July 19, 1904



Hon. W. S.@

For copies of certain papers referring to the School of Musketry at Ottawa.

He said : These are papers in connection with the statement made in this House a few days ago by the hon. member for North Victoria (Mr. Sam. Hughes), The hon. member for North Victoria made the following statement


Samuel Hughes



I have received a communication to the effect that the young men who have come here to learn musketry are being taxed for the maintenance of clubs, for the maintenance of an extra mess, and for extra furnishings generally. I am also informed that privates are called upon to act as servants to officers, and that these young men who are brought from the farms to learn musketry are subjected to prison discipline. They cannot leave the camp grounds unless they get a pass and they must be in at a certain hour in the evening or they are disciplined. I am told that a number of officers and men were informed that they need not bring extra clothing or bedding, but that they had to purchase them here at considerable expense. I do not know whether or not the officer in charge of the musketry school is responsible for this. This officer goes on to say that he thinks the country pays the Cartwright family dearly enough without having the men who come to take the musketry course taxed by this extra expense. I do not think the people of this country want the young gentlemen, privates or officers who come here, to be subject to prison rule. I do not believe that a young man who comes here and chances to be a private, should give up one hour of his time to act as servants to any officer, nor do I think that the country should pay these men to act as officers' servants. I direct the attention of the minister to these grievances which I believe are founded on fact, and which should be stopped at once. I do not ask him to give any answer to-day, as I have not had time to give him notice that I would bring it up.

To which I replied :


Frederick William Borden (Minister of Militia and Defence)



This school of musketry has been in operation for a couple of years, and this is the first time I have heard any complaint. I was not aware that the system in force this year differed from that of previous years. I am sorry that my hon. friend (Mr. Sam. Hughes) saw fit to make the reference he did to the Cartwright family. I scarcely see what that has to do with it, and I am sure that my hon. friend himself would be the last man to say or to insinuate that any charges that may be imposed on officers attending the school could go into the pocket of as honourable a gentleman as Col. Robert Cartwright is known to be. I am sorry that he made that gratuitous slip. I am very glad, however, that he has called my attention to the fact, and I will make inquiry and be prepared to make a statement on the subject.

I have here, Mr. Speaker, a memorandum addressed by the commandant of the school, Colonel Cartwright, to the Adjutant General. It reads as follows

Rockcliffe, Ont., 14th July, 1904. From the Commandant Canadian School of Musketry to the Adjutant General, Headquarters.

Statement by Col. Sam. Hughes, M.P.

Sir,-I have the honour to inform you that my attention has been called to a statement in regard to the Canadian School of Musketry made in parliament by Col. Sam. Hughes.

In order that no time may be lost in disabusing the public mind of misconception in regard to the Musketry School, which might be conceived by the public if this statement were left unanswered, I forward herewith for your information :

1. A marked copy of the musketry regulations for the Canadian militia, showing the camp bedding, &c., allowed to each officer, non-commissioned officer and man.

2. An extract from the regulations and orders in regard to servants at the Musketry School.

3. Nominal roll of the non-commissioned officers and men of the Royal Canadian Regiment present at the Canadian School of Musketry, showing the capacity in which each non-commissioned officer or private is employed.

4. Parade state, showing the number of officers, non-commissioned officers and men at the Canadian School of Musketry.

In regard to the above papers, I might say first that the officers' mess is managed by a committee. Preliminary arrangements, subject to their approval, have to be made with caterers, who have everything in order to proceed with the mess from the first opening of the school. The fees are of the most moderate description and will bear the closest possible inspection.

The staff-sergeants have a mess, other noncommissioned officers have a mess, and the private soldiers have a mess. These messes are managed by a committee, in the same manner as all similar messes are managed in the service. They are spending their own money under the supervision of the adjutant.

