March 14, 1921

L LIB

Rodolphe Lemieux

Laurier Liberal

Mr. LEMIEUX:

feature of the fishing industry will be considered at the proper time. But at the moment I wish to call the attention of the Government to the necessity of providing the fishermen with freezers in various local centres; and I would suggest that those freezers should be organized on the cooperative system. That system has been adopted in the Old Country and is working very satisfactorily there. I again ask the Government to look into this matter and to establish for our fishermen these local freezers to assure them a continuous supply of the necessary bait.

Coming back to the question of natural resources in general, Mr. Speaker, and to the remarks I made at the beginning of my address this evening, namely, the opening up of the interior of the Gaspe peninsula, I claim that in my humble judgment the best asset in the natural resources of Canada it not to be found in the fisheries or the mines, but in the population itself. The best asset of Canada is its population, particularly if it is a population of settlers. Now, Sir, the opening up of the interior of the peninsula of Gaspe would add to that district at least fifty large centres. Many years ago that country was surveyed by engineers and traversed by missionaries and voyageurs, who were unanimous in their view that we had between the two ranges of mountains a splendid valley, with good soil, where there could be planted at least fifty parishes, that could attract settlers and maintain them on the land. Mr. Speaker, is it too much to ask that the pioneer population of Canada, which has shown so much attachment to the land of its ancestors, should be favourably considered in connection with the railway policy of the Government? After all, Canada is the greatest farm on the continent of America, and we must look to the farmer as the mainstay of our country. I claim, Sir, with some pride, that the race to which I belong is above all a race of farmers. Think, then, what the result would be if by the construction of a railway in the interior of the Gaspe peninsula fifty parishes were established; think of the industry of that population, of the increase in its numbers, and of the national wealth it would represent. Leroy-Beaulieu, the great economist-and many who came after him have said the same thing -once stated that the capital value of a man, a woman or a child could be placed at one thousand dollars. Mr. Speaker, I want to help my good friend the Minister of Finance (Sir Henry Drayton) in the dilemma in which he finds himself

to-day. He has to find a means of raising revenue to meet the financial condition of Canada, the serious railway problem of Canada, the interest charges on the national debt. The greater the population of the country the greater will be his revenue, because the country is developed in proportion to the extent and activity of its population.

Now, Sir, the fifty parishes which I would like my hon. friend to establish in the interior of Gaspe will soon increase their numbers, because the race from which I spring has demonstrated that, once given a start, it never stops. At the time of the cession of the country to Great Britain the census of Canada showed, according to our historians, a population of 60,000 or 70,000; to-day the French Canadian population of the province of Quebec only is, if my information is correct, about 2,500,000. The same economist, Leroy-Beaulieu, stated a few years ago that the rate of increase in the French population in Canada was unique in the history of the world; that the population was doubling itself every thirty years. Well, that means that in thirty years the French Canadian population of the province of Quebec will be 5,000,000, and in sixty years, 10,000,000. And what is sixty years? Even a century is but a moment in the history of a nation. Now,

I come back to what I said a moment ago: the best asset of Canada, its greatest wealth, is its population-and, I may say, its farming population. Let the Government develop a policy of expansion; let the Government encourage colonization, the taking up of farms, and we need not worry about the future of Canada. These are my last words, Mr. Speaker; I did not intend to speak at such length, but as I was speaking of the population of the province of Quebec, I could not but give a few facts which are in themselves quite illuminative.

Topic:   A NEW ANGLE TO THE SOCKEYE SALMON HATCHERY QUESTION.
Permalink
UNION

Henry Arthur Mackie

Unionist

Mr. H. A. MACKIE (East Edmonton) :

Mr. Speaker, I believe I have a first duty to perform in coming to the defence of the hon. Minister of Immigration and Colonization (Mr. Calder) after the onslaught that has been made against him during his absence by the hon. member for Pontiac (Mr. Cahill). If I may judge by the gentleman's prophecy, I doubt very much that he would be a better minister of immigration than the present minister; for in Saskatoon, when the hon. member for Pontiac was there during the boom days, this is what we found on his barn door sign:

Frank S. Cahill says Saskatoon will have

100.000 population in 1920.

The population of Saskatoon at that time was about 40,000; it is now about 20,000.

I wonder whether the other 20,000 pulled out with my hon. friend from Pontiac and followed him to his constituency, or whether in the manipulation of their affairs he drove them out of the country. That is a matter for him to answer, but in view of that record and that prophecy, I say that the Minister of Immigration has nothing to fear.

Next, Sir, I would like to say a word in connection with the remarks made by the hon. member for Maisonneuve (Mr. Lemieux), who says that what is wanted is a government. I always thought that you could judge people by their works; and if I read aright the political history of this country, during the period of fifteen years that hon. gentlemen sitting opposite were in power, they were quite as impotent as any administration that is known in the political history of Canada in taking any initiative in developing our natural resources. This Government has gone through a period of great difficulty, it is now about to adopt policies of development and settlement, and it is not amiss that the members of this House should, from time to time, bring to the attention of the Government the various matters which agitate us personally in our provinces. Kipling has been quoted this afternoon on iron ore. We have in Alberta

360.000 Kiplings who say that that province, properly treated in the development of its natural resources, will rival any other province in the Dominion in fifteen years. Those are the Kiplings we have.

I intended to take you this evening from Athabaska Landing on the river Athabaska down to the Mackenzie basin and back and tell you what is disclosed to the eye in that province; but all the various matters which I could speak of on that trip have been spoken about by members of their respective provinces, and it will suffice for me to say that all that has been said by the respective members for their respective provinces-we have all those things included in the province of Alberta. I will, therefore, dispense with going through the itinerary. I intended to take you down to Pelican Rapids, a water-power which rivals many of the water-powers to be found in other provinces. I intended to take you down to Pelican gas wells where they pick the ground with a stick and light the gas which flows to cook their meals. I intended

to take you down to Grand Rapids which, if harnessed, would rival the Niagara Falls, and I intended to take you down to McMurray where you have 500 times the world's normal consumption of oil to be taken from the tar sands. I expected to show you what wonderful wealth we had in the development of the timber of that country. I intended to pass you on the Mackenzie basin where 4,000 square miles of oil have been discovered by the Imperial Oil Company and others. But I will refrain from going into those matters tonight, because the subject has been covered so well by other members for their provinces, that it suffices for me to say that we have everything you have spoken of and it only remains for you to come and make the trip which I have made in a canoe and you will see all this exposed to the eye, it only requiring somebody to tell you what you do not know yourself or for you to see what you do know yourself.

My complaint is a real one and I join with the hon. member for Maisonneuve (Mr. Lemieux). I want action. But there is a difficulty which has been brought to the attention of this House, one that is real, and it was brought to our attention by the hon. member for Lethbridge (Mr. Buchanan) who, by the way, finds himself in a very awkward position to-day by having the farmers from his constituency coming to Ottawa to ask him to protect them on their hay. He did bring to the attention of this House that, so far as this resolution deals with the western provinces, a great difficulty stands in the way of the adoption of a policy by this Government, in that the western provinces are clamouring for their natural resources. It seems to me that if we have reached such an impasse between the provinces and the Dominion in dealing with that question, we had better slit the Gordian knot in two and have done with it and then let the provinces adopt whatever policy they like with regard to their mineral resources, or else the Dominion of Canada should take a stand and immediately make it possible for us to have both population and the wealth taken out of the country which is teeming with it and which can be seen by anybody as he who runs and wishes can see.

The transportation difficulty is one that is always thrown up to us in the western country and it is a real one, but it is one that ought to be solved in the course of a few years if any of those natural resources are given a great impetus by this Government. The labour question is one that has

been solving itself very rapidly within the last couple of years.

I should like to assist the hon. member for Maisonneuve (Mr. Lemieux) in his railway project in Gaspe and in the development of the natural resources of Gaspe; but it strikes me that there is only one question in which the Dominion Government has any jurisdiction in the province of Quebec and that would be the fisheries, except for tidal waters. If I am mistaken, I may be corrected by the hon. gentleman, but I assume the natural resources of Quebec belong to that province, and that question is one for Quebec to deal with except as regards such assistance as the Dominion Government is actually giving to-day to the various provinces in a general way, being a plan more to co-operate or co-ordinate with the provinces than a plan to develop as an initiative from the Dominion itself. My hon. friend's speech, therefore, this evening would have been better delivered in the Provincial Legislature than in the House of Commons.

