Mr. BURNHAM:

Does that include lobsters?

Mt. JAMESON:

My hon. friend is in an attitude now that suggests them. For years past the price of meats has been steadily rising in this country and in the United States. This has been due partly to the increased population and partly also to the raising of a lesser number of food

animals in the United States and in Canada relatively to the population. This, while regrettable in itself has nevertheless led to th-e increased use of fish, as a cheaper and yet nutritous food. But we find that food fishes, at certain points distant from the coast sell at prices which seem unreasonably high for fish should be cheap in Canada. If the fisherman who by toil, industry and hardship compels the sea to yield him tribute were deriving the advantage of these prices, there would probably be little'or no cause of complaint on any side. The fisherman, however, secures relatively little advantage from the price paid, under normal conditions by the consumer, although his prices have advanced to some extent in recent years and just now, owing to the abnormal conditions created by the war the price of fish on the seaboard is abnormally high. Nor does the shipper, as a rule, obtain the advantage of the price. He is subject to competition amongst shippers and must accept a reasonable profit only or he cannot continue to do business.

Yet it should be borne in mind that in a country of great distances such as Canada, many miles separate producer and consumer, and that reasonable transport a-. tion charges and legitimate profits of dealers have to be paid.

The rates charged on fish by the. transportation companies are, however, the subject of much concern. And not only do some people engaged in the fish trade consider they are getting neither the rates nor the services which the importance of the business warrants, but in certain instances actual discrimination affecting adversely cities in the interior of Canada has been more than hinted at. I may add that fresh and lightly cured fish generally speaking, require uudeT existing conditions, to be shipped by express in order to reach the consumer in prime condition. I would like to place a table of the express and freight rates on Hansard:

Transportation Rates-Fresh Fish.

Express

From Halifax or Mulgrave to:

From St. John or St. Andrews to :

Quebec

Montreal

Ottawa

Toronto

Hamilton

London

Windsor, Ont. . . . Digby to Montreal

$1.25 $1.25

1.50 1.30

1.60 1.40

1.75 1.60

1.90 1.60

2.00 1.75

2.50 2.00

1.50

Per 100 lbs. net weight of fish, including delivery.

Freight Carload. L.C.L.From Halifax to Montreal. . . .26 .35From Mulgrave to Montreal . . .28 .38From St. John to Montreal . . .22 .31From Digby to Montreal. . . . .27 .41Per 100 lbs. gross weight, delivery extra. Express From Vancouver or New Westminster to : Carload. L.C.L.Calgary . .$2.50 $2.80Edmonton .. 2.75 3.20Regina .. 2.50 3.60Prince Albert .. 3.75 4.80Winnipeg .. 2.50 3.60Toronto, Montreal or Boston. *3.00 Per 100 lbs., including delivery, charge on net

weight of fish in C. L. lots and on net weight plus 25 per cent for ice and packages less than C.L.L.

From Prince Rupert to:

Edmonton $2.50 $3.20Regina

2.50 3.60Prince Albert

3.30 4.20Winnipeg

2.50 3.60Toronto, Montreal or Boston. *3.00 ....

A delivery charge of 15 cents is made in Boston. ' K

Freight

From Vancouver or

New Westminster to: Carload. L.C.L.

Calgary $0.94 $1.8SRegina

1.25 2.55Winnipeg

1.25 2.87Per 100 lbs. gross weight, delivery extra.

From Prince Rupert to:

Edmonton .... $1.05 ....Winnipeg ... *....S

1.25 ....

The Marine and Fisheries Department has for some years been endeavouring to aid in .securing a market foT the producer and good fish, at fair prices, for the consumer. It will be of interest to state what has been done in this way. The following is a synopsis:

The Federal Government is giving the following aid to develop the fish business:

(a) It accepts responsibility for one-third of the express charges on less than carload shipments from all points on the Atlantic coast to destinations in Quebec and Ontario, and from all points on the Pacific coast to destinations as far east as the eastern boundary of Manitoba.

(b) It has arranged for a weekly refrigerator express service from Mulgrave to Montreal, shipments from Halifax being consolidated dn the car at Truro one day each week during the summer season. In addition to paying one-third of the transportation charges on shipments in this car, the express and railway companies are guaranteed that the earnings on this car will be at least those on 10,000 pounds.

(c) It has made available to the shipper^ at Mulgrave and Halifax a cold storage freight car one day each week by guaranteeing the railway that the earnings on this car will be at least those on two-thirds of a minimum carload of 20,000 pounds at carload lot rates.

(d) It has for the past two seasons given a first-class exhibit at the Toronto exhibition, which has been awarded a gold medal each year.

(e) It has sought to advertise fish by the issuing of a booklet which has been broadly distributed throughout the country.

The shipments carried by express on which a rebate is paid, include fresh and mildly cured fish, such as smoked fish as well as shellfish. The increase in the sales resulting will be gathered from the payments made to the express companies during the past number of years, which are as follows:

On shipments On shipments. Tear. from East. from West.

19.09-10 $15,162 20 $13,541 761910- 11

16,898 13 21,896 731911- 12

19,620 62 35,315 101912- 13

29,969 48 39,277 131913- 14

37,818 85 44,114 471914- 15

26,667 33 34,528 60

Mr. A. K. MACLEAN:

Does that refer

only to fresh fish?

Mr. JAMESON:

This is all fresh and

mildly cured fish.

The industry to which this assistance was granted increased very rapidly as the result, I am told, of that assistance. Last year, it seems, there was a falling off to a certain extent; I do not know what the explanation is unless it be that smaller quantities of fish are being shipped by express and larger quantities by freight, in which case I think the same amount of assistance would not be rendered. In view of the assistance in respect of transportation charges upon fish, and the increased quantities handled, it might reasonably have been expected that the cost to the consumer would be reduced very considerably. The tendency of price however has been to go up rather than to become less.

Let us for a moment follow the journey of the fish from the boat to the consumer. Having been caught by the fishermen, dressed, and lightly cured, or packed in ice and shipped by the local buy'er it reaches some centre in the interior of Canada where it is perhaps sold to a jobber. It is then sold to a retailer who may do business 50 or 100 miles distant, involving further transportation charges. By him it is again sold to the consumer at a price which is startling compared with that received either by the fisherman or by the local shipper. Two important facts should not be overlooked; first, that under our present system the ownership of the fish necessarily changes four, five or six times between the time it leaves the hands of the producer and reaches the consumer; and secondly, that there is a loss by the retailer which the consumer must eventually pay, by reason of the fact that he has not in his establishment proper facilities for preserving or attractively displaying the fish. So, there are expenses and profits at every stage of the journey from the fisherman to the con-

sumer at whose door the retailer leaves the fish, it may he 100, 500, or 1,000 miles distant from the waters from which it was taken.

I have an illustration to give to the House of what it would mean if we could affect a short cut, so to speak, between the producer and the consumer. It is the experience of a gentleman in the Eailway Department J. L. Payne. This gentleman informs me that he recently purchased 900 boxes of finnan haddie from a Nova Scotia firm and they were laid down at the doors of some 900 different people in Ottawa who had joined with him in the order. \ The fish at their doors, all expenses paid, cost seven cents per pound, while at the same time, in the retail stores in this city the same class of fish was selling at twelve and a half cents and upwards per pound.

Mr. A. K. MACLEAN:

I suppose there

were no further expenses in connection with that shipment other than the original cost of the fish and the transportation charges?

Mr. JAMESON:

That is my information.

Mir. MACLEAN:

These were no distribution and selling expenses? *

Mr. JAMESON:

No. The shipment was the result of co-operation on the part of different people. Mr. Payne kindly acted as agent, and my information from him is that he paid six cents per pound to the producer, and that it cost one cent per pound to bring the fish to Ottawa -and to deliver it at the doo-r of the consumer. There were no profits.

Mr. MACLEAN:

Can my hon. friend tell me what the selling price of the same class of fish is say, in western Nova Scotia, say at a point like Windsor or Kentville?

Mr. JAMESON:

I cannot tell my hon. friend that; I do not know what the profits are down there, but I think the dealers just sell to the one man. For instance, the man who prepares the fish for the wholesale market would 'sell to the retailer, and so there would be just a profit for two individuals.

The trouble in dealing with this matter in regard to transportation is that two or three transportation charges' are superimposed on the original price of the fish, and that the profits of dealers, jobbers and retailers, have to be considered. I merely mention this instance of which I have been informed -by Mr. Payne, in order to show

that unnecessary transportation -charges, and perhaps the profits of some ' jobbers, might be eliminated or reduced.