Private Soldiers.-There are no privates taking the course at the Canadian School of Musketry. There are, however, privates from the Permanent Corps, sent down to Rockcliffe for fatigue purposes. They are used in various ways, as shown in the attached schedule. It

will be observed that the proportion ot officers' servants to officers is much smaller than that allowed by regulations. It would be a great hardship to prevent these men making extra money as officers' servants, most of the men count on making extra in this way when coming to Rockcliffe.

Bedding.-In regard to bedding, the full allowance of bedding as laid down, has been allowed to officers at this camp. Owing to the fact that at a previous camp officers were allowed sheets and pillow-cases, there may have been some disappointment on this score, but all the officers to whom I have spoken on the subject consider that sheets and pillow-cases are unnecessary for camp life. In any cas it is not a very great hardship for an officer desiring these luxuries to provide them for himself.

Clothing.-In regard to extra clothing, the officers have been given specially to understand that while at musketry work they may wear out their old uniforms. A certain number of fatigue suits have been procured from stores to issue to officers and non-commissioned officers desiring to use them.

When proceeding to Ottawa in uniform officers are required to be properly dressed. As yet, however, the adjutant has not had reason to order any officer or non-commissioned officer to procure extra uniform.

Passes.-Passes are only required for extraordinary circumstances, such as men wanting to stay out all night, or aftr 12 o'clock, or to get off some parade or other duty.

Officers are expected to sleep in camp, as at other camps.

It is, of course, thoroughly understood that officers or non-commissioned officers misbehaving or showing indifference to their studies will be sent home.

The Musketry School affairs, mess accounts, and expenditure are simply arranged and easily investigated, and the more they. are investigated or examined the more the absurdity of the attack on the management of the school will appear.

I do not bear C01. Sam. Hughes the least animosity in regard to the statements he has made, because it is clear that he has been misinformed by some malicious person, who ought to know-, and probably by this time does know, that he has made a series of absurd and misleading statements.

The question as to whether officers attending a course of instruction should be permitted the use of a soldier servant is a matter of general policy, upon which there may be a difference of opinion.

I have the honour to be, Sir,

Your obedient servant,



Commandant, Canadian School of Musketry. The Hon. the Minister,

Forwarded. I concur in the above. ''3d.) Aylmer, Colonel, Commanding Canadian Militia.


I shall not detain the House by reading the rest of this report, except'to read the list of officers. The list of officers now in charge of the school is as follows :

Lieut.-Col. Cartwright, commandant.

Capt. Kemmiss Betty, adjutant.


Robert Laird Borden (Leader of the Official Opposition)

Conservative (1867-1942)


Capt. Groves Contant.

Capt. de la Ronde, Q. master.

Surg.-Lieut. Birkett, M. O.

In addition to this, I have the following letter addressed by the commandant of the school to the Adjutant General :

Rockcliffe, Ont., 15th July, 1904. From the Commandant, Canadian School of Musketry, to the Adjutant-General, headquarters.

Statement by Colonel Sam. Hughes, M.P.

Sir,-I have the honour to report, for the information of the officer commanding the militia, that the under-mentioned non-commissioned officers paraded this morning before my adjutant, and, upon being interviewed individually, each made a protest against the statement made by Colonel Hughes in the House, and which was published in the ' Citizen ' of the 13th July. (Clipping attached.)

Each stated that he considered the same both inaccurate and misleading, and as unjust to himself as a student and to the staff of the Canadian School of Musketry.

Each was asked whether he had any complaint whatsoever, and whether his liberty had at any time been curtailed, and each non-commissioned officer replied in the ne- . gative, emphatically denying that there was any shadow of reason for complaint-

They requested that this protest be forwarded through the proper channel, in order that the same may be brought to the notice of the Minister of Militia, and that the insinuations contained in the remarks of the member for North Victoria be denied in the House, from whence they emanated :-

C. Sgt. Parkhill, 13th Regiment.

" McMaster, 2lst Regiment.

" McMurphy, 26th Regiment.

" Kuhn, 41st Regiment.

Sergt. Blakeney, 43rd Regiment.

Turner, 91st Regiment.

Street, Ottawa Engineers.