I have one subject about which I am extremely touchy, and it is the oil question which I hope to be able to speak upon this evening, under the heading of another resolution. I should like to see the question of our natural resources settled as soon as possible or this Government take a stand in the development of our natural resources The resolution, therefore, is one that I am prepared to support if it comes to a vote, because I think it is time that some action should be taken. For instance a great deal has been said as to the coal resources of Alberta. Let me tell the House that the" coal resources are not entirely confined to Alberta; you will find coal deposits at Birch mountains in the Mackenzie district, Cariboo mountains, Norman, Great Bear lake, Peel river; and the same belt extending from Fernie to Brazeau and Yellow Head pass continues on the east of the Rockies up to the Laird river. None of those deposits have been discovered by the Dominion Government or by any effort of the Dominion Government whether under this regime or any other regime; they have been discovered by prospectors who have gone through this country and who have made their reports which have been generalized by some department at Ottawa. The central plain of the Mackenzie has oil, gas tar sands, gypsum and anhydride, marble, limestone, salt, coal and brick slate. To the east are all the minerals usually found in metamorphic rock such as gold, cobalt, nickel, iron, maganese mica,

copper, etc. All these again have been discovered by individual prospectors and there has been no policy by this Government or any other government to assist in their development. What we are asking under this resolution is that this Government should announce its policy in regard to these natural resources. That cannot be done very easily unless you determine first of all whether the western provinces are entitled to their natural resources pr not. Personally, I should like to see those natural resources passed over to the western provinces as fast as possible. We have a great deal of difficulty, being 3,000 miles away, in getting the attention we should have. If we write a letter, it takes two or three months before we get a reply and before the red tape has been done away with in this city, we are handicapped by finding that we have to start all over again in some other department. We should, therefore, like to see the natural resources handed over to the provinces so that we could give those natural resources the attention they deserve. It is not for me to say to this Government what it should do. One of two actions should be taken- the natural resources should be transferred to the provinces or the Dominion Government should take action in developing them.

Before taking my seat I wish to make one observation upon the criticism which has been offered by the hon. member for Maisonneuve (Mr. Lemieux) in regard to the railway charter which the hon. member for Matane (Mr. Pelletier) sought to get before the railway committee. If I remember rightly, the attitude of the railway committee was this: that the hon. member for Matane should produce evidence that the incorporators or directors of the company were men of means, financial men, that they did not want a charter merely for exploitation purposes, and that the railway which they proposed to build would not at some time or another be foisted upon this Govcernment as other railways have been from time to time, making public ownership in this country merely the taking over of defunct railways instead of railways constructed by the people for the people. That evidence was not produced before the committee by the hon. member and as a consequence the charter was refused.

Topic:   A NEW ANGLE TO THE SOCKEYE SALMON HATCHERY QUESTION.
Permalink
L LIB

Georges Parent

Laurier Liberal

Mr. PARENT:

Does my hon. friend

know of a single case in which evidence was produced before the railway committee as

to the financial standing of the incorporators?

Topic:   A NEW ANGLE TO THE SOCKEYE SALMON HATCHERY QUESTION.
Permalink
UNION

Henry Arthur Mackie

Unionist

Mr. MACKIE (East Edmonton) :

I do

not know of any such case but I do know this, that after private individuals have embarked on a railway enterprise in this country to which the Dominion Government was not a party in any shape, whatsoever, and after people have settled along that line of railway, these individuals and the people who have so settled have come to this Government and said: It is your moral duty to take over this road. We say today in the face of the fiasco which has been permitted in this country by all Governments in their railway policy that this Government should put its foot down on granting charters to private individuals who may open up the country and after people have settled along the line tell this Government " it is your moral duty to take over the road."

Topic:   A NEW ANGLE TO THE SOCKEYE SALMON HATCHERY QUESTION.
Permalink
L LIB

Georges Parent

Laurier Liberal

Mr. PARENT:

Does my hon. friend not

know that there is a general law applicable to every citizen of this country?

Topic:   A NEW ANGLE TO THE SOCKEYE SALMON HATCHERY QUESTION.
Permalink
UNION
L LIB

Georges Parent

Laurier Liberal

Mr. PARENT:

The Railway Act under which the holders of charters are required to fulfil certain obligations and under which the public interests are protected, a general law stating the conditions by which a company shall be incorporated and shall fulfil its obligations to the country.

Topic:   A NEW ANGLE TO THE SOCKEYE SALMON HATCHERY QUESTION.
Permalink
UNION

Henry Arthur Mackie

Unionist

Mr. MACKIE (East Edmonton) :

I quite agree that that might be a solution. The Railway Act might be amended in such a way as to say who shall and who shall not get a charter arid if that is a solution I shall be very glad to assist my hon. friend in bringing it about. We have in Alberta the Alberta and Great Waterways Railway. The Provincial Government came down here and begged the Dominion Government to take over that road because it was in a state of liquidation, but there was only a small population at the end of the steel at McMurray, nevertheless the people said: Since you got us to come here and promised us a railway we are entitled to have the Dominion Government take over the road, so as to keep faith with the people. It is true it was not your promise but itis your duty to take over this road as part and parcel of the National Railway System. The same thing happened with the Edmonton and Dunvegart railway and it was only after refusal upon refusal that

the Canadian Pacific took over the road under a working agreement for operation only. And so it has been all along. We are told by the Minister of Railways demand after demand is made upon his department that certain private lines should be taken over by the Dominion Government as a moral obligation so as to give service to the people along these lines that were built by private enterprise. Hon. gentlemen opposite should remember these things when they have an opportunity to speak on the railway Estimates, when they will no doubt be castigating this Government for its policy of public ownership. As a matter of fact the only policy of public ownership that we have is the taking over of defunct private enterprise, not because we want to but because of mistakes of past administration to which the railways are a living testimony. The Government has no alternative but to take them over. The Government therefore should put its foot down on that sort of thing. If the hon. member for Matane or any other hon. gentleman can produce the evidence required I would support him as a -member of the Railway Committee, or if any hon. gentleman is willing to come forward and suggest a remedy that is feasible the difficulty can be solved.

In conclusion I wish to say that the resolution has my hearty support. I hope the Government will take heed of it and adopt a policy of either giving over to the provinces their natural resources or taking some step themselves to develop them so that the provinces will benefit directly and the Dominion indirectly.

Topic:   A NEW ANGLE TO THE SOCKEYE SALMON HATCHERY QUESTION.
Permalink
L LIB

William Duff

Laurier Liberal

Mr. WILLIAM DUFF (Lunenburg) :

Mr. Speaker, at this late hour I do not intend to take up a great deal of the time of the House, but I could not sit in my seat without expressing an opinion or two on the important question now before the House. I think every hon. member will agree with me that the question of the natural resources of this country is one of the most important that this House could discuss now or at any other time. I could spend the whole time which I intend to take in discussing the natural resources of only my own province, the province of Nova Scotia. We have in that province our great coal mines in the island of Cape Breton, in the county of Pictou, and in your own county of Cumberland, Mr. Speaker. We have also our great lumber industry, our great fishing industry, and

our great agricultural industry. But it is not my intention at the present time to discuss the natural resources of my own province, because they are well known not only to the people of Canada but to the whole civilized world and also because there are other hon. gentlemen who can discuss them a great deal better than I can. I intend to spend a few moments in going further afield. I think it was the hon. member for Maisonneuve (Mr. Le-mieux) who said that East is East and West is West, and I intend to go west for a little time and speak on the natural resources of the far western province on the Pacific coast. I had the pleasure during last September, October, and November of spending about eight weeks in the western provinces, and it was certainly a most interesting trip. One reason, no doubt, why I found it so interesting was because it was my first trip west of Toronto, and I assure you, Mr. Speaker, as I passed through the great province of Ontario and the Prairie Provinces of Manitoba, Saskatchewan, and Alberta, and came at last to British Columbia, I was seized with the idea that Canada certainly was the greatest country in the world, a country of which every man, woman and child in this Dominion may be justly proud. My only regret was that I had to spend such a short time in the different great cities and towns in those western provinces.

During my visit to the great province of British Columbia I was struck with the immensity of her natural resources. Owing to my early training I was perhaps impressed more by her great fishing industry than anything else. During the time at my disposal I had the opportunity of discussing first hand this great industry with people who were interested in it. I heard what they thought of it and of its great future if proper steps are taken for its development. But most of all I was struck by the fact that the present Government was not doing its full duty, or its partial duty, by the people of British Columbia, in the matter of the fisheries of that province.