Mr. HAZEN:

From wh-at point of Nova S-coti-a did they -come?

Mr. JAMESON:

Mr. A. K. MACLEAN:

If they do not what shall we do?

Sir GEORGE FOSTER:

Eat less fish.

Mr. JAMESON:

My hon. friend (Mr. A.

K. Maclean), I am sure, sympathises with the attitude I take. He is not yet a recipient of any of these royal favours, whatever the future may hold for him, and, being one of the proletariat like myself, I have not the slightest doubt but that he will endorse up to the hilt the remarks that I have made.

Mr. A. K. MACLEAN:

I wish you would provide a penalty.

Mr. JAMESON:

We are in hopes they will act. The public would penalize them in some way, at all events. As a nation we have not yet perhaps entirely outgrown the extravagance of the pioneer in our use of the natural wealth of the country. This no doubt, in some measure, is the reason why ,the consumer calls for fish not only of standard variety, but also of standard size, the smaller which in other countries find a ready market, being in little demand here. And here I venture to express the opinion that the method in towns and cities of purchasing food for the household by telephone, rather than as formerly, by a visit to the market or shop of the dealer, and the delivery by the seller, instead of by the purchaser is probably in itself responsible for a substantial increase in the cost of supplying the family table.

In those great natural storehouses,- seas, rivers and lakes-a bountiful providence has reserved to the people of Canada an almost unlimited supply of sea foods. With this great natural advantage, aided by a properly organized system of distribution, fish should be cheap in Canada.

In the distribution and sale of food fishes is there needless expense which can be eliminated? Are there excessive or unnecessary transportation or other charges? Are there multiplied profits which might

be avoided? I believe the answer should be "yes" to all these questions. They are questions to which, however, it may be undesirable to give an offhand answer; but they are questions that should be answered M possible. They are questions of importance to the consumer who wants to know he is not paying undue profits; and no less are they of importance to the fisherman, whose future market must depend, in a great measure, upon the product of his industry being available to the consumer at fair and reasonable prices. Yet, tnis at least we know, that to-day and for years to come, economy -should be the watchword of this nation. Anything which will tend toward reducing the cost of supplying the family table calls for serious consideration.

I have some suggestions which I propose to make in a very kindly -spirit to my hon. friend the minister who takes -a deep interest in- this matter an-d I will make them as briefly as I can. I believe there are others who desire to speak on this important resolution. The present method of distribution of sea foods seems extravagant and wasteful. I think it -should be more highly organized. Reshipments involving several freight or express charges -should be avoided, where possible. Transportation corporations all of which have -been generously bonused by the people of Canada, should recognize their responsibility. They -should aid in the distribution of a cheap food, by making especially favourable rates, which hitherto they have not seemed inclined to do.

This, I am informed, -can be done without disturbing other rates by placing fish in what is known as a "commodity" classification instead of -as at -present. F^st freight trains, and what may be termed the "peddler car" system would also greatly aid in affecting cheaper transportation. The "peddler car" is a -through car with a through rate, carrying car-load lots, and distributing its load at different points en route, -an additional charge being made each time the car is opened for that purpose. The transportation -companies, being in favor of less than carload rates, are against the "peddler" caT.

Fi-sh dealers at inland points could get a better service by placing their orders a reasonable time in advance. Shipments could then be consolidated, and carlo-ad lot rates obtained. Thi-s, combined with a peddler car -service, would effect a great saving in the cost of transportation. It would also tend to eliminate the jobber,

and so save his profits, to the benefit of the consumer.

Avoidable waste occurring, owing to lack of proper facilities in most retail markets for preserving and attractively displaying the fish, should be overcome. For not only does it add to the cost of the fish to the consumer, but nothing is more liable to discourage its general use than careless methods of handling; while to obtain good, fresh fish from Tetail dealers under such conditions, is impossible.

The Department of Marine and Fisheries,

* which for many years has been1 expending large sums in protecting the fisheries of sea and lake, should now, I think, go a step farther. In every important community they might establish, or exhibit for demonstration purposes, a model fish market. This might consist of what is known as a silent salesman, or glass case, with proper refrigeration. In a short time progressive fish dealers would, no doubt, properly equip their premises. A vigorous campaign should be set on foot for promoting the consumption of sea foods, not on fast days only, as chiefly heretofore, but as a stable article of diet throughout the year.