Milne, 26th Regiment.

Ferguson, 43rd Regiment.

Denny, 43rd Regiment.

Cowan, 43rd Regiment.

Menzies, 43rd Regiment.

Waters, 43rd Regiment.

Johnstone, 4!st Regiment.

Morrison, 43rd Regiment.

Corporal Andrews, 43rd Regiment.

Workman, 43rd Regimnt.

Kemp, Ottawa Engineers.

Filion, 43rd Regiment.

Shaw, 43rd Regiment.

Learoyd, 43rd Regiment.

McGuiness, 43rd Regiment.

O'Neill, 43rd Regiment.

Bindon, 43rd Regiment Mitchell, 43rd Regiment.

Simkins, 13th Regiment.

Worrall, 13th Regiment.

Zimmerman, 13th Regiment.

Marsh, 13th Regiment.

Morgan, Ottawa Engineers.

Cottee, 43rd Regiment-Heinrichs (J.), 43rd Regiment. Heinrichs, (F.), 43rd Regiment. Swallow, 13th Regiment.

I have the honour to be, sir,

Your obedient servant,

(Sgd.) R. CARTWRIGHT, Lt.-Col., Commandant, Canadian School of Musketry.

Deputy Minister.

Forwarded in connection with previous correspondence.

(Sgd.) AYLMER, Colonel, Commanding Canadian Militia.

18, 7, '04.


Robert Laird Borden (Leader of the Official Opposition)

Conservative (1867-1942)


I may say that the hon. member from North Victoria (Mr. Sam. Hughes) was called away to attend the funeral of an old friend, but he will probably be back to-morrow.


Motion agreed to.


Bill (No. 159) respecting the Pacific Bank of Canada.-Mr. R. F. Sutherland.



Hon. W. S.@

FIELDING (Minister of Finance) moved that the House go into Committee of Supply.


Robert Laird Borden (Leader of the Official Opposition)

Conservative (1867-1942)


Before the motion is carried, I would like to ask the Minister of Marine and Fisheries (.Hon. Mr. Prefon-taine) whether be has any further information on the subject I mentioned yesterday. Is he quite sure that the commission to which he referred, of which the hon. member for Digby (Mr. Copp) is one and some other gentlemen whom he named, is the commission formed for the purpose of dealing with this particular subject and is not a commission formed for the purpose of dealing with some other subject ?


Joseph Raymond Fournier Préfontaine (Minister of Marine and Fisheries)


Hon. RAYMOND PRBFONTAINE (Minister of Marine and Fisheries).

In answering the question put yesterday by the hon. gentleman, I referred to the report of Prof. Prince, which is published in the annual report of the Department of Marine and Fisheries for 1903. His report is very voluminous, and goes over the whole question, showing that two years ago this matter was brought under the notice of the department, and a special study made of it by Prof. Prince. It covers about thirty pages of the departmental report of last year. Now as regards the study of this question which has beeii made by Prof. Prince, I will read from his report showing what was done during last year :

In view of the pressing importance of the dog-fish nuisance on the Atlantic coasts generally, the members of two commissions have been authorized to take evidence from the fishermen and report. One of these commissions, consisting of Professor Prince and Mr-Morais, held sittings in Gloucester and Resti-gouche counties in April last, and made recommendations based on the statements laid before them ; but this commission, however-was very limited in its scope.

The second commission, consisting of Colonel Tucker, M.P., as chairman, and Messrs-Copp, Armstrong, Bowers and Venning, with Reverend Father Turbide as a member in respect of the Magdalen islands, held sittings

at various points on the Magdalen Islands and the Bay of Fundy, and as the commission was authorized to inquire into the herring, sardine and lobster fisheries, as well as other important matters, it has been impossible to cover the whole ground as yet, and until the close of the second sittings this summer, it will not be possible for that commission to make final recommendations.

The question is a very large one, which will involve very considerable expenditure of public money to properly cope with it, and it is plain therefore that reliable recommendations can be made only after a very wide survey and a considerable amount of evidence from different parts of the coast has been received.