We had the pleasure this afternoon and evening of listening to the speech of the hon. member for New Westminster (Mr. McQuarrie). I followed it with attention, and I must congratulate him on his grasp of the situation with respect to the salmon industry of that province. I agree with him that that industry is capable of

much greater development, and I hope that his prayer to the Minister of Marine and Fisheries (Mr. Ballantyne) will be answered but I have no faith that it will. I noticed that when he first rose to speak he endeavoured to eulogize the Minister of Marine and Fisheries. He said there never was such a minister in charge of that department before. I regret that the Minister of Marine and Fisheries is not present to hear what I have to say. However, I will not speak for myself, but will use the words of the hon. member for New Westminster himself. As I said, he began by eulogising the minister, declaring that he was the greatest man that was ever in charge of that department in Canada. If this is the fact, why is it that two years ago the hon. member for New Westminister (Mr. McQuarrie), found it necessary to bring to the attention of the minister a state of affairs in his province which was anything but creditable to the department? On looking through Hansard I find that the hon. member made a very excellent speech in this House about two years ago on the address in reply to the speech from the Throne, and in the course of his remarks he referred to the great salmon industry of British Columbia, calling to the notice of the Minister of Marine and Fisheries, the same gentleman who is at present in charge of that department, certain grievances in British Columbia, and in no uncertain tone informing the minister what he expected to be done. Now, it seems to me that if, after two years, the Minister of Marine and Fisheries has not heard the cry from Macedonia, it is not competent for the hon. member for New Westminster to get up in this House and congratulate the country upon having the best Minister of Marine and Fisheries with which this great land has ever been blessed. What did the hon. member for New Westminster say on the occasion to which I refer? I read from Hansard of 1919, at page 426, the following:

"I am very sorry indeed that he did not And it convenient to come to our province. All the signs point to trouble in connection with the British Columbia fisheries. In connection with those fisheries we have had Royal Commissions, we have had International Commissions, we have had investigations of all kinds; hut the situation does not appear to have yet been cleared bp. Great dissatisfaction exists not only in connection with the Fraser river fisheries, but also as regards the whole of the fisheries of British Columbia, and I tell you, Mr. Speaker, that the fisheries of that province amount to something."

The rest of the hon. member's speech this evening, after his preliminary re-

marks eulogistic of the minister, was only a criticism of the Government and the Marine and Fisheries Department. After bestowing some praise on the minister, he began, as he did in the speech from which I have just quoted, to criticise the administration. His whole speech, of something like an hour and a quarter, was critical of the Minister of Marine and Fisheries and his department at Ottawa. The only good thing he could say in reference to the officials of the department was the fact, in connection with the great salmon industry of British Columbia, that they were getting rid of the seals in the waters of the Fraser river because, he said, the seals were destroying as many salmon as the fishermen were catching. I presume the hon. gentleman was speaking from the book, and from information given him by one of the officials of the department. But I should like to know, and I am sure you would be interested to know too, Mr. Speaker, how in the name of all that is good and great any official of that department can tell how many salmon the seals destroy, or how they can establish the fact that the salmon industry has been injured by these aquatic enemies of theirs. I admit that the seals must feed on some kind of fish, but the hon. gentleman will find that in addition to salmon they have other varieties of food. He said that one of the good things to the credit of this department in connection with the salmon industry was its endeavour to blow up the seals on a certain reef in the Fraser river. It seems to me that if that is all that we can credit the department with, so far as this great industry is concerned, they are condemned out of the mouth of the hon. member for New Westminster.

My chief reason for rising to-night was to say a word or two on behalf of the great halibut industry of British Columbia. During my tour in the West, in company with my distinguished leader (Mr. Mackenzie King) and the two other hon. gentlemen, who were of the party, the hon. member for Quebec East (Mr. Lapointe), and the hon. member for North Essex (Mr. Kennedy), I had the pleasure of staying for three days in the city of Prince Rupert, and whilst there, not only members of the Board of Trade and citizens generally, but fishermen of th,e district, interviewed me and stated their grievances, requesting that not only I but the other members of our party would take up their case on the floor of the House. The halibut fishery of British Columbia is a very important one and is capable of great development, and I say

56i

without hesitation that it is a public scandal that the present Government, especially that of the Minister of Railways and the Minister of Marine and Fisheries, should treat the fisherman of Prince Rupert in the way they have been doing. I repeat, Sir, and emphasize this statement, that it is a public scandal and a disgrace for these two hon. ministers to treat the fishermen of that city in the manner complained of, and if they cannot better conditions there, I think it is their bounden duty to resign their portfolios and let others take charge of the affairs of their departments. What has happened? As I say, the halibut industry of Prince Rupert is a highly important one. For instance, on the first of this month no less than 415,000 pounds of halibut were landed at that port. But what did the fishermen find when they came to the city of Prince Rupert to land and sell their catches? They were told by the business men of that city, the men who handle fish and ship it to points in Canada as well as to Chicago, Boston, and other ports in the United States, that there was no means of transportation to cope with their catch. This quantity of fish, as you will readily realize, Mr. Speaker, would require something like about 150 refrigerator cars, but the Department of Railways had no cars, or practically none, to handle this great catch. And that has been the case for the last three or four years. Now, is that the way for a government to treat people engaged in a great industry like the halibut industry of the British Columbia coast? It certainly is not, and the Minister of Railways merits condemnation for the manner in which he has dealt with this industry.

The hon. member for Maisonneuve (Mr. Lemieux) referred to an article in the Canadian Fisherman. In order that the House may appreciate the exact condition of affairs, I should like to refer to this article. It appears under the caption "Strangling an industry," and the sub-head reads: "How the fishing industry of the North Pacific is being bluffed and humbugged by the Canadian Government Railways." Now, Sir, this House was startled a few days ago, when the Estimates were laid on the Table, to find what the deficit on the Canadian National railways would be this year. But, Mr. Speaker, it is not surprising that there should be deficits in the affairs of the country, and particularly in the Department of Railways, when the present Minister of Railways is handling the great transcontinental system of Canada as

Topic:   A NEW ANGLE TO THE SOCKEYE SALMON HATCHERY QUESTION.
Permalink
UNION

Hume Cronyn

Unionist

Mr. HUME CRONYN (London) :

I would not venture to intrude in the debate at such a late hour did I not wish to point out to the House that pertinent suggestions, and I think constructive suggestions, have already been made which might aid in solving some of the questions which have arisen in the course of this debate- not indeed that they could hope to solve anything like all of them, because, as you well know, the debate has ranged over a wide field. I do not think, for instance, that any of the suggestions made could

solve the question of the shortage of refrigerator cars; but in other respects I believe the establishment of a National Research institute would be a start towards solving the problem of the utilization of our natural resources. I do not pretend to traverse the ground which has been covered in former sessions in this respect, but I would just like to recall very shortly what has been done up to date and what remains to be done.

Four or five years ago the Research Council, an honourary advisory body, was appointed to look over the field to see what could be done and to advise the Government on action. Their report-and I will not delay the House longer thqn to simply mention the final conclusion-was in favour of the establishment of a research institute. Subsequently parliamentary committees sat during two sessions to consider this question, and then brought in a unanimous report in favour of the establishment of such an institute. That report was debated by hon. members on both sides of this House, and I think representatives from seven provinces spoke in favour of the report, which was unanimously adopted by the House. I am bound to say, Sir, that my disappointment last session was exceedingly keen when Main Estimates and Supplementary Estimates appeared without one copper being provided for the establishment of such an institute. I am perhaps the more delighted after such a disappointment to see in the Speech from the Throne this session, the, to me, two magical words, "Scientific research;" and my reason for rising tonight is to urge upon the Government, and particularly upon the right hon. Minister of Trade and Commerce (Sir George Foster) speedy action along this line.

It may be asked how such an institute would help in the development of our natural resources. The Research Council prepared, and the Parliamentary Committee considered, a Bill to be brought before the House looking to the accomplishment of the purpose I have mentioned, and the very first function of the institute as stated in that Bill is as follows:

The Institute shall have charge of:

(a) researches undertaken to promote the utilization of the natural resources of Canada.

Such an institute would undoubtedly be the rallying point where all such matters could be referred, to be discussed and upon which appropriate action might be recommended. Because in such an institute not only would laboratory tests be carried

on, but when those tests showed that a certain process was technically successful, the Institute would apply a commercial test as well to determine whether such a process would be profitable.

