Right Hon. W. L. MACKENZIE KING (Prime Minister):

In reply to my hon. friend's question may I say that the Minister of Agriculture is attending a conference at the moment.

War Effort-Government Policy

Mr. SENN:

Yes, I understand.

Mr. MACKENZIE KING:

I shall direct his attention to my hon. friend's question. I have no doubt that he will exercise good judgment in his reply.

Mr. VINCENT DUPUIS (Chambly-Rou-ville):

Mr. Speaker, in rising to take part in this debate may I say that I fully realize the seriousness of the situation, but I am more at ease when I know that I am to express my views to a distinguished body of men who cherish British institutions and world liberty as we understand it. Indeed, a state of complete confusion exists at present in this country. The temper of the people is upset and their otherwise good judgment is disturbed. The body politic is threatened with total disruption. What is the cause of this state of affairs? Why should a large number of the families and friends of our soldiers overseas be disturbed and anxious? Is it because at the front some of our soldiers, or I may say even one of our soldiers, may be abandoned or left alone while his comrades are falling on each side? Will a single soldier be left alone? If that should be true I, as one of the members of this house who have many relatives at the front, would be the first to feel some anxiety, and to ask our government to see that this state of affairs should be corrected.

Is it true, Mr. Speaker, that unless we, the Canadian people, send immediate reinforcements to the extent of 16,000 men, the Canadian forces at the front will be left without help and support? I claim that this is not true. I ask any hon. member of this house who is endowed with a balanced mind, whatever may be his military experience, to rise in his place and say that if a single position on the front line in western Europe, no matter how small, should be left undefended because of casualties, the chief of staff behind the lines would not send immediate reinforcements to fill that gap. If there is a single man in this

house or outside who would dare say the chief of staff would refuse to fill that gap, I am ready to resign my seat. Where is that hon. member? If that is not true, why stir up prejudices in this country? Why put fear in the minds of the mothers, the families and the sweethearts of our great soldiers overseas, that our boys are going to be left without support? I think many hon. members of this house have discovered the trick and have brought the plan into the open; but it is good that such things should be repeated, and I am going to take the trouble to repeat them now.

Our military authorities may say that it would not suit the pride of the Canadian nation to allow a Polish regiment, a Belgian regiment, a French brigade or an English brigade, as the case might be, to fill the gap caused by casualties suffered by the Canadian army. That is perfectly correct. If our pride is wounded in that way, very good; but sometimes we as a nation are justified in measuring the dimensions of our national pride. I claim, basing my remarks on military authorities of other nations, that Canada has undertaken too much for its potential man-power. If we take count of our actual strength at the front, both in Europe and in Italy, according to the information given by high authorities, we find that we have six divisions, two and a half in Italy and three and a half on the western front. Is this all we have to show for our war effort, as far as man-power is concerned? No, sir. We have in our air force and navy approximately another five divisions, which makes a total of eleven divisions for a country of eleven million people, or one division for each million of the population of this country. If we take this as a basis for ascertaining what should be the man-power of others of our allies, we come to these figures: the British isles with a population of 47 million should have forty-seven divisions. It is true that they have to face the music in many parts of the world, but as far as I know they have only one division on the western front and perhaps two or three divisions in Italy.

Mr. HANSON (York-Sunbury):

That is

perfect nonsense.

Mr. DUPUIS:

I am here to be corrected.

Mr. HANSON (York-Sunbury):

It is

armies.

Mr. DUPUIS:

That is what I meant to say -armies. The British isles have one army on the western front.

Mr. HANSON (York-Sunbury):

How do

you know they have only one?

War Effort-Government Policy

Mr. DUPUIS:

And one army in Italy.

Mr. HANSON (York-Sunbury):

How do

you know that?

Mr. DUPUIS:

The Canadian people have

one corps, the second Canadian corps, on the western front. On the western front the United States have four armies and the French have one army. That is the picture of the western front. According to the population of the British isles, which is 47 million, on the basis of one-half there should be twenty-two divisions of men in the army, excluding the air force and the navy. To divide that number again we would have eleven divisions in Asia and eleven in Europe.

I think we can safely conclude that our manpower behind the front line is quite strong to-day," and it is much stronger when we consider the strength of the United States. Continental United States has a population of 132 million. Dividing that by two gives sixty-six divisions which should make up the armed forces of the United States. We have been told, I suppose because of their fear of the enemy, that the United States expect to have [DOT] seventy divisions on the western front in the near future, but to-day there are only four United States armies in the front line. It means that behind the line there is the potential man-power of the armed forces of our allies, which I am sure should relieve a little bit the anxiety which has been purposely created in order to stir up prejudice in this country. What are the facts about the infantry strength of the allied nations?

Mr. JACKMAN:

Give us the German

strength.

Mr. DUPUIS:

You are not talking to a

German, my hon. friend, you are talking to a man who has fought and is still fighting to preserve the liberty which your party wants to destroy.

Mr. JACKMAN:

I congratulate the hon.

member, but I am asking him what he knows about the German strength.

Mr. DUPUIS:

You are talking to a man

whose great grandfather fought as a captain of militia in 1812-14 to keep this country, under the British crown. Without false humility let me say that you are talking to a man whose grandfather, the son of the ancestor I have referred to, died to obtain responsible government in this country and get rid of the little group of financiers and privileged men who in 1837 were trying to destroy unity and keep the riches and natural resources of the country

away from the masses of the common people. German talk! I hope my hon. friend will not say that again.

Mr. JACKMAN:

I do not believe the hon. member understood the question I asked1 him.

Order.