The erection of reduction works has been suggested, and it is possible that an experiment may be started at once with a view to utilizing the dog-fish for oil, fertilizing ard food purposes, and the department is in communication with important parties with a view to arriving at this end.

The department has already carried on some experiments with dog-fish as lobster bait ; but these have so far not proved very satisfactory, and should be carried on in a more extensive way later in the fall



I may add that I have a report of the experiments that have been made, and which are very interesting. Experiments are being carried on on a still larger scale at the present time, and instructions have been given to the men employed on the fishery protection boats to see what can be done to alleviate the nuisance that is complained of. As regards the intention of the government on the subject, it will be seen within the next few days that numerous suggestions have been made. One of them, for instance, was to offer a premium for each dog-fish caught, the premium suggested being lj cents each. While the department were considering this suggestion, we received very valuable information showing that to cope with the difficulty in the way suggested, by offering a premium for each dog-fish, would cost an immense sum of money, and involve an expenditure of over $100,000 a year. The department therefore has come to the conclusion to put a certain sum of money in me supplementary estimates in order to erect reduction works where the dog-fish can be treated for oil and for fertilizing and other purposes. I repeat that the department is fully aware of the importance of this question, and will adopt all practical means to abate this nuisance. In dealing with a question of this kind, certain studies have to be made and certain experiments carried on. This nuisance is not new, it has existed in the waters of various countries, and it has been dealt with in different ways. On the coast of France, for instance, they use the flesh of the dog-fish as food, and it appears that in certain countries the people have no objection to eat that kind of fish. They find it a little coarse, but still it is palatable. But in Canada up to the pre-


sent time people have strongly objected to use the flesh as food. Gradually, however, it may be that as a result of the experiments that will be carried on, people may come to find the flesh of the dog-fish as wholesome a food as some others ; and I think it will be found that the taking of this fish can be made a profitable commercial pursuit. Under these circumstances, I think the House and the country will be satisfied, when the supplementary estimates come down, that we have not ignored the importance of this question, and that we are trying in the most expeditious manner to give satisfaction to the fishermen.


Robert Laird Borden (Leader of the Official Opposition)

Conservative (1867-1942)


The subject is certainly one worthy, not only of the immediate attention but of the immediate action of the government. The reason I thought it necessary to bring this subject to the attention of the Minister of Marine and Fisheries, was as I explained yesterday, because I found that on the 2nd of May we were promised the report of the commission within two or three days, and we have heard nothing more of the matter from that time till this. I do not believe that the people of the larger provinces of Canada realize the importance of the fishing industry to the Dominion as a whole. In speaking of the fishing industry, I am speaking of course more particularly of the fishing industry of the maritime provinces with which I have been endeavouring to make myself acquainted during the last two or three years. There has been a great deal of encouragement given to the different industries throughout this country in various ways during the last quarter of a century ; but certainly the inshore and deep-sea fishing industries of the maritime provinces have, on the whole, received as little encouragement in proportion to their importance as any of the great industries of Canada. I hope to live to see the day when the provinces of Ontario and Quebec will be fully supplied with the best fish in the world from the fisheries of the maritime provinces ; and until that day comes, and until even that market is extended much further west than the provinces I have mentioned, I for one will not be satisfied. As I mentioned last year, I think that one difficulty under which we labour in the maritime provinces with regard to this matter is that our fishermen still pursue very much the same methods that they pursued fifty, or sixty, or seventy years ago. Not very much advance as I understand-and I am speaking subject to correction by those in the House who understand the subject possibly better than I do-not very much advance has been made in pur methods of catching fish. Possibly there may have been some advance but not much. But I understand from those who are qualified to speak on the subject that not much advance has been made in the methods of curing the fish.

Subtopic:   E. E. PRINCE.