A demonstration kitchen, conducted by one who understands how fish should be cooked and served, should be made a feature at all fairs in Canada. The department might very easily keep this service up the year round in those centres where it would do the most good, until the blessings of a fish diet were known.

It should be borne in mind that the increased consumption of ,fish will aid in solving some features of the transportation problem. When .fresh fish can be shipped in carload lots, the rates will be much less, tending to reduce the cost of the fish to the consumer. In this good work an important section of the press of Canada has already rendered signal service, and is entitled to the thanks, both of the fishing interests and the consumers. With their continued co-operation advantageous results can, I believe, be attained. With this introduction I beg leave to move the resolution standing in my name.

Mr. J. H. SINCLAIR (Guysborough):

Mr. Speaker, the subject of which my hon. friend from Digby (Mr. Jameson) has been speaking is one of very great interest to my constituents, and I am very much pleased that he has brought it before the House. I do not know of any branch of business that could be promoted to a

CMr. Jameson.]

greater degree by the Department of Marine iand Fisheries, than that of out fisheries, by the adoption of such measures as will increase the sale of fresh fish throughout Eastern Canada; I am not so familiar with the trade of the West.

The slight assistance that was given a few years ago has given splendid results. Prior to ten or twelve years ago, a large part of the fresh fish consumed in Montreal, Toronto, and other Canadian cities came from Gloucester in the United States. Our Nova Scotia fishermen worked on these Gloucester vessels, which caught the fish off our own coast and then took it to Gloucester, whence it was returned to Montreal -and Toronto. This was A very unsatisfactory state of affairs, and the Government of that day introduced the policy of subsidizing the transportation of fish from the eastern -coast of Canada to the big cities inland, by paying one-third of the express rates. The trade immediately

5 p.m. -changed. Ln-stead of the inland cities of Canada -buying their fish from Gloucester and Boston, they bought from Eastern Canada, w-ith the result, that at present only a relatively small quantity of fresh fish is imported into this country.

I -agree with -my hon. friend that fish as an article of fo-o-d i-s not as much used in this country as it should he, and I think a good deal could be done by. advertising -to increase its consumption. The Minister of Marine and Fisheries, in advertising out fish, at the last Toronto Exhibition took a step in the right direction; and I commend him for so doing. If it were known throughout the towns of Ontario that the fr-e-sh fish of Nova Scotia was -such delicious food, that we had plenty of it in Ea-stern Canada, and that it could be bought cheaply. I have no doubt that much more fish would be purchased and used in our homes. While referring to this matter I never could understand why the fisheries should be put under the Naval Department, and I must S-ay th-at the House -and the country . have n-ever yet been given -an intelligent reason as to why thi-s w-as done. I had hoped that the fisheries of this country would grow to such an extent as to occupy a minister most of his time, but instead of that, -the Fisheries Department has been placed under the control of certain naval officers who have nothing whatever to do

with the fisheries of this country. If there is any business at all which should be under the branch known as the Marine and Fisheries, surely it is the fisheries of this country. I do not tfiink it was , a wise step to take, and jt seems to me that some explanation should be given. My hon. friend from Halifax (Mr. A. K. Maclean) says he understands that only the ships of the Fisheries Department are under the control of the Naval Department, but as I understand it, everything connected with the fisheries is under the control of officers of the navy. This is an abnormal state of affairs, and I do not think it is in the interests of the industry.

The main problem is to find a market for our fish: if that industry is to grow, and it has possibilities of becoming very extensive, the local market will not suffice. I quite agree with my hon. Mend (Mr. Jameson) that we should do everything in our power to develop the local market, and I have no criticism at all to make of his proposal in that direction; but the local market in Canada for fish, fresh or any other kind, is very small compared with the great supply- it is possible to obtain around our coasts. Why should we not look for a market outside? There is no reason why we should not do everything in our power to develop a foreign market for our fish. Regulations are made to encourage people to export manufactured goods. If you look through the tariff, you will see that a man who makes an engine or a boiler in this country and sells it abroad can go to the Custom house and get a rebate of ninety-five per cent of the duty that he paid on the raw material. We are actually paying money to induce our people to send these articles abroad, and I think the policy is a good one, but why should we not apply the same policy to fish? Why should we not encourage the exportation of our fresh fish to the United States? To the-south of us is an enormous country with a population of ninety million people. It is the richest country in the world, and the best market in the world, but we are notdoing anything at all to reach

