The duty collected that year was $19,000. I am not being personal in these references, but the argument that is used in this book is that a duty is collected on goods produced in this country of a similar character to the dutiable goods imported. Let us take another item, potatoes. I might say here that I gave some of these figures once before, and the hon. member for Victoria and Carleton (Mr. Caldwell) demolished my whole argument by saying that the member for Lincoln ought to know that there is no duty on potatoes. I had not a chance to reply at the time, but I want to say now that in 1916 we collected about $1,000,000 of a duty on potatoes. I am not sure of this figure, but I think it is approximately right. I figured out for the benefit of my friends that, taking their argument as a basis, we had grown on our farms and sold to the consumers of this country, according to the trade returns of that year, in the neighbourhood of 79,000,000 bushels of potatoes. Now, if your argument is worth anything at all it simply means that somebody collected $15,000,000 on potatoes. And I should like to know which of you got that money. The not inconsiderable sum of $676,000 was collected on vegetables. Now, according to the arguments contained in this book every one who bought potatoes and vegetables helped to pay that extra duty. Well, who got the money?
Subtopic: THE BUDGET