Just a word or two in regard to the item for health of animals. The public accounts show that $500,000 was spent last year in one province in the matter of preventing tuberculosis. I am not finding fault with the endeavour to eradicate the disease, but I want to point out the futility of spending $750,000 or $1,000,000 a year under the existing circumstances, for this reason: if you have twenty per cent tubercular conditions existing over an area and you do not discover the reason and remedy the cause, you will have to repeat that expenditure every year. I want to impress upon the minister that there are some conditions underlying this that require investigation. The method of handling the slaughtering of those cattle is not fair to the farmers. The position is that the inspector comes along and says that so many cattle are affected with tuberculosis and the farmer receives a certain sum from the government. A drover takes them away to the market and then brings back a certificate. I would like to point out what the United States government does in this regard. In this country the farmer for his salvage gets about $15 a head. In every state of the union the government takes the salvage and undertakes to market it and gets for the farmer all that is in the discarded animal, and they have increased to the farmers from that source eight to ten dollars per year for the last few years. In Canada the farmer gets only fifteen or sixteen dollars for a diseased animal, while the farmer in the United States get $45 to $46 per head. The government is not doing enough along the line of investigating the basic conditions under which cattle are kept and which cause disease to break out among herds. After reading the report of last year I travelled over a thousand miles myself through the province of Quebec where this disease was reported, and I convinced myself that we have not even begun to investigate the conditions under which certain cattle are housed. In this far north part of America we may be mistaken in the way we handle our cattle in the winter, having regard to bovine tuberculosis. In the neighbourhood in which I lived for a great number of years we did not know in those pioneer years about bovine tuberculosis, but herds of cattle were on the decline. There was one farmer who had the finest herds in the district. I will tel] the minister who he was. He was the pioneer ancestor of the Aikins family in Canada, the father of Sir J. A. M. Aikins, the late lieutenant-governor of the
province of Manitoba and of the distinguished Doctor Aikins of Toronto. It was an old pioneer family, with magnificent powers of observation. This particular farmer discovered that every animal in his bam required so many cubic feet of space, and he provided a proper system of ventilation for every animal, as well as the right kind of housing, with the result that in a few years his herds surpassed all the other herds in the neighbourhood. Three generations have passed since that day, but to-day the young men in that district still point to the wisdom and the powers of observation of the man who laid the foundations of the healthy herds in that district. I plead with the minister to-day to have an investigation made in those areas in this country where there is such a tremendous amount of bovine tuberculosis. I am satisfied that if the basic conditions are improved, a great deal will have been done to conquer this disease. Otherwise I am satisfied that every dollar you are spending will have to be spent over again in the next few years. It is the underlying conditions that should be investigated apart from what the government, should do in seeing that the farmers of this country get what they are justly *entitled to in the matter of salvage.
Topic: DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE