Mr. J. D. REID.

I would ask the minister again about the question of furniture. No doubt his remarks will be carefully read by the manufacturers of furniture in this country. Now, the minister said that there was a good market in Japan for furniture. I would like to know how he thinks he would be encouraging furniture manufacturers to ship goods to Japan in face of the fact stated by him that he paid $400 for furniture and paid freight on it, and only received about $300 for it after he was through with it. In other words, are we to understand that the commissioners were not able to dispose of these goods at their actual cost ? No doubt he got them at a very low price.

Mr. FISHER.

The regular market price.

Mr. J. D. REID.

Together with freight added. The commissioner was not able to get more than about 50 per cent on the dollar, because $400 worth of goods, together with the freight, would probably be $600, and the minister says he only got something like about $300. The hon. minister stated that they got a sum of about $300. I suppose the hon. minister feels that the commissioner did his duty while there, and got the actual market value for these goods. If so, he must admit that the amount received was only about 50 cents on the dollar, so that the manufacturers of furniture would not receive more than 50 cents on the dollar upon the amount they charged the government. How does the hon minster make out 132

that that was encouraging the manufacturers to ship goods to that country ?

Mr. FISHER.

I may say that I based my statements inr regard to the market that we have there for furniture on the actual prices that are charged there for European and American furniture. Individuals in Japan came and asked what this furniture could be laid down there for and they said that they had paid larger prices for inferior goods. We had to sell the goods that had been there on exhibition during the whole summer and I daresay that my commissioners were not able to get the first hand price for any of them. I know as a matter of fact that some of these goods were sold very low to people of importance in whose hands we wanted to place them for advertising purposes, and I am not quite certain but that some of it was even given away for that purpose. The total of this amount was the actual cash received but I would not for a moment allow it to be held that these prices were the total value of these goods had they been placed first hand on the market or had they been offered in the ordinary market.

Mr. J. D. REID.

I have had a little experience myself in regard to goods at exhibitions and I have always found that goods that have been made specially for an exhibition are a little better that the ordinary goods.

Mr. FISHER.

These goods were not; they were just ordinary trade goods.

Mr. J. D. REID.

We generally get a little higher price. The government had that exhibition in Japan for the purpose of encouraging trade and the hon. minister says now that he has found out from the manufacturers of furniture that there is a good market in Japan. He has worked it up for them, and he has said to them : If you will send your goods there you will get a good market at paying prices. Will the hon. minister assume the responsibility of allowing any manufacturing industry to send a consignment of goods to Japan and guarantee that they will bring the actual cost of production in this country ?

Mr. FISHER.

No, that would not be the government's work. The government would not undertake to do that. The country would not ask the government to do that and the House would not support the government in doing that. The point is that by the exhibition of Canadian goods we showed to the people of Japan the character and quality of the goods that can be produced in this country. We must then trust to the ordinary channels of trade to follow that up, and it is only if the ordinary channels of trade will follow it up that the trade can be established.

Mr. J. D. REID.

Have tliere been any shipments made since that exhibition ?

Mr. FISHER.

The furniture association have not taken the steps we asked them to take: When Mr. Hutchison, the commissioner, and Mr. Burns, the secretary of our exhibition there talked matters over with them they said that they were so busy with their work here that they did not care to undertake shipments to Japan at the present time.

Mr. BLAIN.

If I understood the hon. minister correctly at the outset he made a statement to the committee in regard to four 1 or five exhibitions. Would the hon. gentleman say how much he expects the total cost of the St. Louis exhibition to be and how much the probable cost of the other exhibitions that he mentioned will be ?

Mr. FISHER.

This is an item of $200,000 which I am asking now for next year.

I am expecting to apply about $125,000 of this to closing up the accounts in connection with the St. Louis exhibition. That will leave about $75,000. When I asked for that item I was discussing the question of an exhibition in South Africa. Since then I have received information of the organization which has led me to believe that it is not of a character that we ought officially to take part in. But, I have also officially on behalf of the government, accepted an invitation to take part in the universal exhibition at Liege which is to open on the 1st of May next year.

Mr. BLAIN.

About how much do you expect to expend there ?

Mr. FISHER.

About $50,000, somewhere in the neighbourhood of the amount we expended at Osaka,-possibly not so much as Lifige is a little more accessible than Osaka.

Mr. BLAIN.

What will be the total cost of the St. Louis exhibition ?

Mr. FISHER.

About $325,000.

And those others ?

Mr. FISHER.

I want to have about $25,000 available so as to be in a position to take part in these other exhibitions which 1 have mentioned.

Mr. SAM. HUGHES.

Has the hon. Minister of Agriculture ever looked at the question in this way ? There is an expenditure of $325,000 on the St. Louis exhibition. I had the honour of being the only member of the House of Commons who voted against the payment of a large sum towards the expense of making an exhibition at the World's Fair. Would it not be better to take that sum of money and spend it on Immigration ? If the hon. minister would take that $325,000 and apply it to immigration it would bring out to Canada several Mr. FISHER.

thousand immigrants. I should imagine that it would bring out about 10,000 people. Does not the hon. minister think that that sum of money expended in bringing 10,000 selected immigrants to the shores of Canada would be infinitely better employed than if it were spent in this flimflamming around St. Louis and other places ? I think the money should be voted to the Department of the Interior. My own personal opinion is that these exhibitions do not do the country one particle of good.

Mr. FISHER.

I do not agree with the hon. gentleman.