April 8, 1914

LIB

Mr. MARCIL:

Liberal

1. Does the Department of Marine and Fisheries intend to make any improvements at the Port Daniel West hatchery this season for the purpose of securing a better result than that obtained last year, and what are these improvements?

2. At what distance from the hatchery did the officer in charge reside during the past season, and did the staff employed there have any previous experience at all in their work?

Topic:   QUESTIONS.
Subtopic:   PORT DANIEL LOBSTER HATCHERY.
Permalink
CON

Mr. HAZEN: (Minister of Marine and Fisheries; Minister of the Naval Service)

Conservative (1867-1942)

1. An extra strainer is being attached to the intake pipe, and a different kind of faucets and tubes will be used and the fry tanks rearranged.

2. His house is at Port Daniel Centre, about six miles from the hatchery. He spent twelve hours daily at the hatchery throughout the season. Four of the staff had previous experience.

Topic:   QUESTIONS.
Subtopic:   PORT DANIEL LOBSTER HATCHERY.
Permalink

LAKE ERIE BUOY SERVICE.


On the Orders of the Day being called:


LIB

Frederick Forsyth Pardee

Liberal

Mr. PARDEE:

I desire to call the attention of the Minister of Marine to the following telegram which has been received:

Marine Department accepted bid of Kenneth Frazier for Lake Erie and Detroit river buoy service. Frazier's tug John Monk, not registered Canadian vessel as required by specifications, my tender lowest complying with specifications in every respect, enter protest against awarding contract to Frazier; obtain explanation why department's action.

Is the statement in this telegram true, that the tug which has been awarded this service is an American bottom?

Topic:   QUESTIONS.
Subtopic:   LAKE ERIE BUOY SERVICE.
Permalink
CON

John Douglas Hazen (Minister of Marine and Fisheries; Minister of the Naval Service)

Conservative (1867-1942)

Mr. HAZEN:

This is a question that might properly, I think, be given the ordinary notice of. I may say, however, that the Department of Marine asked for tenders for the buoy service on the Detroit river and lake Erie, and the lowest tenderer was Mr. Kenneth Frazier, who stated that he would perform the service with a tug called the Monk, and he would have it Canadian registered. I was informed at the department this morning that steps were being taken to have that tug registered in Canada. In order to be registered in Canada, it will have to be brought into Canada and the duty upon it would have to be paid. Then it would have to be examined by the technical officers of the department to see if it is such a tug as could be registered in Canada. These are the facts, so far as I know, at the present moment.

Topic:   QUESTIONS.
Subtopic:   LAKE ERIE BUOY SERVICE.
Permalink

THE BUDGET.


Consideration of the motion of Hon. W. T. White (Minister of Finance) for the House to go into Committee of Ways and Means, resumed from Tuesday, April 7. Mr. J. G. TURRIFF (Assiniboia), resuming: Mr. Speaker, I wish to express my thanks to the Minister of Public Works (Mr. Rogers) for allowing me to adjourn the debate last night at eleven o'clock. I was then dealing with the duty on agricultural implements, and I was pointing out that the Budget Speech delivered on Monday last was a raw, cold deal for the farmers; that the farmer had got practically nothing, and that the manufacturers got practically everything that was given by that Budget. I pointed out that the reduction of five per cent on the duty on binders and mowers would mean $5 on a binder and $2.50 on a mower, and as these implements would ordinarily last from eight to ten years, that therefore each farmer was getting a reduction of about ninety cents per annum. While the Minister of Finance (Mr. W. T. White) did that with one hand, on the other hand he enabled the manufacturers to take ten or twenty dollars a year out of the pockets of the farmers, by the increase in the price of materials, in giving the manufacturers increased duties on iron and steel. The Minister of Finance stated that the reason he was able to put these two items on the free list was because the Canadian manufacturers of binders and mowers had been so successful that they were able to compete with the whole world. But the hon. gentleman might as well have said, in so many words, that the manufacturers of all other Canadian implements were behind the times, that they were not able to compete, and that they were not able to make as good an article as could be imported into Canada. I take issue with the Finance Minister. I sold Massey-Harris implements for a good many years, and I would not say the Canadian manufacturers could not make as good a wagon, or as good a plough, or as good a seeder, or as good a disc, or as good a disc-harrow, or as good a rake, or as good a manure-spreader, or as good any other kind of implement, as could any other manufacturer. The reason given by the Minister of Finance is, therefore, not a good reason for making the reduction on these two specific items. If my argument is right, it means that while the farmer has an advantage of $5 on a binder and $2.50 on a mower, yet the Canadian farmer is to be salted because in the opinion of the Minister of Finance the Canadian manufacturer cannot make other implements as good as those we import. That is the logical conclusion of my hon. friend's argument. If I am misrepresenting him, I shall be very glad to be corrected ; but I do not think I am misrepresenting his argument, and that would be the last thing I would think of doing.


