Mr. MacMILLAN (Mackenzie):
had sympathy. I am sympathetic towards everything, but that does not mean that I will support everything. I am sympathetic towards the man who is lost spiritually, politically and otherwise. The platform of the Cooperative Commonwealth Federation received a great deal of consideration and thought in western Canada. I know it did in that portion of Saskatchewan from which I come. The fundamental difference between the platform of the Cooperative Commonwealth Federation as it originated in Calgary, and the platform of the Liberal party was the stand taken on the land policy, many parts of our platforms were in common, and it would be impossible to have conditions otherwise. The Liberal party has much in common with the Conservative party; that is inevitable. On land matters, however, platforms of the Cooperative Commonwealth Federation and the Liberal party are not in common; in fact that was the fundamental difference between those two parties. It is not necessary for me to elaborate on their land policy, for every member of the house knows as much about it as I do. They were going to give assistance to people who were in debt; those people in return were to transfer their land to the government if the party attained office, and the owners were to become tenants. Now suppose such a thing were to happen that the Cooperative Commonwealth Federation should come into office as the federal government of Canada and put their land policy into operation; what, effect would it have upon the people? The great Sir Wilfrid Laurier, whose name has gone down to imperishable renown, speaking in the city of Montreal fifty years 92582-164$
ago, said that property rights and property possession were the most sacred things belonging to the individual. But would it remain that way if this policy of the Cooperative Commonwealth Federation were to become operative? I submit that it would not. To become a tenant I submit that a man would have to surrender entirely his spirit of independence. We are not unmindful of the sad and bitter experience of the first tenant known to us in history, that of the Adams' in the garden of Eden. Because of one single violation by one of the tenants of one of the covenants in the lease, the whole family was expelled from the garden. I sometimes think that there must have been a cooperative commonwealth federation group in existence at that time and that it was the leader of the group who found his way into the garden and beguiled the tenant.
If the policy of the Cooperative Commonwealth Federation were carried out, we would lose all property rights. I have here an article which contains an extract from Morgan's Ancient History, as follows;
The idea of property was slowly formed in the human mind, remaining nascent and feeble through immense periods of time. Springing into life in savagery, it required all the experience of this period and the subsequent period of barbarism to develop the germ, and prepare the human brain for the acceptance of its controlling influence. Its dominance as a passion over all other passions marks the commencement of civilization. It not only led mankind to overcome the obstacles that delayed civilization, but to establish political society on the basis of territory and of property. A critical knowledge of the evolution of the idea of property would embody, in some respects, the most remarkable portion of the mental history of mankind.
Independently of the movement which culminated in the patriarchial family of the Hebrew and Latin types, property, as it increased in variety and amount, exercised a steady and constantly augmenting influence ir the direction of monogamy. It is impossible to overestimate the influence of property in the civilization of mankind.
The growth of the idea of property in the human mind commenced in feebleness and ended in becoming its master passion. Government and law's are instituted with primary reference to its creatioh, protection and enjoyment.
The growth of property is thus closely connected with the increase of inventions and discoveries, and with the improvement of social institutions which mark the several ethnical periods of human progress.
I submit, Mr. Speaker, that if that land plank in the platform of the Cooperative Commonwealth Federation party were to become operative in this country, before the present generation would pass away we would be reduced to the condition of the nomadic wanderers, upon the primeval plains.
Long Adjournment-Mr. MacMillan (Mackenzie)
Strange and devious are the paths of history. The Cooperative Commonwealth Federation had to pass through the fiery furnace of affliction, and during the year 1933, as I have already mentioned, they fought strongly in the constituency of Mackenzie. It was their best fighting ground, and they met with defeat. Then in the provincial elections in Saskatchewan on the nineteenth of June last they were practically put out of business, only five being elected out of fifty-five, and four of them by minority votes. They began to see that they were human like everybody else. They were very anxious to attain office.
Then what happened? At their convention held in the city of Regina in the year 1933 many of the farmers were opposed to nationalizing the land. The farmers were in favour of nationalizing the banks and every other enterprise except themselves. They expressed themselves very strongly in the matter, and I believe the hon. member for Vancouver South (Mr. Maclnnis),who was an active participant in that convention, lost his temper. I am only surmising that, but when I read the statement that he did make I cannot imagine that it would be made under any ' other conditions than that his mind was agitated and that he was not quite normal.
If the farmer wants a cooperative commonwealth in which everything is socialized but himself, he had better have a cooperative commonwealth of his own.
I would not make that statement unless I was somewhat agitated-offended. He went on to say:
If the farmer is anxious to benefit from the cooperative movement he will have to come half way.
I do not know what is meant by "half way," whether he meant that the farmer should allow half of his possessions to be nationalized and the other half not, but that was the statement of the hon. gentleman, and I admire him for the ground he took; he was sincere. He was espousing principles and policies in which he believed and he wanted to stand his ground. He had said:
If the farmer wants a cooperative commonwealth in wliioh everything is socialized but himself, he had better have a cooperative commonwealth of his own.
