April 10, 1934

LIB

Joseph-Arthur Bradette

Liberal

Mr. BRADETTE:

I wish to discuss the

question mentioned by the hon. member for Kenora-Rainy River, and of which the minister has knowledge. Last week Mr. Finlay-son stated that work on the trans-Canada highway would be started west of the town of Hearst. This is a message that has been received with great joy in my section of the country and also in the riding represented by the Minister of Labour, and I should like to receive from the minister an assurance that the government of Ontario has approached him in this matter in his capacity as head of the unemployment relief administration.

There is one question which is of very great importance to our section and it is this. Construction of the highway west of Hearst is a problem that must have been studied carefully during the last three years-that is, the routing of the road. If the road swings back immediately south of Hearst it will have no significance to our section from the point of view of tourist traffic. The routing of the road west of Hearst should go westerly following the National Transcontinental highway for a considerable distance, at least as far west as Nakina. I draw this to the attention of the minister because I think he is familiar with the situation so far as the trans-Canada highway is concerned, and I think that sufficient time has been given the provincial government to study the proper routing of the road.

I should be glad if the minister could tell the committee that what Mr. Finlayson has

Relief Act, 1934

said will be carried out in the course of the summer, and that the work will be started very soon in the spring.

There is another matter which is discussed a good deal in our section of the country, and that is the land-bonusing scheme. I believe the impression has been created in northern Ontario that the scheme will be financed partly by the federal government and partly by the treasury of Ontario, and this is one of the best ways whereby to remedy the dire situation that exists among our settlers in northern Ontario. It may be suggested that such promises are made only in anticipation of an election, but I do not take it in that sense. I am sure that if this promise were implemented it would provide an excellent way of improving the condition of our settlers, and the beneficial results would be reflected not only throughout Ontario but in the whole of Canada.

Another matter in which I know the department is interested is the back to the land movement. I would point out to the minister that this year most of the people settled under the scheme in northern Ontario will find it absolutely impossible out of the $10 a month that they receive, or, to be precise, out of the $200 they get yearly for three years, to supply themselves with the necessary seed grain. This being so, I think that everyone will realize at once that unless the necessary seed is given them free the people who have settled under the back to the land movement will find it utterly impossible to get along this season, because they cannot provide seed for themselves this year. It is true that some of these people have been operating under the scheme for the last two years, and some settled last year. The question may be asked: How is it that these new settlers did not find it possible to grow sufficient grain to supply their own requirements for the coming season? Well, the answer will suggest itself to anyone who is at all familiar with the climatic conditions that prevailed last summer in that part of the country. The conditions were such last year on account of the drought that practically no grain could be grown on the land by these people, and that should convince the committee and the minister that it would be impossible for these people, out of the $200 they receive under the tripartite arrangement, the contributors being the municipal, provincial and federal authorities, to provide sufficient funds to buy the necessary seed grain. I believe that the government of Ontario led the settlers in my own section of northern Ontario as a whole to understand that they would be

supplied with seed this spring. Now, I do not believe in giving a wrong impression of any situation, but I am bound to say to the minister that in my section not five per cent of the settlers will be in a position this spring to buy seed grain, and I know that if the grain is not given them free most of the area ploughed last fall will remain uncultivated. It will be absolutely impossible for these people to put the ground under crop, and from that statement the committee will realize that the situation will be aggravated next fall; it will be worse than it is this spring. I do not know how far the federal authority will go in supplying the seed grain to the settlers who have been on these farms a number of years, but I do know that under the back to the land scheme the government will have to find funds sufficient to supply with seed for the coming spring the new men placed under the direct policy of the federal government.

Reverting to the important question of the trans-Canada highway, I must repeat the statement I made a few moments ago that when that message on the subject was delivered by Mr. Finlayson it was received with considerable enthusiasm in my own section of the country. In view of the fact that the federal government is contributing fifty per cent of the money spent on the trans-Canada highway, I think it should have something to say in regard to the routing of this highway, and we fervently hope that, in the light of the knowledge and experience of the present federal Minister of Labour, the routing will be one that will satisfy our section. I will not take up the time of the committee reading several editorials that have appeared in the Northern Tribune of Kapuskasing and in the Cochrane Northland Post, but it is pointed out in these articles that it would be deplorable if the government did not push the route westward following the Canadian National line as far as Nakina, then branching off with the other branch of the trans-Canada highway from the southern section of northern Ontario and eventually connecting direct with Winnipeg. If the road were constructed immediately south of the town of Hearst, following the Algoma Central and giving direct communication with Sault Ste. Marie, that would not provide a solution of the problem from our point of view, because it would not give the communication to which we are entitled. I should like the minister therefore to be kind enough to answer the three questions I have submitted to him.