Not only has this House, but I think it is fair to say that the country at large, has approved and applauded the establishment of a research institute. I have had occasion to go through several provinces since last session, and in more than one of them I was asked to give addresses on this subject. I found an exceedingly lively interest displayed in the question, and even in those provinces where perhaps the predominating industry is agriculture the members of various clubs and other institutions appeared to be fully awake to the importance of this movement. And our manufacturing industries as well are alive to its importance and are anxiously looking forward to a step being taken in this direction. Only the other day I noted, as perhaps some other hon. members may have done, the discovery that pitch pine could be made into excellent pulpwood for the manufacture of paper. Heretofore pitch pine if mixed with spruce spoiled the pulp, but by scientific research, carried on in the laboratories of the pulp and paper companies, a method was discovered of treating it alone, when it was found that not only was its fibre somewhat longer than that of spruce, but that properly treated it made an excellent grade of pulp. What does that mean? It means, as I understand it, that in the limits already handed over to operating companies the supply of pulpwood has, through this discovery, been increased from twenty-five to forty per cent. So there is a natural resource of our country put upon the market simply by scientific research. "Well," it may be said, "that was done by a private concern. What need is there of a research institute?" It is only a week ago that I received from the Pulp and Paper Association a strongly worded resolution in favour of the establishment of a research institute so that their members might take advantage of its work and go further afield into discoveries such as I have just mentioned.

I want to close my remarks with a personal appeal to the veteran Minister of Trade and Commerce under whose immediate control this matter comes-and I regret that at this late hour he is not present -so that he may give his personal attention to the proposed Bill and perhaps see his way clear to introduce it into the House. Not long ago my hon. friend from Red

Deer (Mr. Clark) termed the right hon. minister the Nestor of the House-and rightly so-for of whom could it be more truthfully said in the flowing words of Homer?

The smooth tongued chief from whose persuasive lips sweeter than honey flowed the stream of speech. ,

I trust that he will add to his many honours by this piece of progressive legislation, and then would we, in classic, phrase, wish that his years should be as his eloquence, Nestorian.

Topic:   A NEW ANGLE TO THE SOCKEYE SALMON HATCHERY QUESTION.
Permalink
L LIB

Gustave Benjamin Boyer

Laurier Liberal

Mr. GUSTAVE BOYER (Vaudreuil-Soulanges) :

(Translation.) Mr. Speaker,

I have listened with much pleasure to the speeches that have been delivered on this question of the country's natural resources. We have heard about coal mines and gold mines, about colonization and fisheries; in a word, about all those things which, if systematically developed, would give birth in Canada to an era of still greater prosperity. But of all those natural resources, one seems to have been forgotten-I mean the most natural of all natural resources, the maple industry from the standpoint of maple sugar and syrup making.

In 1904 I had the pleasure to speak for the first time about this industry which had been neglected and seemed likely to disappear. That first speech had aroused some hilarity in this House. Honourable members did not at that time attach any importance to the serious side of this question; however, the following years awakened public attention and both the Dominion and Provincial Governments-especially that of the province of Quebec-after taking hold of the question, made quite a success of it.

In 1904, the revenue derived from our maple industry hardly amounted to $1,200,000. Last year, it is marvellous, we must acknowledge it with pleasure, the maple products have increased remarkably in quantity and yielded more than nine million dollars. I think that of all the natural resources of this country there are none that pay more than this one, taking into account the short space of time required to produce and its amazingly easy sale.

As I have said, when this question was raised for the first time in this House in 1904, it was not taken in earnest. In the following years I brought up the same question and finally succeeded in getting an amendment to the Food Inspection Act which to a certain extent prevented the adulteration of sugar and syrup.

This amendment was not sufficient yet to give all the required protection to the farmers, to the sugar and syrup producers, but at last in 1913 or 1914 the government of the day thought proper to listen in earnest to the request of the sugar producers of Quebec and Ontario, and they altered to a large measure the amendment to the Food Inspection Act. Since then we have seen all the provinces, encouraged by this protection, give more serious attention to this industry. In the past the farmers produced a pure maple syrup which they would send to the cities, and this the manufacturers would compound with other syrup or sugar, or other ingredients, and out of a gallon of pure syrup they would manufacture ten or fifteen gallons of this spurious article, which they would then sell for the pure product. The name was all that remained of the genuine article. Large quantities were thus made which were sold at the same figure as the pure maple product. With the help of societies established in the province of Quebec, we succeeded in a large measure in stopping this adulteration, I do not say that the present Government have done all in their power to have the law observed, but I must render justice to the late government, especially to the present Postmaster General, who then did his utmost to have the amendment that I had suggested to him, accepted. Now, these city establishments, where pure maple sugar and syrup were turned into compounds, and which were sold for the genuine article have disappeared.

Last year the Montreal Bank of Commerce made a report whereby the value of the total output of this article was stated to be worth nearly a million dollars.

At the present time, I must add, that if that industry was developed on a larger scale, if the farmers would apply themselves to this industry as they do to all the others, they could not even yet with all their united efforts turn out enough maple sugar and syrup to meet the demand. We have an enormous demand from the United States, we also have much demand from European countries where our product has only been known for four or five years. Unfortunately we can not meet all the needs. Yet we have in the province of Quebec and in a part of the province of Ontario, a large number of maple groves which might be worked to advantage. We have in the province of Quebec admirable sugar bushes which might be worked with larger profit; but they are left idle. There are in the country about 55,000 owners of

maple bushes who could carry on this industry, but barely 15,000 do so. Now, when I see that this industry brought last year nine million dollars to the producers, I feel convinced that no industry could pay better than this one, not even excepting dairying, which is nevertheless reputed to be our national industry. And why? Because the maple sugar and syrup crop is gathered in a short time, barely three weeks, during a season when the farmer has almost nothing to do, and from bushes generally growing on rocky land which would otherwise give no return. Even now, many farmers-notwithstanding the possibility of a good yearly return, and attracted by the high prices for wood owing to the dearness of coal, cut down their maple trees for fuel. They thus destroy a capital which could give them a yearly income of much greater value than could the return from the capital represented by their sales of fuel wood if invested at six per cent. They realize at one time more than the sugar and syrup would bring them, but it is once for all, never to be repeated, for what is destroyed is destroyed for ever, and is a dead capital.

This motion gives me the opportunity to call the attention of the House to this eminently national resource, essentially ours. Apart from the Eastern States of the American republic, and some parts of the province of Ontario, nowhere in the world can such a succulent product be found as our maple sugar. Our syrup and our sugar are not known. When they become a thing of ordinary consumption, no one will want to use any other sugar than ours, I mean as a sugar de luxe. That is why the Government should undertake an educational campaign.

Both the Federal and the Provincial Governments have done something for that industry. In the subsidy given to the provinces, the Federal Government has allowed a small amount which the latter are to distribute according to their judgment. The province of Quebec has made the most of this small grant.

I claim that the Dominion Government, while they have done something in the right direction should do more. They should increase the subsidies of the provinces for the encouragement of agriculture.

I believe that the Government should give larger grants and impose more rigorous conditions. The Quebec government have made a good use of what has been given to the province; and I believe the

Dominion Government should be encouraged by the results obtained and might increase the subsidies.

Now, with a view to securing results from the help granted this industry, it would be well to apply the Adulteration Act very vigorously. I know that during the last six years, the enforcing of this Act has been much neglected. During the war, the general food commissioner had called to Ottawa the president and directors of the Pure Maple Sugar Cooperative society and had asked them not to be too exacting, not to require the strict enforcement of the law, for, as he said, sugar war scarce and people had to be rationed; representing to them that it would be better not to make complaints and allow the work of time to better the situation. We were agreeable to this request, but unfortunately as usual tolerance bred license. To-day it has become necessary that the law should be enforced rigorously and that all those who adulterate maple sugar or syrup should be very severely punished. Should the Government be willing to return to the very good practice of treating the offenders with severity, we would have increased production. If the farmers accomplished anything in that in- ' dustry these last year, it was because the prices were very high, and they felt themselves protected. The price for sugar has even been excessive, I admit: sugar has been as high as 35 cents a pound and syrup $3,00 a gallon. This was due to the circumstances, and we understand that this can not continue. The farmers realize thoroughly that they will have to return to more normal prices, and that the industry will not suffer thereby, for the consumer has also to be thought of. The reverse would be detrimental to the producer, for should the prices remain at the high level, consumption would likely decrease considerably, because everybody would not be able to pay such prices. The farmers are very reasonable; they are ready to admit that the prices might come down and yet afford a sufficiently remunerative profit. However, prices must not fall disastrously low, as happened in 1914; for in that case the farmers would give up sugar-making. I believe that if we encourage the farmers, if we show them that we mean to encourage them, they will persevere in this industry, and it will be all benefit for us ali, as a large output will tend to regulate the prices. I deem that the Dominion Government, along with the educational propaganda in favour of agriculture which they

carry on with such good results, should also do their share in this campaign and not leave it all to the provincial authorities. All the provinces have not the same degree of interest in this question. The Federal Government, who know the needs of each province, since they make a constant and thorough study of them, should give the Department of Agriculture all necessary authority for the spreading of knowledge useful to this industry, and to impress the farmers with the idea that instead of being cut down, as they are too extensively now, the maple bushes should be preserved with care. The Conservation Commission aims at reforesting certain parts of the country. It is much easier to preserve our forests than to do any replanting. In certain parts of the country bur beautiful forests are being destroyed without mercy, without judgment, without purpose, I make bold to say. Our maple forests are precious not only from the, viewpoint of what they are worth as timber or fuel, but also from that of the benefit they can annually yield to the gatherer of the sap. They should be husbanded with judgment.