CON

William Thomas White (Minister of Finance and Receiver General)

Conservative (1867-1942)

Mr. W. T. WHITE:

I do not assent to the view that my hon. friend is not misrepresenting my argument, but of course I do him the justice of saying that he is not wilfully misrepresenting me.

Topic:   QUESTIONS.
Subtopic:   THE BUDGET.
Permalink
LIB

John Gillanders Turriff

Liberal

Mr. TURRIFF:

All right; we will leave it at that-difference of opinion. My hon. friend the Minister of Finance, during the course of his speech, told us that he himself made an investigation of the books of the different manufacturers of agricultural implements in Canada as to whether or not they were making undue profits. When he came to that part of his speech, I asked him a question. My hon. friends opposite seemed to resent my doing so. I do not think my hon. friend the Minister of Finance resented it at all. He had no reason to complain of the number of questions asked or the manner in which they were asked. I was simply seeking for information; but my hon. friend the Minister of Finance certainly satisfied the members behind him, because he absolutely refused to answer my question. He did some very fancy sidestepping and also took considerable credit to himself for being an expert auditor. I believe the hon. minister is fully entitled to take credit to himself for being an expert auditor. If I had to make a choice of hon. members for that class of work, I would choose my hon. friend the Minister of Finance. He has youth, ability, brains and experience; and when he made an audit of those books, he knew something about them. The question I asked was a very mild, modest one. I will read it to the House. My hon. friend had just spoken as follows:

We have made an inquiry as to the factory cost of production of the principal agricultural implements in Canada and the United States. We have examined the balance sheets 6f manufacturers with the idea of ascertaining what their position is and whether or not they are making undue profit upon their business.

MR. TURRIFF: Would the hon. gentleman state whether, in making that examination, he also examined as to what amount of cash was in the stock and what amount of water?

Of what use is an examination as to the profits of any manufacturing concern unless one knows how much money they have in their business and how much their paid-up stock represents in cash and in water. This is the reply of my hon. friend:

MR. WHITE : The' examination as to selling price was made hy a trusted official of the Customs Department, Mr. Thomas Costello. He examined into the cost of production. I examined the balance sheets myself and I think, without paying myself too much of a compliment, that I know something about a balance sheet. After having given this matter the most careful and painstaking consideration, we are satisfied that on only one range of implements can the duty be lowered without violation of the fiscal policy of reasonable protection which is designed to encourage and promote the establishment of industries in Canada.

I venture to say that, when my hon. friend was through with that examination, he had a very good idea of the financial conditions as shown on the books of the companies; but if he did not make an investigation as to the amount of water and of cash put originally into what is represented to-day by paid-up stock, he knew absolutely nothing about what profits the companies were making. Will my hon. friend say now whether or not in that examination he looked into the question as to how much 'water and how much cash were represented in the paid-up stock of the company.

