of Canada when he says it,-that during the war there was less labour disturbance in Canada than in any other country in the world. But is the worker entitled to be dissatisfied as things have been in the past? I put this to you, Sir. Before the industrial revolution, when the man,-the journeyman and the apprentice,-worked side by side with his master, the man, as a general rule, had a modest sufficiency to eat and to wear, and he lived on a basis of more or less equality with his master. Then came the industrial revolution, and mankind harnessed the power of steam, and afterwards harnessed the power of electricity and he increased his power of creating wealth ten times, aye, I think, twenty times. But what resulted to the worker? The worker did not live with his master; he did not work side by side with his master; but he was depressed into a mere " hand," and the master became the great factory employer or great manufacturer. The worker, although by his skill, aided by electricity and steam, he was able to create twenty times the wealth that he did before, remained very little better off than he was before the industrial revolution began. That is to say he had a fair, but not an adequate sufficiency of clothing and of food; and before, by the force of trade-unionism, he raised his pay by combining against his master, he was not as well off as he was before the industrial revolution occurred. Now, the workman feels that he is living in a new world. The British workman, the French workman, the Canadian workman, each feels that his sacrifices on the field entitle him to expect that the world will be a better place for him to live in; that no longer will the great portion of the most arduous work in the world have to be performed for a bare pittance. I, for one, do not blame him. I, for one, want to see the workman get a greater proportion of the wealth which his labour has created. There will, in this connection, have to be co-operation, and I feel certain that members interested in this subject, as well on the Government side as on this side of the House, will be glad to study the Whiteley report in which is outlined the system of industrial councils in which men representing the masters and men representing the workers will sit for the purpose of a common management of the industries in which they are engaged.

The hon. member for Calgary (Mr. Redman) spoke in somewhat severe terms of the Bolsheviks. The popular idea of a

3i

Bolshevik is a wild-eyed anarchist looting a bank. I am not sure whether the common view taken in this country of the Bolshevik is altogether correct. I think that perhaps there is another side to the question, and as this is the great forum where truth and exact knowledge should be brought before the people, I take the liberty of referring the House to some articles which are appearing in the Manchester Guardian from an eye-witness from Russia. I think the Manchester Guardian will be admitted by all to be one of the very great organs of public opinion in the old land. The writer of the articles which appear in the Manchester Guardian was, since the autumn of 1916, engaged in relief work under the auspices of the Society of Friends' War Victims' Relief Committee, and he spent a large portion of his time in Russia, learned the language completely, and has a great deal of interest to tell us. I believe that the House will be interested if I read a short extract from an article which appeared in the Guardian on the 22nd of January of this year. It is entitled " A Rural District under the Bolsheviks." The writer says:

Of all the industrial and economic enterprises in the district none suffered less change than the Co-operative Society, which had been started before the war under the old regime, and which continued unchanged under the Provisional and Kerensky Governments, and enlarged its membership 500 per cent under the Bolsheviks. In the time I speak of the Cooperative Society had virtually become a monopoly, and had either put out

If the Minister of Agriculture (Mr. Crerar) is here, he will see that when he bought seed for distribution and consumption in the Northwest, he was acting just like a Bolshevik.

-and naturally placed the order with the Cooperative Society. Purchase of medical requirements in Moscow for the numerous Soviet hospitals was done through the same channel, members of the Soviet often travelling with the buyers in order to guarantee good faith.

The profits of the Co-operative Society, which were reduced to minimum, but which on the millions of roubles of turnover amounted to a considerable sum, were devoted to educational purposes. Evening classes were started in modern languages, geography, history, and the Russian language; in bookkeeping and business training; subsidies were granted for agricultur-

al colleges and schools, and scholarships were founded for the gymnasia (secondary schools.)

The educational programme of the Bolsheviks was ambitious, but it was this ambitiousness which commended it to the people. The Bolsheviks aimed at starting a school in every village and increasing the number of gymnasia in the district and founding a university, but in this project they were stopped by lack of teachers.

"The article goes on to say:

Under the stricter clays of the old regime the Boy Scout movement was not permitted in Russia, but latterly was allowed a certain amount of liberty under police supervision. Under the Bolsheviks, however, it flourished, and troops were formed in many of the cities and department towns.