Joseph Raymond Fournier Préfontaine (Minister of Marine and Fisheries)



I am told by those who are engaged in the business that herring prepared in Norway sell at a much larger figure than our herring, and that the herring caught and cured in Scotland sell at a much higher figure than ours. So far as that part of the industry is concerned, the supply of fresh fish to the markets of Quebec and Ontario has made some progress. But that market is still in its infancy, and it cannot be much improved until better means of transportation are provided than exist at present, and I believe those means can be very much improved.

But this is only in passing. The industry as a whole is in very great danger from the invasion of the dog-fish. I have read the report of Prof. Prince to which attention has been called by the Minister of Marine and Fisheries, and I think he is under the apprehension that the pest may prove only temporary. As a matter of fact it has been scourging the fish and the fishermen on our coasts during the past six years from about 1898 and during the last two years it has been particularly destructive. In order to give the House some appreciation of what this destruction is, let me quote from the report of Prof. Prince, at page 52, of the 36th Annual Report of the Department of Marine and Fisheries, for the year 1903. His words are as follows :-

The direct harm that a plague of dog-fish can do is well nigh incredible. Thus in 1882 the pack of cured herring in the Shetland Isles was 134-GOO barrels, whereas in 1888, owing to the presence of dog-fish, the total quantity fell to 99,000 barrels, and in 1889, even lower i. e. not more than 47,000 barrels or only about one third of the pack two years before and representing therefore am enormous total loss.

Then, quoting press reports, further on he says this as to our own fisheries along the Atlantic coast :

Every week brings reports from widely different points about the trouble by dog-fish, which are far more formidable pests by sea than the potato-bug is by land. Therefore some people contend that the government should take the matter up and do something to exterminate the invading swarms of dog-fish, or make them scarcer. Now let it he remembered that the fisheries department is not altogether unmindful of the loss suffered each year from this source. The officials, as we remarked before, have been instructed to collect information and tender advice. That was the proper thing for a preliminary step, and the parties applied to should have responded to the best of their ability, but it cannot be learned that many of them did so.

I may say that as far as I am personally concerned, I have not had the difficulty which Prof. Prince mentions in his report, because I have applied to some people familiar with the subject and I have in every instance received full and comprehensive and very practical reports, some of which I propose to submit to the House before I sit down. Prof. Prince's report is quite exhaustive and it is of course so long that I

could not venture to Inflict the whole of it upon the House. He says at page 57 of the report:

The government has been urged to offer a bounty for the capture of a dog-fish. In some parts of the world dog-fish are caught for their oil, but the industry is not very profitable. It is claimed, however, that if a bounty was offered the fishermen would make systematic efforts to destroy this pest, that as the dog-fish were killed off the value of the fisheries would increase and that in a few years the bounty could be withdrawn without injury to the fisherman.

Then he goes on to mention about a dozen suggestions which have been made to the government. Some of these do not commend themselves to my judgment and apparently they do not commend themselves to the judgment of Prof. Prince. After dealing with those suggestions he goes on to say :

If, as seems clear, the commercial products yielded by dog-fish bring such low returns in the market, that it will not pay oil and fertilizer factories to utilize them, and cannot therefore pay the fishermen to fish for them or even to save them when caught accidentally, then a bounty paid by the government seems to be necessary. The livers of dog-fish bring to the fishermen 25c. per pail and at least 50 dog-fish are required to make a pail of livers, and the loss of hooks, bait, and time, have all to be included, hence only the encouragement of a bounty will ensure the energetic and continuous destruction of these fish. Certainly the suggestions numbered 1, 2 and 3 would probably harm the schools of valuable fishes as much as the detested dog-fish, while the employment of a few vessels or government cruisers would not suffice to deal with so general a pest as the dogfish on our shores. Reliance can be placed only on the co-operation of the fishermen all along the coast stimulated by a bounty fairly and effectively distributed on a workable basis. Unless, indeed, the dog-fish in the meantime take the course they have so commonly done in former times and on other coasts, and disappear as suddenly as their hordes originally have appeared. The problem would then solve itself.

