Statistics of Railways and Canals for the year 1913.-Mr. Cochrane. Report of the Department of Trade and Commerce, part 2, for the year ended March 31, 1913.-Mr. Foster. They pay the highest prices for clothing, furniture, building material, such as cement, lumber, lime and hardware, and for' all farm equipment, hand tools, harness, implements, power machinery, power fuel and fencing materials, of any agricultural population in the world. They pay the highest rate of interest on bank loans and mortgages and the highest freight and express rates, coupled with the longest haul for outgoing produce and incoming supplies, of any people of the white race with the possible exception of the Russians. And further on:

On the Orders of Day being called:

ADDRESS IN REPLY. Consideration of the motion of Mr. H. F. McLeod for an Address to His Royal Highness the Governor General in reply to his speech at the opening of the session, and the proposed amendment thereto of Mr. Neely, resumed from Wednesday, January 28. Mr. THOS. MACNUTT (Saltcoats): Mr. Speaker, I have no intention of taking up very much of the time of the House, but I believe that at least all western members should place their views on record in regard to this very important matter. About two and a half years ago a long debate took place in this House on a similar principle, it that time we had before us an offer of reciprocity with the United States in wheat and wheat products, made especially to Canada-not, as the Wilson Bill does, to the food products of the world; but that offer was rejected. I believe that to-day that question is just as important as it was two and a half years ago and there has been ample evidence since that time that the southern market would have benefited this country to a large extent. I only wish that we had before us to-day the same offer as the previous one and that this Government could be induced to accept it. There has been a change of views in the West. Although the two provinces of Saskatchewan and Alberta decided almost unanimously in favour of accepting that offer, the province of Manitoba did not do so. But evidently they have changed their opinion in that province or are prepared for political reasons to swallow themselves, and are ready now to have some truck and trade with the Yankees. We know the attitude of the Roblin Government when a few days ago-a resolution originating with that Government, was unanimously adopted by the legislature of Manitoba in favour of accepting this offer. In the province of Saskatchewan Mr. Haultain was defeated in the provincial election of 1912 largely because of the strong feeling in favour of reciprocity. Although the provincial Government has nothing to do directly with reciprocity, still the people considered that this was an issue, and they preferred a local government friendly to a policy of that kind to one which was not friendly to such a policy. The successor of Mr. Haultain, who is now on the bench, agreed to this resolution: That, in the opinion of this House, the Parliament of Canada should remove the duty at present imposed on wheat and on flour in order that Canadian wheat and flour may be exported to the United States free of duty. A strong delegation, composed of Conservatives from Alberta, led by the leader of the Conservative Opposition in Alberta, came to Ottawa a week or so ago, and it was understood that one of their objects was to ask this Government to accept the offer of free wheat. They did not make this request, it being rumoured that they were headed off; but we know perfectly well that the province of Alberta is strongly in favour of free wheat. What reason can this Government have for refusing this offer? Surely the men who raise the wheat are the persons to be considered. I do not say that they should have protection; they have some now, but they do not want it, and any obstacles in the way of their getting the true value for their product should be removed, no matter what other interests may lose a small portion of their profit in the handling of it or its conversion into flour 01in its conveyance to the different markets. There is a decided difference, although it is not so great now as it was previous to 1911, between the American and Canadian prices for wheat. I remember preparing rsome figures covering ten years, week by week, showing that the average difference

for that period was in favour of the American market by about ten cents a bushel. The difference is not so great at present; but if the price goes lower on the American side, that is a good time not to sell. At all events this would mean a wider market and that is a very important consideration in itself, regardless of the difference in price. At the present time the English market is the only one that Canada has outside of her own, and our home market could only take care of about 40,000,000 bushels last year. That means that our farmers have to send their wheat to England, often causing a glut on that market. The English market was flooded last fall as the hon. member for Edmonton (Mr. Oliver) read to us the other day. At the time the wheat was going on the market there was no competition from other countries, but the price was far lower than the quality of the grain demanded. I have a table here showing that the prices on the Liverpool market have been going down continually since 1907. In December, 1907, No. 1 wheat was worth $1.23; in December, 