Mr. LEGER:

I would draw the attention of the minister to the situation in our part of the country. In the county which I represent most of the land is Crown land. The farmers have wood on their land and almost

every year cut a certain number of cords of pulpwood which they offer for sale in the best market. For the last few years we have had to ship our pulpwood to the United States. In the latter part of last summer right in the little town where I live there were over two thousand cords shipped to the United States by water. These people are poor and have to work hard and I do not think we should deprive them of this chance to sell a few cords of pulpwood in the best market and if the market is not sufficient in our part of the country they should be allowed the chance to export to the United States. I would therefore ask the minister to reconsider the situation and not to do anything that will place at a disadvantage these poor people who have to work very hard for their living and who are making only a few dollars a year in this way. This measure is certain to cut their living, and I think that it should not be made applicable to pulpwood on Crown lands.

Mr. LEGER:

In my part of the country

the people cut most of their wood in the month of June, and therefore if this prohibition of export went into effect at once it would mean a great loss to them. As they are dependent on the returns from their wood to pay their taxes and expenses, I trust the government will defer putting this proposed legislation into effect for this season, so that the people I have referred to may have sufficient time to become acquainted with the regulations and act in accordance therewith.

Mr. LEGER:

I can assure my hon. friend from York-Sunbury (Mr. Hanson) that the railway in Kent was looked after by those more closely concerned in the interests of the county long before he was politically born. If we have not control of the branch lines down there it is not the fault of the Conservative government; they made an offer to the provincial authorities, which offer was declined. I for one have done all I could with reference to the matter, without bringing it before the House as a complaint against any government, and to-day it is being looked after by this government in a way which I think will be for the advantage of my county.

I can assure my hon. friend that this business is in good hands and that we can get along fairly well without his interference.

Mr. LEGER:

I should like to ask the

minister if the lightkeepers were given any increase in salaries last year?

Mr. LEGER:

These officers are certainly not adequately paid for the work they do. Their duty is to protect navigation and in this work they are engaged from the month of April, you might say, up to the month of October. The salary for part time officers engaged in this work amounts to only about $30 or $35 a moDth. With very few exceptions the amount they receive is only $30, which is wholly inadequate to maintain themselves and their families. They are located in very lonely and isolated spots and I think they should have a little more salary than they are now paid in order to enjoy a fair living. Inadequate payment is not much of an encouragement to efficient work. It may be said that if these men do not want the positions they can resign, but that would not be

Supply-Marine and Fisheries

a fair answer to their request. Other men would take the jobs at insufficient salaries. I would ask the minister to consider the advisability of making a reclassification of these officers in order that they may be a little better paid in the future.