Relief Act, 1934

Topic:   UNEMPLOYMENT AND FARM RELIEF
Subtopic:   BILL IN TERMS GENERALLY OF RELIEF ACT, 1933, WITH PROVISION RESPECTING DELAYED RELIEF ACCOUNTS
Permalink
CON

George Gordon

Conservative (1867-1942)

Mr. GORDON:

Replying to the first question about the routing of the trans-Canada highway, I have not read in the press any announcement that Mr. Finlayson may have made, but I have no doubt that it was made as the hon. member has said. However, the routing of the trans-Canada highway throughout the various provinces is a matter which is of course entirely within the judgment of the provinces, and the federal authority has been in the past from time to time formally notified of the terms of any order in council designating any particular stretch of what has been euphoniously called the trans-Canada highway. That official notification the federal government has not yet received; I suppose we shall receive it in due course.

With respect to the bonusing of settlers, that is a purely provincial matter. I do not share the gloomy view which my hon. friend from North Timiskaming seems to hold of the position of the farmer and the settler in Timiskaming-indeed-it is probably to be regretted he has painted the picture as he has. I think I am as well acquainted as any other person with the farmers and settlers in that county, and while they have had their difficulties, I have seen years when the difficulties were immeasurably more trying than they have been in the last four or even in the last ten years. They have through the clay belt adopted methods of farming that perhaps have placed them in the forefront of agricultural activities in Canada. They have no trouble in holding up their end at any of the agricultural fairs. They have a large mining market at hand of which they take advantage; they are organized in a cooperative sense to sell their vegetables and all the other products of the farm and to put them up in an attractive way for those big mining markets, and I certainly do not share with my hon. friend the picture he paints of the farmer and settler in Timiskaming.

With respect to seed grain, that is another purely provincial matter, and I am informed that at no time have the federal government advanced money directly to the farmers for seed grain. They have for many years past at times lent money to some of the provinces which in turn have supplied seed grain to those unable to procure it for themselves. If in certain localities or with certain individuals the condition is as the hon. member for North Timiskaming has stated, then the proper course would be to call the attention of the provincial authorities to that situation, because in spite of what has been said here, I still have enough confidence in the provincial

74726-128J

authorities of Ontario to feel that they will take care of a situation like that and not see worthy settlers unable to put in a crop because of their not being able to finance the purchase of seed grain.

Topic:   UNEMPLOYMENT AND FARM RELIEF
Subtopic:   BILL IN TERMS GENERALLY OF RELIEF ACT, 1933, WITH PROVISION RESPECTING DELAYED RELIEF ACCOUNTS
Permalink
LIB

Joseph-Arthur Bradette

Liberal

Mr. BRADETTE:

I wish to enlarge

slightly on what the minister has said. First of all, as regards the routing of the trans-Canada highway, I knew this was a provincial matter, but in view of the fact, as I stated a few moments ago, that fifty per cent of the money is being raised by (the federal government, I thought we should have some say as to the routing of the road so that it would not be run where it would be of no use or would not fulfil the purpose for which it was built. The only reason I brought the matter to the attention of the minister was that he is familiar with the exact situation. In our section we maintain, and rightly so, that if that routing goes directly south of the town of Hearst it would not be satisfactory and it could not be called part of the trans-Oanada highway. Surely the minister must have some jurisdiction in the matter when at least fifty per cent of the money spent for that particular purpose is being given by the central authorities, and as he is also familiar with our section of the country, whatever he may say in an advisory way will certainly be listened to, as coming from a man acquainted with the situation.