He was quite right. When fate was deciding against the Cooperative Commonwealth Federation party, when they were losing all their elections, they had a convention in the city of Winnipeg last July, and I just want to show you, Mr. Speaker how the influence of that party has dwindled. At every convention they have a group photograph taken; it is the most important business of their convention. I have here the photograph that was taken of the group in the city of Regina. They sat there on July 10, 20 and 21, 1933. I do not know on which of these three days the photograph was taken, but it was the day on which they all looked their best. I have counted the number in the photograph and I find that there are 198, so altogether there must have been 199 persons in the group, because I know that the hon. member for Weyburn (Mr. Young) made it his boast in this house last session that he attended that conference. I cannot see his physiognomy in that group, and what happened I think was this; that when the photographer was adjusting his camera my hon. friend from Weyburn started talking about sound money and somebody sat on him. Mind you, there were 1,98 people present. Subsequently the party met in the city of Winnipeg on the seventeenth of July last. Of course they had their photograph taken there also, and would you believe it, Mr. Speaker, there are only eighteen in the group; the number had dwindled in one year from 198 to 18. Of course, we have to allow a certain latitude because the city of Regina is not very attractive compared with Winnipeg, and no doubt in Winnipeg some of them were out taking in the sights. But regardless of attractions in the city of Winnipeg the fact remains that in Regina in 1933 there were 198 present in the group and a year subsequently in Winnipeg there were only 18. Compare that with what took place in the Chateau Laurier on the twentieth of last month. On that evening nearly a thousand souls met to pledge their loyalty and devotion to the Liberal chief. It can easily be seen which party is in the best position to administer the affairs of this country and to satisfy all the electors. There is only one party, the Liberal party. I am not taking the present Conservative government into consideration at all because for the last two or three years the people have decided that they are out or will be out as soon as they have the opportunity to put them out.
I should like to return to a discussion of the human element to which I referred a short time ago. These people have a very human weakness, they are anxious to get into office. As I said before, the fundamental difference between the two parties is the land policy. What happened last year at Winnipeg? They came to the conclusion that they were pursuing the wrong policy and they
Long Adjournment-Mr. MacMillan (Mackenzie)
decided whether or not that policy was in the interests of the people, they would forsake it for the time being. They decided to drop their land policy. The provincial elections which were voted upon in Saskatchewan on June 19 were fought on a platform containing a land plank, which was the chief issue. What happened at the convention when the agricultural plank was presented? This convention was held in Winnipeg last July. Mr. Hyman, a non-voting member of the convention but a member of the provincial legislature, declared that the plank, in its drafted form, was the weakest in the platform. This is the plank they had previously considered as being the strongest. He pointed out in a powerful speech that enemies of the C.C.F. had so worked on the psychology of fear of the farmers by misrepresentation that farmers were afraid of the name. Farmers as a class resisted socialization the world over to a stronger degree than any other class. Yet they wanted to nationalize the farmer. Here is the excuse this man gave, according to this article:
The farmer's land was his most valuable possession and usually it was something he had wrested from nature and developed by the work of his own hands, and he did not want it taken away from him. The farmer feared what had happened in Russia. Mr. Hyman thought that the soviets action in dealing with agriculture had been its greatest mistake.
That was the opinion which Mr. Hyman advanced at this convention. However, the main thing to be considered by this house is the result. They all fell for this suggestion, even their leader, the hon. member for Winnipeg North Centre (Mr. Woodsworth). Be is one of the few men in Canada who I think would never veer from a policy he was pursuing once he thought it was right. However, on that particular occasion he fell and the results are accumulating upon him with astonishing .rapidity. This party is losing out in every part of Canada. The convention passed a new platform eliminating the land policy, and I shall say no more about what took place at that time.
Subsequently, on December 15, the hon. member for Winnipeg North Centre was speaking in Reston, Manitoba. The people were not yet satisfied; they had grave doubts that if the C.C.F. party was returned to office they would nationalize the land. The hon. member is reported in the Winnipeg Free Press of December 15, as follows:
He advocated public ownership of all utilities such as water power, railways and banks, stating that the bad feature of the new centi'al bank is that it is privately controlled.
In that we agree. The article continues:
He stated the aim of the C.C.F. party is to bring about the kingdom of heaven on earth while we are living,-
I concede that, as many of the C.C.F. supporters are saying that this will be a long range program, that it will take many years to be brought into being, and it is quite likely that we will have to be bom again, that we will have to return to our kindred dust when we are reanimated from the tomb to find the C.C.F. at the helm of state. When questioned as to whether they would nationalize the farms, the hon. member said, "no." He made that very emphatic. I shall say no more about the C.C.F. and their platform, as I see that my time is rapidly passing and I am sure the clock, is right to the minute.
This group claims that they have no connection or association with the communist party of Canada, I believe that that statement is correct, ibut the fact remains that this Cooperative Commonwealth Federation is the best incubator that I know of for the hatching of communist ideas. What has taken place recently? The following appeared in the Western Producer of March 21:
Parties Agree on Joint Aims
To work together in a campaign of public meetings on three points, the Regina C.C.F. council and the communist party have come to an agreement.
This is the official organ of the C.C.F. for the province of Saskatchewan. The article continues:
The three aims for which the two organizations will direct their joint activities are:
1. For the improvement of conditions of unemployed workers on relief.
2. Against forced labour and disenfranchisement, or partial disenfranchisement, of workers, whether employed or unemployed.
3. For non-contributory unemployment insurance.
The C.C.F. and the communist party are working hand in hand in connection with three issues. When the fox once gets his nose through the net, in a very short time his whole body is through. That is just what is happening. The communist party and the C.C.F. are working hand in hand on these things and in a very short time the, communist party will be in control. I give my hon. friends in the far comer this warning.
This party is preaching peace day in and day out. The other day we heard a very brilliant speech in this chamber by the hon. member for Laibelle (Mr. Bourassa). It is unfortunate that the hon. member is as old as he is, as I should like to see him one of those of whom it is said, "Millions now living will never die."
Long Adjournment-Mr. MacMillan (Mackenzie)
Subtopic: OBJECTION TO PROLONGED ADJOURNMENT EXPRESSED IN AMENDMENT TO MOTION FOR COMMITTEE