I am very much pleased that this motion should afford me an opportunity of speaking on this question. I have often addressed the House on this matter, and as I mentioned at the beginning of my remarks, the first time I did so, it was not without causing some hilarity.

Hon. members were not accustomed to hear about maple syrup and maple sugar, but later on they ascertained that this industry was flourishing in the country. Who would have thought it, Mr. Speaker; a commodity that was yielding only $1,200,000 two decades ago, yielded as much as $9,000,000 last year. The dairy industry, the returns from which amount to millions and millions of dollars does not yield one-tenth of the profits accruing from this industry, if the amount of labour and the season at which the work is done are taken into account.

I think the Government should see to it that this natural resource be taken care of. Our coal measures, our gold mines, our fisheries, all those natural resources must be developed, the future of this country is dependent upon it; however when since creation we have at hand an industry whose development is so easy and which is a gift of God, let us try to get from it all possible returns, not only for ourselves, but for the country as a whole. Having developed that industry upon a large scale,

we shall be able to make the most of the good name of our maple sugar and maple syrup abroad, where it will be said: Here is a product peculiar to Canada. We received lately from France orders for the shipment of tons of maple sugar. From Chicago we were asked for twenty-five thousand pounds of sugar in one pound loaves, for sugar yellow in colour so that they might call it "Golden Sugar." We could not fill those orders. Production is too meagre yet.

At this time, the United States are coming into Beauce to get hundreds of thousands of pounds of sugar and yet I must state that sugar is carelessly manufactured in the county of Beauce. I see that the hon. member from Beauce (Mr. Beland) is here; I am pleased to make these remarks in his presence. There are some parts of the province of Quebec where some splendid sugar is manufactured- sugar of the first quality. In the county of Beauce, there are localities which turn out good sugar, but many places where bad sugar is made in the province of Quebec are to be found in Beauce. We have done our utmost in that direction, however that district is so large and the producers are so numerous that they could not be taught in a few years. With the help of the hon. member from Beauce, of the local newspapers and of the schools which were opened in that district, we are in hopes that the farmers there will eventually occupy a foremost place in that industry. The county of Beauce alone turns out as much maple sugar and maple syrup as all the rest of Quebec and that part of Ontario where there is sugar-making, and the producers of that district will presently be in the forefront of that industry as they are in other farming activities. When we read history, when we learn in what manner our fathers endeavoured to develop that industry, tapping the maple trees with axes and letting the sap flow into wooden buckets we acknowledge their process was a very primitive one. However they have not yet reached that point in Beauce; they collect the maple sap in very small vessels while it would be much advantageous to collect it in larger ones. Yet, I do not wish to speak ill of Beauce whose progressive inhabitants will discard ere long the ways of the past, and I shall proceed with my disquisition. Americans are coming into that county to get a dark sugar we would not place upon our table and we do not like to see manufactured

any longer in the province of Quebec. The association I just mentioned to you is above all an educational association. We advocate betterments which ought to be introduced in the sugar industry. What we succeeded in doing elsewhere for butter and cheese with the result that we now have good butter and good cheese, we would like to do for maple sugar; our desire is that good maple sugar be turned out in every part of the country. Americans are coming into Beauce to get dark sugar for which they pay as high a price as they would pay for good sugar. The sales of these products in that district amounts to seven or eight hundred thousand dollars. That sugar is shipped to the United States where it enters into the manufacture of chocolates and especially into the making of chewing tobacco. Why do they use that dark sugar which has not undergone all the changes which good sugar has to undergo? It is because that sugar, although not in such a condition as to be placed upon our table, still preserves the original taste of the maple, all the relish of the sap. Such is the reason why. But that is only fortuitous and should not be our ultimate aim.

The county of Beauce is one of the most beautiful districts of the province, and it is the duty of its inhabitants, who are in many respects, a very progressive people, not to be content with present satisfactory prices, but to endeavour to improve their products; not only would they get the same fair returns, but they would also add to the good reputation of their province. It is a very large district, containing im-mence forests, and therefore, we would not be justified in charging its people with apathy. There are great handicaps which prevent the proper development of this vast territory and its progress is retarded by the high prices which are being paid by the adjoining country for inferior products.

Our observations, however, do not apply to all producers in the district of Beauce; on the contrary, there are some who could teach a good many things to the other manufacturers of the province.

I trust that my hon. friend from Beauce will take my remarks in good part and that he will communicate them to his constituents in the same spirit as I have given them.

In the county of Vaudreuil, which is very small as compared with the county of Beauce, we have but a few sugar factories. But our products are of the highest order and they always command the maximum prices. Why? It is because our

farmers are using modern and national methods. They are well rewarded and very much encouraged thereby. I have seen in my constituency, maple bushes of only a few acres, to give their owners a profit of six or seven hundred dollars.

I am calling the attention of the House upon this matter and I am sure that the hon. Minister of Agriculture, who is present, will understand what I mean, because he has in the person of his strict and official representative, the Deputy minister a man who knows particularly well the maple sugar industry.

I * was pleased to notice that the Hon. Minister of Justice has listened to my remarks. He belongs to the province of Quebec; he knows what our maple sugar is and I am sure that his thought will not concentrate exclusively on coal or gold resources, which are sometimes very disappointing, and that he will devote a little of his influence to the development of the maple sugar industry.

Topic:   A NEW ANGLE TO THE SOCKEYE SALMON HATCHERY QUESTION.
Permalink
UNION

Herbert Sylvester Clements

Unionist

Mr. H. S. CLEMENTS (Comox-Alberni) :

Mr. Speaker, I promise that at this late hour I shall occupy the attention of the House for only a few moments. I do not intend to go fully into the subject matter of the resolution; I rise only to reply to the hon. member for Lunenburg, who, I regret, is not in his seat. I regret also that I have not been able to follow the hon. gentleman who has just spoken (Mr. Boyer).

The hon. gentleman for Lunenburg (Mr. Duff) made the bald statement that he spent eight days in British Columbia. I assume that he spent probably one day in Victoria and two in Vancouver. He said that he spent three days in Prince Rupert; the remainder of the time would be occupied in travelling between these three points. Having spent this much time in our province, the hon. member assumes that he knows the fisheries of British Columbia. Well, in my opinion the hon. member knows very little of the fisheries of British Columbia. It might be as well for him to give his attention to the province from which he comes; I hope he knows more about the fisheries of his own province than he does of those of British Columbia.

The hon. gentleman indulged in a tirade against the Minister of Marine (Mr. Ballan-tyne) and the Minister of Railways (Mr. Reid). He laid great stress on the shortage of cars at Prince Rupert, and he discussed the halibut situation and the salmon situation in British Columbia. Why, one would think that the hon. gentieman had been

raised in that province. I should like to discuss the natural resources of British Columbia and those of the Dominion generally but time will not permit. I want to say, however, to the hon. member for Lunenburg and to all hon. members of this House that the late Liberal government from 1895 to 1911 had created the greatest combine in connection with the fisheries of British Columbia that ever existed. I represent probably three-quarters or more of the total fishery districts of British Columbia, the remainder being represented by the membr for Skeena (Mr. Peck). Let me say to the member for Lunenburg that in 1911 when Prince Rupert budded out as a growing town, having been practically planted by the late government-I lived in Prince Rupert and I know the conditions -a merchant or a hotel keeper could not buy a single fish in Prince Rupert for home or hotel use. That condition was the result of the combine brought about by the late Liberal government so far as the fishing interests of the province were concerned. When the Government of 1911 took office, through the efforts of hon. Mr. Hazen, the Minister of Marine and Fisheries, and of myself as a private member, regulations were put into force with a view to breaking up the combine in British Columbia, and Prince Rupert was put on the map as a fishing town, being allowed the privilege of having American and foreign fishing boats unload their catches, take on bait and buy supplies and equipment. That was accomplished by the present Government.