_ As regards the settlers, I do not want the impression to be created that I was desirous of painting a very gloomy picture, but I must tell the minister that in my section most of the farmers are settlers, the majority of them trying to emerge or graduate from the settler into the farmer class. This is not the case in the riding which the minister represents because it has been in existence for a longer period of time and there most of the settlers have already graduated from the settler into the farmer class. It is true that we have local markets, but it is also true that, for several reasons which I intend to mention when the agriculture estimates are under discussion, we cannot take full advantage of those local or regional markets in our section of the country. The minister well knows through tihe reports made to the provincial government that, take for instance, west of the town of Cochrane in the Hearst, Kapus-kasing and Cochrane district-and this does not apply so forcibly to Matheson, Ramore and Yal Gagne-nearly ninety per cent of the farmers and settlers have been on direct relief for the last two years, and were it not for that relief most of them would have found

Relief Act, 1934

it impossible to live on their holdings. I fully appreciate the fact that the distribution of seed grain is a matter coming primarily under provincial jurisdiction, but the fact is also that we must have a certain amount of responsibility when we contribute fifty per cent of the money spent on direct relief. On that score again I believe the minister could give help in an advisory capacity by allowing at least quite a number of the settlers on t.heir new holdings to have free seed grain for this year. It is all very well to say that in the past they were supplied with seed grain, but it was not free. This year I had the experience of having some settlers come to my home who, on account of liens against them for seed grain supplied a few years ago, had had their farm holdings cancelled. Some of them who had lived on their farms for fifteen or twenty years lost their holdings. The government was no doubt right in faking back the crown land because the settlers had had a long period of time to repay those amounts, but if another such loan is made to the settlers many of them will find themselves in the same position; their holdings will be cancelled and threats will be held over their heads for years and years, so that eventually they will become discouraged in their calling. This is not giving a gloomy picture of the situation; it is bringing to the attention of the country a problem which we Should not be afraid to tackle. With the minister's knowledge of conditions in his and my sections of the country, his personal influence should be used so that there will be no lack of seed grain to cultivate this year all the acreage that is tillable.

Topic:   UNEMPLOYMENT AND FARM RELIEF
Subtopic:   BILL IN TERMS GENERALLY OF RELIEF ACT, 1933, WITH PROVISION RESPECTING DELAYED RELIEF ACCOUNTS
Permalink
LIB

Ross Wilfred Gray

Liberal

Mr. GRAY:

Perhaps the minister has given the answer before, but we in Ontario would be interested in knowing how many settlers have been placed in northern Ontario under the land settlement scheme. Perhaps he could give the information by years under that scheme by which the municipality contributes $200, the province $200 and the dominion a like amount.

Topic:   UNEMPLOYMENT AND FARM RELIEF
Subtopic:   BILL IN TERMS GENERALLY OF RELIEF ACT, 1933, WITH PROVISION RESPECTING DELAYED RELIEF ACCOUNTS
Permalink
CON

George Gordon

Conservative (1867-1942)

Mr. GORDON:

I gave the details before, but I will give them again. In Ontario there were 362 heads of families with 1,4711 dependents settled on 27,400 acres. Is that the information the hon. member wants?

Topic:   UNEMPLOYMENT AND FARM RELIEF
Subtopic:   BILL IN TERMS GENERALLY OF RELIEF ACT, 1933, WITH PROVISION RESPECTING DELAYED RELIEF ACCOUNTS
Permalink
LIB

Ross Wilfred Gray

Liberal

Mr. GRAY:

Yes. How many of those people have been returned to their municipalities?

Topic:   UNEMPLOYMENT AND FARM RELIEF
Subtopic:   BILL IN TERMS GENERALLY OF RELIEF ACT, 1933, WITH PROVISION RESPECTING DELAYED RELIEF ACCOUNTS
Permalink
CON

George Gordon

Conservative (1867-1942)

Mr. GORDON:

I think none of those has been returned. Those are the ones at present on their locations. There were some who were returned to the municipalities.

Topic:   UNEMPLOYMENT AND FARM RELIEF
Subtopic:   BILL IN TERMS GENERALLY OF RELIEF ACT, 1933, WITH PROVISION RESPECTING DELAYED RELIEF ACCOUNTS
Permalink
LIB

Ross Wilfred Gray

Liberal

Mr. GRAY:

That is the information I would like.

Topic:   UNEMPLOYMENT AND FARM RELIEF
Subtopic:   BILL IN TERMS GENERALLY OF RELIEF ACT, 1933, WITH PROVISION RESPECTING DELAYED RELIEF ACCOUNTS
Permalink
CON

George Gordon

Conservative (1867-1942)

Mr. GORDON:

I do not know the exact number, but the percentage is very small. Of course there are bound to be some who will not succeed.