I would also like to bring to the attention of the House, because the suggestions which are here made may be of assistance to the lion. Minister of Marine and Fisheries in dealing with the subject, a communication which I have received from a gentleman who is very well known in Nova Scotia and who is very largely interested in the fish business. This is Mr. Howard Smith, of the firm of N. & M. Smith, of Halifax. I asked him in the month of January last to give me his views on the extent of the pest and the best way to deal with it, and Mr. Smith was good enough to write me a letter, dated the 28th January, which is as follows :-

Dear Mr. Borden :-As promised, I send you herewith a few ideas and suggestions as to how best to combat this bete noir of our coast fishermen, the voracious dog-fish. I do not speak from experience as a practical fisherman, merely repeating sundry scraps of information picked up from the hardy toilers on our shores, who, 222".

on good grounds, consider this their worst enemy.

I think that Mr. Smith's modesty has led him to probably undervalue the information upon which he speaks, because I happen to know that he has devoted a good deal of time and study to this question and has taken a great deal of interest in it. He goes on as follows :-

Nor are they alone suffering from its ravages. Reports to hand this year from Norway, state that the fishery there was greatly handicapped on account of the enormous schools of dogfish following the codfish, &c., as they swam over their favourite haunts and feeding grounds. Newfoundland fishermen also view with alarm his first appearance last year in small schools. Our American neighbours have awakened to the injury done, particularly their inshore fishery, and the Gloucester newspapers, and fishing gazettes, cry aloud for government action to eliminate, as far as possible, the evil.

I have lately read that ' Mr. Irving Field ' of Harvard University, under the direction of the United States bureau of fisheries, has devoted the summer to the study of the scarcity of lobsters and their destruction by other denizens of the sea. He has brought out the fact that dog-fish is one of the fiercest enemies against which the lobster has to contend, working more destruction than any other of the finny tribe. This species of shark is very voracious, and is declared to be no small factor in depleting the number of lobsters on the coast.

' Mr. Field by the examination of the stomachs of several hundred of the dog-fish, found that next to the rock crab, and the spider crab, the lobster is the chief article on which the dogfish feeds. In several of the stomachs were found lobsters partially digested, which measured over seven inches in length, and the presence of two smaller lobsters in a single stomach was not uncommon. If this be true, an additional reason exists for making wear upon the dog-fish.

' Mr. Field also experimented with dog-fish as food, and declares it to be an article of great merit. Both himself and colleagues partook of it, and pronounced the fish savoury and palatable. It was afterwards served in the marine biological station to hundreds of students and professors engaged in scientific work, without their knowledge of the species, and all pronounced it one of the finest flavoured of fish. It is a favoured fish with those natural epicures, the Japanese, and it is also used as a food by the inhabitants of the Bermudas, by whom it is called 'Nurseflesh.' The name, and difficulty in preparing the fish is the chief objection to its use as an article of diet.'

I have been repeatedly told the fish is an excellent article of food, if care is taken to keep from deteriorating until cooked. Unless put on ice, it tqrns bad in ten or twelve hours, the flesh being particularly rich. Our herring or mackerel exposed in the same manner would keep at least 24 hours. Its possibilities as an article of food to be put up in any quantity, are yet in an experimental stage. Personally, I think it is only a question of prejudice due to the name and the depredatory habits of the marauders.

One thing sure, and that is, they can be used as a fertilizer, after the oil has been extracted from the liver, and the skin can be dried for sand-paper purposes, the latter giving an almost indestructible surface for polishing. Moreover,

the fins, by simply boiling in water, produce the finest glue. One ounce of glue is said to be obtained from seven ounces of fins.

Now here Is the germ of my ideas. Bonus fertilizing factories, say at the rate of $2 to $3 per ton output, whenever a certain proportion of their output is dog-fish residue ; pay the fishermen Jc. per dogfish to enable them to fit out and attack, this, their natural enemy.

Subtopic:   E. E. PRINCE.

July 19, 1904