Now, so far as the canning industries were concerned, under the old conditions it was useless for any individual fisherman to apply for a cannery license or a seining license-and I am speaking of purse seining or drag seining; even gill-net seining-the whole thing was controlled by this combine. But things were changed when the Liberal government went out of office in 1911. The present Minister of Marine and Fisheries (Mr. Ballantyne)-all credit to him-threw the fisheries of British Columbia absolutely open so that any one might, by paying the necessary fee, obtain a license to can or to fish. The present Government and the Union Government absolutely broke up that monopoly which had been created by the Liberal government prior to 1911, and today we have absolutely open fishing in that province.

I regret that I did not have the opportunity of listening to the remarks of the hon. member for New Westminster (Mr. McQuarrie). Since 1911 I have had the

honour of a seat in this House as a representative from British Columbia. I have always, from that time up to the present, advocated that the rivers and streams leading up to the natural spawning grounds of the fish in that province should be cleared and the natural spawning grounds preserved so that the fisheries could be kept up and maintained. But, Sir, from 1895 up to 1911 practically every stream entering into the natural spawning areas of the fish in that province had been jammed, and not a dollar had been spent in clearing them or providing for the care of the natural spawning grounds. But I want to give the present Government credit for spending a good deal of money in this connection. Since 1911 steps have been taken to remedy this condition, and so far as I know the great maj ority of these streams to-day are cleared so that the fish can ascend to their natural spawning lakes and areas.

I suppose my hon. friend from New Westminster has discussed the hatchery situation in British Columbia and in the Dominion. We have always maintained-of course there have been arguments pro and con-that the hatcheries of British Columbia-and I suppose the same would apply to the Atlantic coast-have not been rendering the service which many of the cannery men would like to see rendered. But I agree with some of the professors and some of the cannery men that large rearing ponds in connection with our hatcheries in British Columbia would be a great asset.

My hon. friend from Lunenburg censured the Minister of Marine and Fisheries for the neglect of the halibut fisheries of British Columbia, stating that they had been depleted and were practically lost to the fishermen. Well, I venture to say that if the hon. member were in his seat he would not be able to tell me where the halibut grounds in British Columbia are. I say that in all sincerity, and without any desire tc reflect upon the hon. member in any way; I want to be as kind to him as I possibly can. Now, many who know the situation better than I do have always contended that Hecate straits belong to the Dominion.

But that area, as many hon. members will know, lies between the mainland and Queen Charlotte islands, and by all natural events and observations, that water, in my opinion at least and in the opinion of many experts, belongs and always did belong to the province of British Columbia and the Dominion of Canada. The late Government-and I am sure the hon. member for Shelburne and Queen's (Mr. Fielding)

knows the situation as well as I do-knew that all that water of Hecate strait was fished out by the Americans, and the immense halibut banks which existed in those waters have been absolutely destroyed. The halibut which is brought into Prince Rupert to-day is all caught beyond the three-mile limit and many hundreds of miles from Prince Rupert and, indeed, there is a little halibut caught on the west coast which finds its market in Prince Rupert.

I regret the hon. member for Skeena (Mr. Peck) is not in his seat. There is no doubt there was a few months ago a certain shortage of cars in Prince Rupert to handle the fishing trade, and I say, in all sincerity, that if I believed the Minister of Railways (Mr. J. D. Reid) was deserving of censure in that regard, I would certainly give it to him; but so far as I can judge the situation, the minister is not to be censured at all. Last session, orders were given for refrigerator cars; I think money was voted for the purpose, and if the car companies fell down in the delivery of those cars, it seems to me that the matter was entirely up to the management of the railways and not to the Minister of Railways. The number of cars which were ordered had not been delivered, but the management of the railways divided up what cars they had throughout the Dominion; Prince Rupert received its fair share of refrigerator cars, and so far as I know to-day no great complaint is coming from Prince Rupert as regards any shortage of cars in that city.

I rose simply to answer the hon. member for Lunenburg (Mr. Duff) in regard to the fishery question. I would certainly like to have had the opportunity and pleasure of discussing many of the natural resources of Canada and especially the pulp industry, because I have many large pulp concerns in the constituency which I have the honour to represent, and there is room for many more. I hope I have not censured the hon. member for Lunenburg too much, but I trust that before he rises again in this House to discuss the fisheries of British Columbia he will get a little better posted upon the subject. If he does so, it will be more in his interest and the interest of the province from which he comes.

Topic:   A NEW ANGLE TO THE SOCKEYE SALMON HATCHERY QUESTION.
Permalink
L LIB

Henri Sévérin Béland

Laurier Liberal

Hon. Mr. BELAND (Beauce) :

(Translation.) Mr. Speaker, I did not intend taking part in the discussion this evening, had it not been for the rather unpleasant remarks made to the House by the hon.

['Mr. Clements. ]

member for Vaudreuil (Mr. Boyer). It is always a great pleasure for me to hear the hon. member. The House at least the hon. members who are acquainted with the French language, are aware that he is a splendid speaker to whom one could listen for hours'. My hon. friend, in his speech, has, to a certain degree, established a few indisputable facts, but on the other hand, he tarnishes unnecessarily the reputation of a district, a reputation earned by years of intense production of our truly renowned maple sugar and maple syrup which are known not only in Canada, but also throughout Europe.

The last part of my hon. friend's speech might be described an advertisement for the electoral district which he represents so well in this House; but when the hon. member attacks the county of Beauce and its maple products, and seems to complain of the superior qualities of these products, which according to him, are superior in appearance only-instead of taking our farmers to task, he should remember that Providence herself has willed it so. In fact, Mr. Speaker, the quality of the maple sugar and the maple syrup which is produced in Beauce is mainly due to the special qualities of the maple trees of the county, qualities such as cannot be claimed for the maple trees in Vaudreuil. This is due to natural conditions, Mr. Speaker, to those fine hillocks and rolling lands which gather and above the sun's rays in greater abundance that could be expected in a flat country, like Vaudreuil.

My hon. friend referred especially to the methods of sugar making in the county of Beauce. He has given us to understand by his transparent, though veiled remarks, that the methods in use in Beauce were old fashioned ones. This proves but one thing, and that is, that the hon. member for Vaudreuil is not acquainted with the Beauce district. If he had taken the trouble, or rather if he had given himself the pleasure of visiting our splendid rural district, when the sun is fast melting the snow, and its warm rays are causing the sap to ascend and the buds to burst forth he would have found that sugar and syrup in Beauce are manufactured by methods as perfect as science can teach in these days. I fear he has not however visited us for a quarter of a century.

But let us say no more of this rivalry between the member for Vaudreuil and myself. I will only add that, if American manufacturers of maple candies, toffee, or the so-ealPd maple syrup, give the pre-

ference to the Beauce products, it is not because it is darker, but because it is sweeter, if I may say so, than the syrup . that comes from the Eastern townships and the counties of Vaudreuil and Sou-langes. With a pound of the Beauce maple sugar, the Chicago manufacturers can make a greater quantity of maple candies than he could make with one pound of sugar bought from my hon. friend the member for Vaudreuil.

There is in Canada an enactment known as the "Maple Products Act." This Act forbids all manufacturers, whoever they are, to mark their products as maple, when they contain any substance other than the condensed sap of the maple itself. Several members who spoke in the House last year and this year have approved of this special provision of the law, Mr. Speaker,

I have come to doubt its usefulness.

That is not the point. The law is useless because, on account of the high prices of pure sugar and syrup, it is impossible to find a sufficient number of consumers to dispose of all the maple syrup and maple sugar produced in this country. Now, let me point out that, some years ago, there was in certain states of the Union, a legislation similar to that which is in our statutes, concerning maple products, and the American producers almost unanimously requested their respective Governments in each one of the states, to repeal the Act. In the province of Quebec, and particularly in the county of Beauce, there is a movement on foot-and one that is taking considerable proportions, as evidenced by the petitions signed by thousands of syrup and sugar manufacturers, which I have already laid before the House-in favour of amending or repealing this Act. Of course, the manufacturer has no kindly feeling towards the city producer \yho may place on the market a so-called maple product which is distinctly a fraud. But the producers of Beauce, at least if I understand rightly the petitions I have had the honour of laying before the House, are willing to have their pure products altered, that is, mixed with cane sugar or syrup which are selling at a much lower price, provided that it would be specified and specifically marked on the container that it is a mixed maple product.