Topic:   UNEMPLOYMENT AND FARM RELIEF
Subtopic:   BILL IN TERMS GENERALLY OF RELIEF ACT, 1933, WITH PROVISION RESPECTING DELAYED RELIEF ACCOUNTS
Permalink
LIB

Ross Wilfred Gray

Liberal

Mr. GRAY:

Does the minister suggest that they are making a success of the venture?

Topic:   UNEMPLOYMENT AND FARM RELIEF
Subtopic:   BILL IN TERMS GENERALLY OF RELIEF ACT, 1933, WITH PROVISION RESPECTING DELAYED RELIEF ACCOUNTS
Permalink
CON

George Gordon

Conservative (1867-1942)

Mr. GORDON:

That is what our reports state. I saw an exhaustive report made by the Reverend J. C. Cochrane who has had an extensive experience in colonization work throughout that part of northern Ontario. His report was made public and I think published subsequently by the Ontario government. I had an opportunity to read it, and I depend a great deal on anything the Reverend Mr. Cochrane would say, knowing him as I do and knowing his experience in opening up land for settlement there, and his close contact with and interest in the settlers in the early stages of establishing their farms and getting their buildings in shape and developing their holdings. Although he makes some criticisms, I would say that of all the so-called colonization schemes that have been inaugurated in the past there is none that has been as successful as this one of colonization at home, although as I said some people got past the choosing committees who really had little chance from the beginning to succeed. They were returned to the municipalities from which they came. Of course we must expect some failures.

Topic:   UNEMPLOYMENT AND FARM RELIEF
Subtopic:   BILL IN TERMS GENERALLY OF RELIEF ACT, 1933, WITH PROVISION RESPECTING DELAYED RELIEF ACCOUNTS
Permalink
LIB

William Henry Moore

Liberal

Mr. MOORE (Ontario):

I have no desire to prolong this debate, but I should like to ask the minister whether he is aware of the special conditions which prevail in rural municipalities adjacent to industrial centres. Many people who have drifted into such areas are in need of relief or on relief, but the rural organization in some instances is not in a position to fulfil all the requirements of this plan. I have several such municipalities in mind. I know of one in which unhappily there has been malnutrition, and insufficiency of clothing. The situation, of course, is that in these rural municipalities the farmers are really not in a position to meet the special requirements of these people who have drifted across their borders and do not properly belong to the municipality in which they happen to be.

While on my feet may I say that I thought the minister was just a little ungenerous the other day when he referred to the lack of sympathy, if you like, from this side of the

house, and seemed to suggest that we do not appreciate the improvement that has taken place in conditions. May I say for myself that I have been reading the barometer as carefully as I could, and I have been calling off improvement wherever I saw it. I believe sincerely that we are pulling out of this depression. But one thing that our people must have is confidence, and most of all must they have confidence in government-which applies not only to Canada but to all countries. Now, unusual legislation does not inspire confidence.

I think if it were not for the unusual privileges that the government ask I should vote for this bill. I should like to vote for it. But I should like the minister to consider whether all the unusual clauses are required. I should like him to consider the effect that such legislation has on the public mind. People cannot contract with confidence so long as they are told that unusual conditions exist, that emergent measures are required. And if they cannot contract with confidence they cannot employ labour, they cannot pay wages, they cannot look forward to buying and selling in the ordinary way. I would have the minister consider these matters, because it seems to me that in an attempt to meet one set of conditions the government may bring about another set of conditions entirely different from what they may have expected.

Topic:   UNEMPLOYMENT AND FARM RELIEF
Subtopic:   BILL IN TERMS GENERALLY OF RELIEF ACT, 1933, WITH PROVISION RESPECTING DELAYED RELIEF ACCOUNTS
Permalink
LIB

Thomas Reid

Liberal

Mr. REID:

The minister in answer to a

question said the other evening that some reforestation work was being done in some of the provinces. I would like to ask if any reforestation work is being done in British Columbia, either under his department or any other department of the government. The reason I ask is that wThile the minister may say that it is up to the provinces to carry on this work, I think he or the government would be well advised to consider a national scheme. Surely we are not going to stand by and see our forests depleted; and under the modern system of logging they are not only being depleted but are being severely injured from the point of view of future growth. Surely we are not going to leave nothing but debts to the coming generation. I know of no finer national undertaking that might emanate from this administration than some scheme of reforestation in the provinces suitable for that purpose. Most countries to-day are doing a certain amount of reforestation work. I need scarcely name them-Great Britain particularly is doing it; so is France, and so is the United States. Here is work that is useful, work from which the coming generation will receive benefit.