It will be interesting to those who live in the dry province of Ontario to know how the Bolsheviks dealt with the illicit liquor traffic:

The Russian public had not been accustomed to reliable law courts or a just police administration. Under the Bolsheviks, as under the Provisional and Kerensky Governments, the villages appointed their own police when necessary, choosing the oldest men as those most Hkely to have wisdom and discretion in human affairs. As an instance of this may be mentioned the way in which the old regime and the Bolsheviks dealt with illegal vodka distilling. In the days of the Imperial police anyone caught in the act was arrested by the police, but, as everyone knew, each offence had its price, except that of political propaganda, and a sum of money amounting maybe to several hundred or several thousand roubles, would settle the matter, and until the time of blackmail came round again the business could continue unmolested, however much the public might be against it. Under the Bolsheviks a man found distilling vodka would not be punished but his still would be taken from him, the public would be informed of his guilt, and the amount of grain which the food committee would allow him to buy would be limited to that needed , for his o\Vn domestic use.

I am placing these facts before the House, "not because I am here to defend the Bolsheviks, but because I think it is well to realize there may be two sides to every question, and we should not be carried off our feet in denunciation of other people before we really know what they are doing. As I understand it, Bolshevism is a form of socialistic government in which the lower classes-I should not use that expression because it is obnoxious in this country-in which the manual workers have assumed to take the whole control of the government to the exclusion of the intellectual and trading classes. I think that is morally wrong because it is government of the people by only part of the people, and I think it unwise because it eliminates from the government classes which might have [Mr. MoMaster.l

a considerable contribution to offer. It has been suggested that Bolshevism must be put down. What is meant by that? Does it mean we are to send more men to Russia for the purpose of fighting? If that is so, I would say first of all that it is a course the wisdom of which is very doubtful. Outside interference may tend to solidify the people under the Bolsheviki, and perhaps in endeavouring to put down disorder we may possibly trample on liberty.

You will remember, Mr. Speaker, the situation at the time of the French revolution. You will remember how the French revolutionaries were denounced, and properly so, not only for their excesses but for other things as well by the civilized countries of Europe. You will remember how kings banded themselves together for the purpose of putting down the French revolution and how the revolutionary spirit of France, the free spirit of old France, enabled the barefooted armies of the republic to conquer all their enemies, and they were not conquered until the first republic had become an Empire and until Napoleon had seized the reins of power and turned the enthusiasm of the French revolution into channels for his own imperialistic benefit. And therefore I say, we come to this: We have Canadian soldiers today fighting in Russia; we have sent Canadian soldiers to Siberia, where they are fighting. I do not propose at this moment to condemn the Government for sending them, but I say that the Government must at the earliest possible moment let the Canadian people know why Canadian boys have been sent there. Certain explanations which have been given do not explain. It has been suggested by some one that they are sent there for the purpose of promoting Canadian trade. I for one would rather that in all the future history of Canada we never sold a single mowing machine or any other article of manufacture or commerce there than that the blood of a single Canadian lad should be spilled in vain.

There is another matter in this connection which must be inquired into. It is a relatively small force that has been sent. I do not know whether my opinion is right or not, but I believe I am right in saying that this force was so small that it could have been recruited through the voluntary system. I believe I am right in saying that drafted men who expected to be sent to fight the enemies of civilization in France

Sir SAM HUGHES:

Did not Great Britain borrow four billion dollars from the United States of America?

Mr. McMASTER:

She did. She borrowed very heavily. I do not pretend for an instant that she did not have recourse to borrowing, but the main point is that Great Britain borrowed less and raised by taxation more than the other countries that have followed the protectionist practice. Why should the lamp shine in the window, why should the latch string be on the outside of the door, because we know that there are men in this House who differed from us on the question of how best to raise men for the Canadian army? They had .the right to their. opinion. We had the right to ours. I would, on this occasion, follow the generous example set by the leader of the Government who said in substance that where he differed from the late, lamented Sir Wilfrid Laurier on public questions, he would leave it to history to decide, that we were too near events perhaps to arrive at a proper judgment. We will follow that example and we will leave to history to decide whether the way of raising an army advocated by gentlemen on that side or the way advocated by us was the proper and better way. But that day has passed. That question is settled, please God never again to be raised in our lifetime.