You can obtain-and it has been scientifically demonstrated-just as wholesome and nourishing a syrup as the pure maple syrup by mixing the latter with cane sugar; that mixture will keep a long time and that is very difficult in the case of

pure maple sugar. One of the reasons why we cannot sell an unlimited supply of our excellent and delicious maple syrup of Beauce, is that it cannot keep indefinitely. Unless you have a small refrigerator at home, the heat in the summer will cause a fermentation of the syrup. The consumers in the cities who are aware of this fact, buy only a small quantity of maple syrup in order to avoid the trouble of having it spoil by fermentation. That is why it is difficult to sell any large quantity of pure maple syrup, unless it should be for industrial or manufacturing purposes. To-day, petitions are being circulated throughout the county of Beauce and are being signed by thousands of people, asking the Government and Parliament to either amend or repeal the existing Act. I do not know whether the Government will give their consent. Of course there may be room for argument against the proposed amendment, because it would always seem very nice to say: Maple syrup is such a dainty thing, so fine and delicious and precious, that we must not allow any alteration of it. But we must also consider the mercantile and industrial point of view. For instance, you will realize that if you allow maple syrup manufacturers in Montreal, Toronto or Quebec, to make a syrup containing, let us say only 25 per cent of pure maple, provided that it would be specified on the container, whatever it may be, there will not be the same objection to the placing of that product on the market and it will have the advantage of keeping indefinitely and could be sold at a much lower price.

Mr. Speaker, I need not say any more. Whatever may be said against the maple sugar of Beauce, either by people settled in the west end of the province of Quebec, Vaudreuil, for instance, or in the eastern townships where my good friend who is sitting beside me (Mr. Robb) resides, they may say that it is black, red or brown, or anything else, but the fine connoisseur who wishes to taste the real thing, the real maple sugar or syrup, will pass through the counties of Vaudreuil and Huntingdon and through the Eastern Townships to land in our own district where he can find a product to which nothing in the world can ever be compared.

Mr. PIERRE F. CASGRAIN (Charle-voix-Montmorency) : (Translation.) I

would like to say a few words on the subject, but it is rather late and as we have done a good deal of work to-day-I am not speaking of myself but of other hon.

gentlemen who took part in the debate-I beg to move the adjournment of the debate.

Topic:   A NEW ANGLE TO THE SOCKEYE SALMON HATCHERY QUESTION.
Permalink
UNION

Arthur Meighen (Prime Minister; Secretary of State for External Affairs)

Unionist

Mr. MEIGHEN:

I would submit that we have exhausted about as much time on this motion as surely to satisfy every hon. member. I know the subject is of importance, but really we cannot afford to talk day after day in a more or less aimless discussion so far as any specific object is concerned.

Topic:   A NEW ANGLE TO THE SOCKEYE SALMON HATCHERY QUESTION.
Permalink
LIB

William Lyon Mackenzie King (Leader of the Official Opposition)

Liberal

Mr. MACKENZIE KING:

I would submit that the discussion to-day has not been aimless, as my right hon. friend has suggested. I think this is one of the most important questions we have had before Parliament, and I do not think it is unreasonable at 15 minutes to 12 o'clock- within a few minutes of midnight-to ask that we should have an adjournment.

Topic:   A NEW ANGLE TO THE SOCKEYE SALMON HATCHERY QUESTION.
Permalink
UNION

Arthur Meighen (Prime Minister; Secretary of State for External Affairs)

Unionist

Mr. MEIGHEN:

If I knew just what ' the aim was I would withdraw the word "aimless." I know some good can come from the discussion; I am not disputing that, but what more good can come from this discussion I am at a loss to understand. I only want to get through with the discussion so that we can get down to the business of the House.

Motion (Mr. Casgrain) for the adjournment of the debate negatived.

Topic:   A NEW ANGLE TO THE SOCKEYE SALMON HATCHERY QUESTION.
Permalink
LIB
L LIB

Georges Henri Boivin (Deputy Speaker and Chair of Committees of the Whole of the House of Commons)

Laurier Liberal

Mr. DEPUTY SPEAKER:

I must draw the hon. member's attention to the fact that having moved the adjournment of the debate, and that motion having been lost he is now precluded from taking part in the debate. Any other hon. gentleman, however, who has not done so has the right to speak.

Motion (Mr. Manion) negatived.

Topic:   A NEW ANGLE TO THE SOCKEYE SALMON HATCHERY QUESTION.
Permalink

REGULATIONS GOVERNING OIL AND GAS PERMITS AND LEASES

UNION

Henry Arthur Mackie

Unionist

Mr. H. A. MACKIE (East Edmonton) moved:

That, in the opinion of this House, the Regulations for the issue of oil and gas permits and leases in the Northwest Territories of Canada approved by Order in Council dated February 11th, 1921 (P.C. 331), are detrimental to the development of the oil industry both in law and equity and the purport thereof is to unduly discourage private initiative and unduly protect large financial interests by allowing the same to take full possession of the oil fields of the Territories.

He said: I regret having to speak on this matter at this hour, more particularly as hon. gentlemen who are absent from the House intended to participate in this de-

'

bate, but I cannot allow this opportunity to slip by in view of the urgency and importance of this matter to those who intend to avail themselves of the opening of navigation in the northern portion of the province of Alberta to go to the northern fields of Mackenzie. Prior to December last, oil regulations for the unsurveyed territory of Mackenzie permitted an individual to locate 1,920 acres of oil lands. In the month of December an Order in Council was passed changing those regulations. This Order in Council became effective on the 27th day of December, and the regulations were so amended that any locator might take 640 acres of land, and, upon discovery of oil, he had the privilege of choosing 320 acres, the other 320 acres remaining the property of the Crown. That was called in the province of Alberta the "checker board" system, but was not looked upon as very unfavourable to the locator. Then, without any warning whatsoever, an Order in Council was passed in January, 1921, suspending all oil regulations in the North West Territories. A new set of regulations was promulgated by another Order in Council, No. 331, assented to on the 11th day of February, 1921. At the time I put this resolution on the order paper there were four distinct objections which I intended to take, two of which, however, have been removed by a subsequent Order in Council. One objection which I intended to discuss was the retroactive effect of the Order in Council as contained in clause 51 of the present regulations, but inasmuch as an amendment has been made and the retroactive effect has disappeared, it is useless for me to enter into a discussion of that feature of the regulations.

Another objection which I intended to discuss at the time the resolution was placed on the Order Paper was contained in section 44, which made it impossible for provincial companies already incorporated to maintain their holdings and develop as they had intended to, but since the resolution has been on the Order Paper that has also disappeared so far as all applications which have been received in the Department of the Interior are concerned. There is an objection, however, still remaining. I must read the section at the pain of occupying a considerable length of time, because I apprehend, Mr. Speaker, there are very few members of the House who are acquainted with the regulations, not being particularly interested in them, and I wish

hon. members to understand them so that the House may receive the benefit of their opinions for the special benefit of the people in the province of Alberta, and also for the general benefit of the whole Dominion. Section 44 of P.C. 331 reads:

Any company acquiring by application, assignment or otherwise a permit or lease under the provisions of these regulations shall be a company incorporated under part one of the Companies Act, chapter 79, R.fS.C., 1906, and amendments thereto, and the charter of such company shall provide for the issue of the shares of the capital stock of such company without any nominal or par value, in accordance with section 7 (B) of the said Act.

Now any application or assignment of location in the Northwest Territories can only be made under this section to a company holding Federal letters patent. I say that this is an indirect way of amending the law of the various provinces, because the object of the Government in passing this regulation is stated to be the prevention of speculation. If that is the only object of the Government they have not succeeded because the law can be circumvented. For example, a person possessing one location or holding by assignment, say, eight or ten locations in that country, can easily assign to a company incorporated by federal letters patent for one million dollars more than he otherwise would, and that one million dollars can be used for bonusing or for purposes of speculation, as the case may be. In some of the provinces the speculative aspect has been absolutely wiped away by the appointment of boards. The regulation obliging a company to incorporate federally merely retards the development of that country. Another reason given for imposing this regulation is that a provincial company has no powep to hold lands in the North west Territories. I have been unable to find any decision bearing on the pqint. I submit that the regulations should be altered, and that it should be permissible for any provincial company to hold those oil locations situated in the Mackenzie district.