Relief Act, 1934

I have here the report of the auditor general, and would like to ask the minister if the auditor general in his investigations in British Columbia went as far back as in the case of the other provinces.

Topic:   UNEMPLOYMENT AND FARM RELIEF
Subtopic:   BILL IN TERMS GENERALLY OF RELIEF ACT, 1933, WITH PROVISION RESPECTING DELAYED RELIEF ACCOUNTS
Permalink
CON

George Gordon

Conservative (1867-1942)

Mr. GORDON:

In answer to the hon.

member for Ontario (Mr. Moore) let me say that I appreciate his observations with respect to legislation of an unusual character. There is no question that that is one of the risks attendant upon emergent conditions, and perhaps I might say emergent legislation. Much thought has been given to the question of the powers asked for in this legislation. Some of those powers I should like to think could be abandoned, but I do not believe that they should be abandoned this year. However, as the hon. member will note, some that were found in last year's legislation have been omitted in this year's legislation; for instance that with respect to guarantees, advances, and so forth, to public bodies, does not appear in this year's bill. I regret that we have to differ as to the necessity for the various powers contained in the bill. I believe that they are necessary for this coming year. I hope that before the year is out we shall have made further progress, and I agree with the hon. member when he says that in his judgment we are pulling through. I believe we are; there are evidences of it. It may take some time for this country and for the whole trade of the world to become substantially readjusted and to get the channels of trade open, because one country cannot do it alone. That is the difficulty Canada has had to face. No one wanted to take any action, governmental or otherwise, that would prevent the free exchange of goods so far as that is humanly possible. But when you find your country in the midst of a national and international tariff war it is sheer folly to think that, if you are to survive, you need not take such action, for a time at least, as will maintain your industries and your agriculture, certainly not as actively as they would be under different conditions, but at least preserving their integrity pending some better understanding among the nations of the world.

With respect to the other question to which the hon. member directed my attention, on a number of occasions similar situations have been brought to my notice. I have no doubt that from time to time the provincial governments are notified in such cases. I have drawn the matter to the attention of provincial governments on a number of occasions, and I should be glad indeed if the hon. member would let me have the name of the

Relief Act, 1984

municipality in. which the condition exists. I will draw the matter to the attention of the provincial authorities, and I believe they would hasten to take such action as might be necessary to .put such people beyond any danger of malnutrition or anything of the kind.

Topic:   UNEMPLOYMENT AND FARM RELIEF
Subtopic:   BILL IN TERMS GENERALLY OF RELIEF ACT, 1933, WITH PROVISION RESPECTING DELAYED RELIEF ACCOUNTS
Permalink
LIB

William Henry Moore

Liberal

Mr. MOORE (Ontario):

I shall gladly

take advantage of the offer of the minister, and I appreciate his kindness.

Topic:   UNEMPLOYMENT AND FARM RELIEF
Subtopic:   BILL IN TERMS GENERALLY OF RELIEF ACT, 1933, WITH PROVISION RESPECTING DELAYED RELIEF ACCOUNTS
Permalink
LIB

Thomas Reid

Liberal

Mr. REID:

I was not particularly complaining about the malnutrition of the youth of the land. The minister is perhaps well aware that British Columbia is doing its full share in the work of reforestation, but the minister also knows that British Columbia, together with the other provinces, is carrying an excessive load in regard to unemployment. It is not a matter of suggesting something to the provinces or pointing out something; my suggestion is that the dominion government join in a national scheme of reforestation in cooperation with the various provinces. Some of the provinces are carrying on this work, including British Columbia, but perhaps it is not being pursued to the extent it should be during the present economic distress.

Now I would ask the minister if, in his report, the auditor general went back as far in regard to British Columbia as he did in regard to the other provinces. I should like to know just how far back his investigation extended.