The great question before the Canadian people in this era of reconstruction is going to be the tariff. Some people say: Leave the tariff alone until we have reconstructed. What a ridiculous suggestion that is! Here is a house that has been blown down by a cyclone. Some people say that the house should be built of wood and others that it should be built of brick.' Those who want to built it of wood say: Do not discuss the question of whether it shall be built of wood or brick until we have built it again of wood. That is the position of people who advocate that reconstruction should ante-date the decision of this question.

What is the attitude of the Liberal party on the question of the tariff? I know7 that an hon. member from Alberta and an hon. member from Manitoba were somewhat critical in their remarks upon the success which the Liberal party had achieved in reducing the tariff. I frankly admit that I wish that during the years from 1896 to 1911 we had reduced the tariff more. But you saw', Mr. Speaker, just as soon as the

guiding hand of the Liberals was taken off the tariff how the duty was increased by 7i per cent even in war times. We are just and fair, and, of course, as former Liberals, you cannot help being just and fair. You will also remember that there was a great reciprocity campaign. Some bird has whispered that the loss of some of those who were identified with the Liberal cause prior to 1911 was due to that reciprocity campaign of 1911. Be that as it may, you remember that Sir Wilfrid Laurier and his party went down to defeat on the issue of reciprocity in natural products with the United States. After all, my friends, if the Liberal party is not giving- satisfaction in the direction you would like, there is no reason why you should hang back with the crowd that is going in the other direction altogether. This is the view of the tariff taken by the Liberal party and voted upon by every member of this House on the 23rd of May, 1917:

That wheat, wheat flour, and all other products of wheat be placed upon the free list.

I do not know whether trading in wheat with the United States is quite as disloyal a thing as it used to be because I understand that not so very long ago an Order in Council was passed allowing trade in wheat with the United States. But then, shortly after that, I think the millers will tell you, there was some sort of an embargo placed upon this trade which prevented the carrying out of that Order in Council.

That farm Implements and machinery, farm tractors, mining-, flour and saw-mill machinery and repairs for .same, rough -and .partly dressed lumber, illuminating, lubricating and fuel oils, cement and fertilizers be added to the free list.

Of course, there will be the retort in some LTnionist's mouth: We have put tractors

on the free list. Yes, tractors have been put o* the free list up to $1,400, hut if you put the tractor on the free list, why did you not put the plough, which has to be pulled by the tractor, on the free list? How could you logically differentiate between the tractor and the plough? Surely it is not because it is only the comparatively well-off farmer who can afford to have a tractor while every poor fellow who goes on the land requires a plough? Surely that is not the reason? I do not believe it is. It is just due to that fact that I described before; there was just a little wind rising in the west and the helmsman took advantage of it to throw the boat's head a point or two to starboard. But, let me continue:

That staple foods and food products (other than wheat flour), domestic animals and foods therefor, be admitted into Canada free of duty

when coming from and being the product of any country admitting like Canadian articles into such country free of duty. .

That substantial reductions be made in the general tariff on all articles imported into Canada, except luxuries.

That the British Preference be increased to fifty per cent of the general tariff.

I say to my separated brethren: Go to the Acting Prime Minister., who is also the Finance Minister, place the Hansard containing my few humble remarks before him and say to him: Now, Sir, are you willing to go as far as the Grits will go? Then govern yourselves accordingly. Do you remember that old story in ancient writ of how the prophets of Baal and Elijah worked together one day on Mount Carmel? You remember how Elijah said: "If Baal be the Lord serve him, and if Jehovah be the Lord serve Him." If your principles are for liberty and low tariff you know on which side of the House you should sit. If protection and high tariff be your God, then stay where you are.

Mr. SPEAKER:

Mr. MICHAEL CLARK (Red Deer):

May I ask the hon. gentleman if he has the number of votes cast in that division, and if he can tell me how many members of the then Liberal party voted for that resolution?

Mr. McMASTER:

I have not that information. I was not then a member of the House, but I am sure the information is within the knowledge of my hon. friend.

Just one other remark and I shall have finished: There are perhaps those who

are exercised in their minds whafc they should do. Perhaps a feeling of loyalty- mistaken, I think-to an absent leader may have some effect upon them. To them, through you, Mr. Speaker, I address these words: Let it be not said of them, as was said of Lancelot by Tennyson:

His honour rooted in dishonour stood,

And faith, unfaithful, kept him falsely true.

On motion of Hon. Mr. Carvell the debate was adjourned.

On motion of Sir Thomas White the House adjourned at 10.28 p.m.

Wednesday, February 26, 1919.