that market. It has always been a puzzle to me why hon. gentlemen opposite appear to think it would be an unwise thing to develop a iparket for our fish in the United States.? Two years ago I ventured to point out to the Minister of Marine and Fisheries that in eastern Nova Scotia, in the vicinity of Canso and the, banks of that region, we have one of the most prolific fishing coasts to be found in all America. We have a fine class of fishermen, who are second to none.

We have everything that is needed to build up an enormous business in fish, .except a good market. I proposed that the Minister of Marine and Fisheries should subsidize a fast fish boat, touching at some of the ports of eastern Nova Scotia, and then going direct to Boston, which is the great market for our fish. That is where our surplus fish has to go whenever there is a large run of fish on the coast. If mackerel comes in on the coast in large quantities it has to go to Boston, because there is no sufficient demand for it in our Canadian cities. . .

Again, in eastern Nova Scotia we have not the facilities they have in the western part of the province, at Yarmouth, for example. If you compare the rates paid for fish at Canso, and at Yarmouth, you will find that a hundred pounds of codfish is worth $1.50, and sometimes more, at Yarmouth than it is at 'Canso. And the reason for that is that a boat runs between Yarmouth and Boston. When a fisherman comes into Yarmouth with his fresh fish, he loads it on the boat and gets it to Boston in twelve or thirteen hours, and he gets the market price for it, whereas at Canso we have not these facilities. If a fisherman catches a boiat-load of haddock at some harbor on the coast wheTe there is no transportation facilities, for example, what can he do with it? If it is winter he can freeze it, or convert it into finnan-haddie and sell it in the local market, but he cannot sell the fresh fish at a good price as can the Yarmouth fisherman. My proposal to the minister was that the Government should subsidize a fast line of fish boats, not.passenger boats, to carry fresh fish from the ports of eastern Nova Scotia direct to Boston, Portland, and other American cities. I feel sure that if this proposal is adopted, a very large business can be worked up that will be of enormous benefit to the fishermen on that coast. The main trouble with them now is lack of transportation. We are spending a good deal of money to enable our fishermen to send their fresh fish to Toronto, Montreal, and the western cities- That is all right, and I am glad that it is being done. It has been done for a good many years, it is a proper policy and has worked out well. But, if we want to build up this industry to the proportions which it may reach, we must get into the United States markets, and the way to do that is to have a line of fresh-fish boats calling at the ports of Eastern Nova Scotia and delivering the fish direct to the Boston market. It would not cost very much to

provide this service. At present we are paying large sums to subsidize ships to go to South Africa, Australia, and other far-off parts of the world with our products. Why should not we do the same thing in the case of the United States, which we can reach in twenty-four hours from the places where the fish are landed? I would like some of my hon. friends on the other side . to struggle with that question and tell me if they can, why that trade should not be cultivated. The Prime Minister must be as much interested in this as I am, for he represents a county with a very long sea-coast and among the inhabitants of which are a number of hardy fishermen. We have the fish on the coast and we have the men to catch them; we have, in fact, everything but the market.

This is not a party question but a business question, and one that a business government ought to deal with. As this is a friendly discussion, I do not wish to criticise, but I would remind my hon. friend from Digby (Mr. Jameson) that freight rates have been increased since the present Administration came into power. The rate for express, I understand, is the same as it was before, but the freight rate on fresh fish from Nova iScotia to Montreal is higher than it was in 1911. I am surprised that my hon. friend from Digby, or my hon. friend from Shelburne and Queens (Mr. McCurdy),did not put in a protest when that was done. The increase between Mulgrave and Amherst, or Mulgrave and Truro, is something like $12 a carload, and this increase of rates was made by the present Minister of Railways to the disadvantage of the fish trade in the local market. I think the old rate should have been allowed to stand; if the department could not afford to reduce it, at least they should not have increased it. If we are to be confined to the Canadian market for our fish, we. want as cheap transportation as we can get.