Topic:   UNEMPLOYMENT AND FARM RELIEF
Subtopic:   BILL IN TERMS GENERALLY OF RELIEF ACT, 1933, WITH PROVISION RESPECTING DELAYED RELIEF ACCOUNTS
Permalink
CON

George Gordon

Conservative (1867-1942)

Mr. GORDON:

I have not the report of the auditor general before me, but it is available; I tabled it myself. I would respectfully ask the hon. member to avail himself of that report; I do not have it here or I should be glad to give the information. With respect to reforestation may I tell my hon. friend that the government has been doing reforestation throughout Canada, wherever there are federally owned lands adapted to that work. Up to date some millions of trees have been set out through the agency of the departments of the Interior and National Defence. I am thoroughly in agreement with the hon. member for -New Westminster when he says this is a useful and desirable work; perhaps in some respects no better work could -be carried on. The Dominion government is well aware of the desirability of continuing this work.

Topic:   UNEMPLOYMENT AND FARM RELIEF
Subtopic:   BILL IN TERMS GENERALLY OF RELIEF ACT, 1933, WITH PROVISION RESPECTING DELAYED RELIEF ACCOUNTS
Permalink
LIB

Thomas Reid

Liberal

Mr. REID:

In the report that has been

laid on the table I notice in the statement of amounts refunded by the provinces under the various relief acts -that British Columbia made one refund of $23,955.26, and below I

see another item of $11,955.87. I do not see any refund for 1931, and in that connection I should like to direct the minister's attention to a statement made in the report with regard to expenditures made in British Columbia in 1931, I believe. In this report it is stated that investigations have been instituted by the Department of Labour, and I am going to ask the minister if he will be good enough either to investigate the situation to which I am going to refer or to make a statement to the committee now, because I think the matter is very important. According to the auditor general's report I find that an amount charged for supplies, totalling $72,524.36, practically disappeared. I do not think this measure should go through until something is done in this connection. I am going to suggest to this government that an investigation be launched and that, if possible, the officials responsible for the disappearance of these supplies should be indicted. I read from page 40 of the report:

Unissued stores charged to "material account" and not distributed-$72,524.36: Although the provincial inventory showed these materials ("purchased from unemployment relief funds") as on hand at November 30, 1931, that is, after the relief program was discontinued, no credit for unissued stores appears to have been passed to joint account.

This is the significant part:

The ultimate disposal of these stores was not traced during the investigation.

I believe they should be traced; I believe the department should send an official to British Columbia to find out where these stores went. This is part of the steal that took place in 1931, to which I directed the attention of the government when I was making some suggestions in connection with the misappropriation of funds by the provincial government during that year. I am going to ask the minister what he is going to do about these stores that disappeared.

Mr. -GORDON: Mr. Chairman, following the auditor general's report there was a refund from the province of British Columbia amounting to $23,956.26. Then by reason of the investigation, if you like to call it that, or the adjustments made direct through the Department of Labour a further refund of $11,955.87 was made. Questions of adjustments, refunds and matters of that character are constantly under way with the staff we have, and I will make a special effort to look into the matter the hon. member has drawn to my attention.

Topic:   UNEMPLOYMENT AND FARM RELIEF
Subtopic:   BILL IN TERMS GENERALLY OF RELIEF ACT, 1933, WITH PROVISION RESPECTING DELAYED RELIEF ACCOUNTS
Permalink
LAB

Humphrey Mitchell

Labour

Mr. MITCHELL:

I should like to ask a question before the discussion closes. Is

the federal government sympathetic to the announcement of the Ontario government that relief allowances are to be increased by twenty-five per cent? Will the federal grant to the provincial government be increased automatically?

Topic:   UNEMPLOYMENT AND FARM RELIEF
Subtopic:   BILL IN TERMS GENERALLY OF RELIEF ACT, 1933, WITH PROVISION RESPECTING DELAYED RELIEF ACCOUNTS
Permalink
CON

George Gordon

Conservative (1867-1942)

Mr. GORDON:

I have not seen, nor have I been notified, what the Ontario government is doing, but, as I indicated before, any contribution that may be made by the federal government to the province of Ontario will have to be the subject matter of an agreement between the two governments after and if this legislation passes through parliament, and the authority to enter into such an agreement is vested in the government.

Topic:   UNEMPLOYMENT AND FARM RELIEF
Subtopic:   BILL IN TERMS GENERALLY OF RELIEF ACT, 1933, WITH PROVISION RESPECTING DELAYED RELIEF ACCOUNTS
Permalink

April 10, 1934