Topic:   QUESTIONS.
Subtopic:   THE BUDGET.
Permalink
CON

William Thomas White (Minister of Finance and Receiver General)

Conservative (1867-1942)

Mr. WHITE:

I am not called upon to answer my hon. friend, but I shall be very glad to do so as a matter of courtesy. The financial position of any company, the amount that is owed to its banks, the financial obligations that confront it are shown in its balance sheet, quite apart from any question of stock; that is to say, whether an institution owes 55,000,000 or $20,000,000 is shown by its statement. Where I regarded it as necessary, I inquired into the matter to which my hon. friend has drawn our attention, and I made the necessary inquiries to satisfy myself. In connection with some of the companies, that question as to watered stock did not arise for the reason that no dividends whatever were paid on the stock that in any degree represented water.

Topic:   QUESTIONS.
Subtopic:   THE BUDGET.
Permalink
CON
LIB

John Gillanders Turriff

Liberal

Mr. TURRIFF:

My hon. friend across the way says, ' Try it again.' I do not have to try it again. My hon. friend has acknowledged that only an occasional investigation was made in that respect. Was evidence taken under oath on that investigation? No, it was not. Will my hon. friend put that information before the

House? No, he will not do that. I did not expect that he would. I want to tell my hon. friend and the House and the country that the answer he has given may apply to some manufacturers of agricultural implements that are not paying dividends, but it does not apply to the main manufacturers of agricultural implements. The Massey-Harris combine was effected many years ago. A few years afterwards I was told by one of the original holders of the stock that went into the combine that that stock did not represent fifty cents on the dollar in cash, although it was made to look as if it did. One of the holders of stock told me how it was done. Any hon. member who has had anything to do with agricultural implements or who is a farmer knows that a company like the Massey-Harris company, with hundreds and hundreds of agencies from the Atlantic to the Pacific, must keep at every agency hundreds of dollars' worth of repairs. Every year certain of their implements are changed. New patents are got out and the old repairs become junk, worth from $10 to $14 a ton for scrap iron; but those repairs were put into this merger at their retail list price, representing thousands of dollars a ton. I have sold too many repairs for binders and other machinery not to know. Repairs that would not weigh half a pound or a quarter of a pound retailed at 25 cents and some of them at $1 or $1.50. In that way the companies were able to put in value as it were, but were really putting in water to the extent of over 50 per cent. For years after that, the Massey-Harris company paid 14 per cent on their watered stock. Then when profits became too great, I understand that a stock dividend was made, so that the company would not show too great profits. Let us see what the prices of agricultural implements in Canada are compared with the prices in the United States.

Topic:   QUESTIONS.
Subtopic:   THE BUDGET.
Permalink
CON

Arthur Meighen (Solicitor General of Canada)

Conservative (1867-1942)

Mr. MEIGHEN:

What year was that

when my hon. friend got that information from the manufacturers?

Topic:   QUESTIONS.
Subtopic:   THE BUDGET.
Permalink
LIB

John Gillanders Turriff

Liberal

Mr. TURRIFF:

It was many years ago, and the information was given me in the ordinary way of conversation by one of the members of one of the original companies.

Topic:   QUESTIONS.
Subtopic:   THE BUDGET.
Permalink
CON
LIB

John Gillanders Turriff

Liberal

Mr. TURRIFF:

It was just as much under oath as was the investigation of my hon. friend the Minister of Finance. The gentleman who was telling me this did not think there was any necessity of

making a statement under oath; he was quite satisfied.

Topic:   QUESTIONS.
Subtopic:   THE BUDGET.
Permalink
CON

William Thomas White (Minister of Finance and Receiver General)

Conservative (1867-1942)

Mr. WHITE:

Was the conversation to which my hon. friend refers had prior to 1911?

Topic:   QUESTIONS.
Subtopic:   THE BUDGET.
Permalink
LIB
CON

Arthur Meighen (Solicitor General of Canada)

Conservative (1867-1942)

Mr. MEIGHEN:

Did you communicate it to the Government?

Topic:   QUESTIONS.
Subtopic:   THE BUDGET.
Permalink

April 8, 1914