Sir WILFRID LAURIER:

I would Hike to ask whether the Minister of Marine has any information to give as to the fisheries regulations on boundary waters. I understand by a press despatch that the American Congress is proceeding to render those regulations effective. May I ask my hon. friend in what condition the matter now stands?

Hon. J. D. HAZEN:

I shall be very

glad to give my right hon. friend any information that I can offhand. My recollection is that a treaty was entered into in 1908 for the purpose of framing regulations with regard to *the fisheries in the waters contiguous to the international boundary line. Under that treaty the United States and Canada each appointed a representative, Professor Starr Jordan and Professor Prince, of the Fisheries Department, respectively. These gentlemen investigated the subject and drew up. certain regulations. It was provided by the treaty that when these regulations had beetn drawn up by the commission, the Government of each country should take the steps necessary to make those regulations effective. Accordingly, in

the session of 1910, the Parliament of Canada passed the necessary legislation. The President of the United States of that day also sent a message to Congress submitting the treaty for their approval. When the treaty came before the committee of the Senate, persons representing fishing interests in the states of Michigan and Washington came before the committee and entered their protest against the passing of such legislation unless the regulations were very considerably modified. The result was that the matter was not proceeded with by the United States with the expedition we thought necessary. We had negotiations with their authorities from time to time. Professor Starr Jordan withdrew from the commission, and Mr. Job. E. Hedges took his place. The elections also brought about a change of government. Before the last session of Congress we notified the United States that Canada, having regard to its own selfrespect, would have to withdraw from the treaty unless action were taken by Congress to make the regulations effective. At that time we were asked, very properly I think, to remember that the last session of Congress in the United States was called for one special purpose, to deal with the tariff, and that it would be impossible to get the treaty before that session for consideration. As a result we passed an Order in Council, which stated in effect that unless the United States approved that treaty by the first of March, 1914, we would feel compelled to resume our liberty of action. Without the slightest doubt, both President Taft and the present President have been very anxious to have the necessary legislation passed. After the present President came into office, Mr. Hedges resigned and Dr. Smith of Washington, an expert in fishery matters and connected with the United States Fishery Bureau, was appointed in his place. The information I now have is to the effect that the necessary legislation has passed the Senate and is now before the House of Representatives, that it will probably be passed by that House in the course of a few days. In view of that fact, while we said we would resume our liberty of action on the first of March, we thought it would be inadvisable and improper to stand to the strict letter of that conclusion. I think I am safe in saying, from the despatches I have received, that we may reasonably believe that the treaty will come into effect within the next few days.

Sir WILFRID LAURIER:

I understand that the Canadian Government has not consented to any modification of the regulations laid down by Professor Prince and Professor Starr Jordan.

Mr. HAZEN:

As between Professor

Starr Jordan and Professor Prince, there were some modifications regarding lake Michigan which neither of them regarded as of very great importance and which they agreed to modify. We have taken the ground that the duty of each country was to accept the regulations as passed by the commissioners, but we have said that we are willing after the treaty becomes effective for the commissioners to consider fully the matters in question and if there are good and valid reasons why any change should take place, we are willing that they should be considered. -

Mr. SINCLAIR:

I desire to draw the

attention of the Minister of Marine and Fisheries to an error in a speech made by him on the 2nd of February in regard to the transportation of fish. On that occasion he used the following language:

I may say that the movement inaugurated by my predecessor in office, and carried on with extensions and improvements since, has proved a great success. There has been an increasing amount of fish going forward, and at one-third of the charges prevailing under the arrangement made by the late Government.

This is a point that has caused some confusion and misunderstanding in the country. I find on making inquiries that the charges on fish are the same to-day as in 1911. The information I have is that the express charge has not been changed, and that the freight charge has not been changed is shown by an answer given by the minister to a question I asked after notice. The only change that has taken place is an increase in local freight rates on the Intercolonial.

Mr. SPEAKER:

I do not think that at this stage the hon. gentleman is in order in going into this matter. The information can be got by putting a notice on the paper. This is an inopportune time for such discussion.

Mr. SINCLAIR:

I wish to get the minister to make a correction, because letters are coming to members in regard to the matter, and the minister's statement is

clearly an error. I suppose he has been misled by his clerks.

Mr. SPEAKER:

That may be so, but I take it that the minister would be more likely to give correct information if he had an opportunity of communicating with his department.

Mr. HAZEN:

I think from what the hon. gentleman said, so far as I could catch it, that the mistake is in the reporting by the ' Hansard ' reporter. I suppose the hon. gentleman's quotation is from the unrevised ' Hansard.'

Mr. SINCLAIR:

Yes.

Mr. HAZEN:

I do not think I made any such statement as the hon. gentleman quotes.

Mr. SINCLAIR:

I think the hon. minister made the statement.

Mr. HAZEN:

I do not think so. However, I will look 'the matter up, and if it was so stated in the unrevised ' Hansard,' it will certainly be corrected for the revised.

Mr. SINCLAIR:

Then I am correct in

saying that it is a mistake?

Mr. HAZEN:

I will look the matter up.