If the Minister of the Interior framed these regulations with a view to preventing speculation, he had in mind what he called "wild-catting;" but I understand that that has already been provided for in the Criminal Law. If he had in mind swindling, that is also provided for in the Criminal Code. If he meant unlicensed or uncurbed selling and watering of stock, that too has been dealt with in different laws; and if he meant the prevention of vending of prospective oil properties, or of promoting

companies and securing capital for their development, then I say that he has been ill-advised in passing this regulation. If by this section, the prospector is not permitted to have the expert or specialized aid of a broker to find a market for his holding when he wants to cash in, or if he is deprived of the services of a professional promoter when he wants to raise cash, then section 44 is ill-advised and I submit that the Government should change it and permit provincial companies to hold and develop oil locations in the North West Territories.

There is another paragraph in the regulations about which I wish to say a few words, and I shall endeavour to conclude as soon as possible. I have reference to the division of the property which the locator is at liberty to stake. Under the present regulations, a locator may go into the Mackenzie basin and locate 2,560 acres of land and drill, and when he has found oil the Government will issue a lease to him of one quarter of this area, three-quarters reverting back to the Crown. Now, I take the position that nothing is indicated in the regulations as to what disposition is to be made of these three-quarter sections, and if the Government wishes at any time it may allot them to any financial company or individuals on whatever terms it may see fit. Whoever acquires these three-quarter sections, which have been practically proven up by the locator in his drilling, has three times as much power as the one who has actually located the ground and developed it up to the point where he is entitled to get the lease. The holder of the three-quarter sections has three times the quantity of land, three times the wealth, and three times the financial backing of others, and it would be easy for the person acquiring these three-quarter sections, under whatever terms the Government may choose to sacrifice one of them to put out of business the man who has actually drilled and found oil, obliging him to surrender to powerful interests.

At the present time the regulations actually prevent men from going in and prospecting that country, and only large financial companies can get into that territory with any reasonable certainty that they will be able to acquire any of the Crown lands which are to be disposed of after the oil has been found. The regulation, I submit, has been based on the assumption that we have railways running

in that country and that you can dump off all sorts of tonnage in the Northwest Territories, that there are facilities for taking oil out, that everything is lovely, and that you can just take the oil to the refinery. These are not the conditions. An estimate made by the Imperial Oil Company, to ascertain whether enough oil could be got to warrant the building of a pipeline, shows that they will have to be guaranteed the production of 20,000 barrels per day. Ling, one of the officials of the company, says that the present well yields 800 barrels per day; and they take it that they will get twenty-five producing wells. They will not get a gusher with every hole drilled unless they break all records. An American geological report says that the Texas record is 271 dug holes to one producer. Taking the average at Norman to be ten, they will have to drill 250 holes to get enough oil to warrant development.

The cost of these 25 wells will he:

Cost of freight on one well outfit, including lumber, 200 tons at $20

per ton $ 40,000

The Albertas outfit weighed 113 tons without lumber or season's grub.

The Hudson's bay rate of freight in 1921 is 13n>o c. per pound, or $27 per ton. Cost of drill and 1,000

feet of 6-inch casing 15,000

Cost of lumber, timber, tools, etc. 8,000

Fares of 7 men in and out at current rates 2,700

Wages of 7 men, averaging $400 a

month, by 12 months 33,600

Total per drilling outfit $ 99,300

Cost of 250 wells at 2 wells per

rig per season: $99,300 by 125..$12,421,500

With four rigs they would drill 25 wells in about 3 years. As soon as oil is found on one location, it would be good business to locate a new claim. How many claims they would be holding to get 25 producing wells it is difficult to say, but not less than 25. They would be paying to the Government on these twenty-five locations the gross total of $32,000 annually. It would take five years to build the pipe line, but in the meantime the Government would take from the locators to the tune of $160,000 while the pipe line was being built. Here then is the outlay before any returns can be looked for. First the pipe line costing $55,000,000. (I will grant you, for instance, that it is not going to be every company that will build a pipe line; and I assume that no Government would permit a company to build a pipe line unless there were some guarantees that they would permit other operating companies to use the same pipe

[Mr. H. A. Mackie.l

line; but for one company that they build that pipe line there is the initial cost of $55,000,000.) Secondly, the wells will cost $12,421,500; and in the third place the rentals will amount to approximately $160,000. Finally for a refinery we will allow the sum of $3,000,000, and you have the sum total of $70,572,500 before any returns can be secured.

Now we will assume that under these regulations a company has expended the necessary moneys to get the requisite number of wells dug to warrant them in constructing a pipe line. The first thing the company is confronted with is that somebody else comes along who has not spent one cent in proving that property and he can go to Ottawa and say to the Minister of the Interior who does not sit in this House, by the way, I want to buy your three-quarters, true, I want to secure them under whatever terms you will allow me. Then he goes in on those three-quarters which have been proven and paid for by some locator and developed by somebody else's own money, and enters the field in competition, I say, Mr. Speaker, that these regulations are nothing short of a monstrosity and should be altered without any delay. If the Government wants to go into the matter of public ownership then let them define that policy; it is not my own by any means. But between allowing the man to go in and get 2,560 acres of land and turn three-quarters of that back to the Government, after it has been proven by private enterprise, by the money of individuals and the money of companies-I say between that and public ownership there is only one thing to do. It is to let the field lie dormant and prevent the development which ought normally to take place. It is quite clear to my mind that the Government in taking rentals as they do are penalizing capital and preventing it from working. The system of withholding three-quarters of the ground after the oil has been found is a means of scattering holdings and is discouraged by authorities, that can be looked up in Hager's Practical Oil Geology, pp. 159-164. What the Government ought to do, I submit, is to encourage development and make it possible for private enterprise to develop that territory, then reap their benefits from imposition of royalties. The Government need revenue and can get it if there is production; but until there is production the Government should not impede development of that country by their regulations and they

should not penalize capital for trying to work.

If the Government were anxious about the Empire let them read Allan's First Annual Report, Alberta Resources, in which it is stated there is enough oil in McMur-ray's sands for the Crown's security or 500 times the world's normal consumption. In 1912 somebody came from London, saw the Minister of Interior and told him to cancel the tar-sand regulations, and they stand cancelled up to the present time except that an Order in Council has been passed in favour of one General Lindsay of Ontario who has located the best parts that are known to him in the town site of Mc-murray. If the interests of the Empire are at stake in the matter of oil read the report of Mr. Allan for the Province of Alberta and he will indicate that there is enough oil hidden there to satisfy the Empire's requirements. I do not know why the regulations should have been suspended so far as tar-sand is concerned. If there is that much oil to be extracted from tar-sands we need not bother ourselves about the Mackenzie field and prevent everybody from getting into it. I am sure the Minister of the Interior has never been off the train from Edmonton towards those fields and does not know the first thing about them. There is a method of getting down to that country and it is an expensive one. Why should we endeavour to hold up the development of a field which can only be reached by navigation of rivers on a course of over 1,400 miles following the sinuosities of those rivers. When the closest well in the North West Territories would be something like 600 miles from Edmonton. Why should you prevent development by these regulations I cannot understand unless there is some ulterior motive which I dare not suggest?

Now the answer may be made to me: So far as rentals are concerned you need not bother about that; all you have to do is to get down there with your drill and you do not pay rentals any more. That is true if I get a drill down the first year. But first of all I must locate and the session is short. I cannot locate and get out and arrange my financial affairs and get in again in the one season; and it is incumbent upon me to pay 50 cents an acre. I pay rental the first year on everything that goes back to the Crown, and I must necessarily pay to the Crown one dollar for the second year's rental. The third year I must prove to the Government that I am performing certain work in order to be released from

paying the rental; and the fourth year I must have a well, or I must take a report to the Government that I am about to make a well. Then when I have done all this, the Crown steps in and takes three-quarters of the ground I have actually proven to be useful to the Dominion of Canada. I say that the regulations are quite unreasonable, and every man in the province of Alberta who is interested in the development of that field has taken the same position. There is also this point: If a

man has proven enough in that territory to make it worth while to construct a pipe line, he must pay the Government rentals whilst he constructs a pipe line.

My object therefore this evening is to bring this matter to the attention of the Government and to show that the regulations were extremely unfair in the beginning-so unfair and so inequitable that before this resolution was spoken to in this House two amendments had been made by the Government to their own regulations, which were absolutely unworkable. I would have preferred that the other amendment had been made so that whoever gets into that country and drills and finds oil shall be at liberty to purchase or acquire the other three-fourths of his claim on some terms giving him preference. That is the amendment I seek this evening in speaking to this resolution; or else that this House places itself on record in favour of fair oil regulations such as I describe.

Topic:   REGULATIONS GOVERNING OIL AND GAS PERMITS AND LEASES
Permalink

March 14, 1921