1911, $1,184; in December, 1912, $1.07 and in December, 1913, 98 cents, notwithstanding the wheat was of the highest quality. That means that the Liverpool market is not sufficient to take care of the wheat that is being grown even now in the West. It seems to me that the farmers are realizing the necessity for a larger market because they are not producing relatively what they should produce. I have some figures here-and I think they are authoritative-showing that the West produced 209,262,000 bushels of wheat this year and in 1912, 204,280,000 bushels, an increase of only 4,982,000 bushels, and that can be accounted for to a large extent by a better yield per acre, and the better quality of the crop. The land does not appear to have been occupied by other crops to make un for this, because there was practically no increase in the oats grown in 1913. In that year, 242,413,000 bushels were raised, and in 1912, 242,321,000 bushels, only an increase of 92,,000 bushels. This increase can only be accounted for by the better yield per acre, as I remember well that in 1912 a large portion of the crop of oats in Saskatchewan and part of Manitoba was shed by a hurricane and the yield that year was consequently not so good as usual. As to barley, there were 31,060,000 bushels grown in 1913, and in 1912, 31,600,000 bushels. That is a decrease in 1913 of 540,000 bushels. I have not the figures for flax but there was much less flax grown in 1913 than in 1912. For some reason or other, then there does not seem to be a proportionate increase in the growth of all grains. Why is this? To some extent, I believe it is because the farmers are not anxious to increase their acreage. When you take into consideration the freight rates, the cost of labour and of implements, there is very little margin left for the farmer at the present price of wheat, and the people of the West are unanimous almost, in demanding another market. It is their right and they should get it. It has already been mentioned in this House that for some little time last summer the Minneapolis figures were lower than those on the Canadian side. That is easily accounted for because at that time there was very little wheat on the market. As soon as the threshing -was over, however, and the wheat came pouring in there was a decided difference in price. Let us look at these figures, taken from the Grain Growers' Guide. On January 3, No. 1 Northern was 4i cents higher in Minneapolis than in Winnipeg; No. 2, 4| cents higher and No. 3, 5| cents higher. But you have to add about two cents a bushel on account of the difference in the quality of grades. A week afterwards, No. 1 Northern was 31 cents higher in Minneapolis; No. 2, 2J cents higher, and No. 3, 3J cents higher. What effect would this have upon the West? About 150,000,000 bushels of the 209,000,000 bushels that Canada raises, would be exported. Apply, say three cents a bushel to that and it would make a difference of $4,500,000. If we apply 5 cents, there would be a difference of $7,500,000. Outside of the great benefit this would be to the farmers, it would make a great difference to the eastern part of Canada. Factories are closed to-day in Ontarir for lack oi orders; people have not got the money to buy; and there are many unemployed throughout the east. I do not mean to say that this larger market would lower the cost of living to any great extent, but it would give some men who are now unemployed money to buy the necessaries of life. I have an article here clipped from a Toronto paper showing that during the past two weeks ten thousand men have been fed by charity. The article reads as follows: Ten Thousand Fed within Two Weeks-Salvation Army Headquarters has Welcomed Many of the Destitute-Soup, Coffee, Bread -Simple Food and Space on the Floor to Sleep not Despised. During the past two weeks nearly 10,000 meals, consisting of soup, coffee and bread, have been served to unemployed men at the Salvation Army headquarters. Officers responsible for assisting the unemployed men without homes and food have thrown open one of their halls where 250 men sleep on the floor every night. The class of men who avail themselves of the temporary provision made by the Army are generally those out of employment, [DOT] and, having spent their last cent, are compelled to accept the bowl of soup, the cup of coffee, and enough floor space to give them warmth and shelter for the night. The Army winter relief fund is also being used to assist this huge family of the unemployed. Several hon. gentlemen have given figures showing that something like 100,000 men are out of employment in Canada today. I do not say for a moment that the opening of the American market is going to give employment to all these men, but it would help very materially along that line, and it would also help the farmers very much. To-day if you go into any little town in the West you will find notices posted up of sheriff's sales. That is a very serious matter, and it is not because the farmers are lazy or idle; they are doing the best they can, but it goes to show that the farmers, not altogether on account of the price of wheat and the high cost of implements- although that has a considerable bearing upon it-are not able to pay their way. Relief is going to be given, I understand, not of a charitable nature, but in a businesslike way by the province of Saskatchewan in various ways. It is not that the country is going to degenerate, or is not capable of giving a good living to industrious men, hut it is that the conditions are such that tney should be improved in order that many of our people in the West may get a better return for tneir labour. This would assist very materially, it would be an easy matter for this Government to open up that market. It would help not only the farmers of the West, but it would help, I think, the unemployed and factories Oif the East. Who are opposed to this? There must be a mandate issued by the milling and railway interests to the Government. They are the only ones that are interested the other way -certainly not the farmer, certainly not the manufacturer nor the consumer. It must be the railway companies and the millers. This is a strong indication that the price must be better to the south and the market more inviting or they need not fear this proposal. It means that in order to retain trie carrying trade the railway freight rates would have to be reduced, and in order that the millers should be able to maintain their control over the wheat and get a supply at their own figures they would have to raise the price to the farmer, very frequently, at all events, and they do not like to do this. In the last two years the millers have been making enormous dividends and the railway companies have been doing very well indeed. But I think that the Railway Commission will probably discover that they are well able to get along with smaller freight charges. I remember very well that in 1911 there was a reason given by the right hon. Prime Minister (Mr. Borden) why this request of the western farmers should be refused. It was that if the wheat went to the south the Americans would get the benefit of the bran and shorts for feeding purposes which should be retained in this country. When a man. raises wheat he raises it to sell, gluten, bran, shorts and all, wherever he can sell it and get the best price for it. He could easily take care of the feed question; he could grow other feed as far as that goes. I have often known good wheat to sell at sixty cents a bushel-that is a cent a pound-although sometimes it sells at less. It is very seldom that you can buy bran and shorts for less than $20 a ton or a cent a pound. It is not considered good business to sell wheat for a cent a pound and buy back wheat offal for a cent a pound. The millers do not give it for nothing; you have to buy it back. That cannot be a good reason for refusing a better price for the wheat. But after all is said and done, I think there is only one interest to be considered in this matter. When the farmer raises a bushel of wheat it is his, it could not be in existence if he did not raise it, and, therefore, I repeat, it is his. He should not have any obstacle thrown in his way in marketing his product, and the country is bound to benefit if the farmer benefits. I do not think that I need take up very much more time because there have been so many reasons given in favour of this proposition and after all it is a simple affair. It seems to me that if, in any kindergarten school, you put the whole thing on the blackboard any child would give the answer, and that is that there is no reason or excuse for the Government to put this off. It has been said that this amendment is brought in at an inopportune time, that it is practically a motion of want of confidence in the Government. Well, if the Government will not accept it, I do not see why we should have any confidence in them. I would be per-

fectly willing to vote along those lines. I think the principal reason why the Government refuse this is that they dare not offend the great milling industries and railway corporations. Possibly they think that the farmers, many of whom are not very well informed, and many of whom are sometimes emotional, can be deceived the same as they were in 1911. The Government know very well that they cannot fool the railway people or the millers in connection with matters of dollars and cents. I am not saying this at all in disparagement of the farmers who, I believe, are the most intelligent people there are to be found in this country, but they have not the opportunity to follow the questions of the day. They are too busy trying to make a living, working from daylight to dark and after with the members of their, families, and they often believe what they hear without investigation. But I think that the farmers know a good deal pore about this question now than they ever did before. They look upon a matter of this kind pretty much as belonging to their everyday life, which previously they have not done. They are now looking upon politics as something which belongs to them, and they are now prepared to give a more intelligent vote upon questions of this kind. It is recognized in the West by the Conservative Government of Manitoba and by the Conservative Opposition in Saskatchewan that these people have wakened up and that they know what this kind of thing means. They have put themselves on record to the effect that they are not opposed to giving the farmers what they want. It is an admission also that the price must be better to the south than it is on this side of the line. I do not think I need take up any more time. It would not be difficult to speak at some length, but it is not necessary, and all I wish to do is to place my views in a general way before the House on this very important question.