Mr. BIRD :

I quoted an incident showing that an ice breaker was stuck in the ice at the eastern end of the strait and at the same time the Sheba had a clear passage all the way through. In that case a radio would have been of service in pointing out the open channel.

Mr. DUFF:

I may say to my hon. friend that I had a similar experience when a ship that I was on board of, called the Greenland was caught in the ice one spring and had to stay there for thirty-two days with a catch of seals on board. Only about ten miles away there was open water and other vessels were able to get through. They saw our predicament and when they got home re. f Mr. Knox.]

ported . that we were stuck fast in the ice without any seals. That was the case in regard to the vessels of which he speaks. There may be a lead or channel of open water through the ice caused by the wind or the current where vessels can pass. Not far away other vessels may be caught fast in the ice. But let me tell my hon. friend that no shipping man is going to send his vessel into Hudson bay if he is likely to meet with that danger.

Mr. BIRD:

Does my hon. friend apply his statement to the early part of July or to the whole of the period I have referred to?

Mr. DUFF:

This investigation showed the conditions in different months-in July, August and September. The hon. member spoke about the experience of the Minto. I would advise him, if he wants some information about Hudson bay and Hudson strait, to consult Captain John Reid who was commander of the Minto when she was in Hudson bay. Captain Reid has enlarged photographs showing the exact conditions in Hudson bay and Hudson strait during the period he was there. Looking at these photographs an>

reasonable man will be convinced that the navigation of either the bay or the strait under such conditions is a very difficult proposition. I repeat that I am not opposed to this route if it can be shown to be practicable and would be glad if I could get evidence showing that it is feasible. We have not all the information that we should have on this project and for that reason I would suggest to the government that they should make further inquiry before spending any more money on it. From the financial standpoint I think it would be unwise-and I am sure my hon. friends from the West will agree with me- to spend any large sum of money in continuing the railway to Port Nelson, or in the building of terminals, or the construction of steamers, to open this route, until we are possessed of further information. Before spending any further large sums of money parliament and the government should go very slowly in this matter.

What, I would suggest, in fairness to my hon. friends from the West who desire to secure a fresh outlet for the grain and other commodities of the West is commendable, is that parliament should ask the government to have a proper survey made of the whole field both with regard to the railway to Hudson bay and the terminals there, and with regard to the feasibility of the navigation of the bay and strait. I would suggest that practical men such as Captain Reid, Captain

Hudson Bay Railway

Bob Bartlett, and other men who have spent many years in the Arctic, should be asked to go up there, stay one or two years, and make proper surveys, inquiring into the whole situation and investigating the advisability and the feasibility of this route. In that way the government would get information that we have not got now. I know practically nothing about the project except what I have read and what I have heard from Captain Bartlett, and others, who have voyaged for years in the Arctic and worked in the Hudson bay, and who have made statements to me which I have given to the House this afternoon. I would suggest that before spending any further large sums of money qualified engineers and qualified seamen, used to Arctic work should go up there and make a thorough inquiry into the whole situation, and then report to the government. Then it will be possible for us to discuss the matter in an intelligent manner. At present we cannot do this.

Mr. ROBERT FORKE (Brandon):

I am glad the hon. member for Lunenburg (Mr. Duff) closed his speech in the manner in which he did. He admitted that he did not know the exact facts of the case. Nevertheless, he maintained that it was unnecessary to go any further into the matter as he was already satisfied that the strait was closed the whole year round. My hon. friend added that he had the results of investigations to prove it. Now, if his contentions are correct I do not see why this debate should proceed any further.

I think perhaps he is right in saying that a very close study of this question should be made by the members of this House. Perhaps the members more directly interested in the matter have already made considerable study of the whole question, and for many years it has been described on the one side as a route feasible and on the other side as a route very difficult, but I have never until to-day heard the statement made that at no time of the year was the route feasible. I have always understood that there was no doubt about at least two months of the year. I had the privilege of looking over a great many charts not very long ago, comparing the voyages of the boats in and out, from Sydney and other eastern ports to Hudson bay, and I did not find in any one of these charts any great difficulty at any time-in fact no difficulty during two months or so. I believe it is correct to say that the Hudson bay route is feasible for at least two months of the year. The question then would be: Is it a feasible or a right project to go on with this work on the supposition that we have

only navigation for two months in the year? It has been discussed pro and con for a great many years. I would like to read a short extract from a speech delivered in 1908 by Sir Wilfrid Laurier at Niagara Falls, where he stated:

We have undertaken the construction of another railway, the Hudson bay railway. We have come to the conclusion that the time to build this railway is now, not to-morrow, but now.

That is a long time ago. On September 22, 1908, the Hon. Clifford Sifton, now Sir Clifford Sifton, speaking at Brandon, said:

Now we come to the latest development and indeed the best is still to come. The prime minister proposes to build for these provinces the Hudson Bay Railway. (Loud cheers). That pronouncement was a very material factor in inducing me to become a candidate for this constituency in this election, because I felt, and feel now, that the time has come when we men from the west have succeeded in proving that a Hudson bay railway is no mere chimera-no foolish project, but one which the people of the West are bound to see carried into effect, and the time to do it is now. ,

Fifteen years ago the people of Canada and of the West were convinced that it was no mere chimera, that it was a feasible project, and now we find ourselves debating as seriously as ever the question as to whether the project should be carried on or given up.When we realize that two different governments have investigated this project, have pronounced it feasible, and have declared that it should be carried on, that its completion was only deferred on account of war conditions, that $20,000,000 has already been spent upon it, is it reasonable that we should now cometo the conclusion that the work should bestopped and that nothing more should be

done?

It has been discussed again and again by the public men and parliaments of this country, both Dominion and provincial. The matter has been so well discussed and so well placed before the House by the mover (Mr. Knox) and the seconder (Mr. Bird) that I really cannot add very much to what has been said. However, I would like to point out again the necessity of some other outlet than the one which we have at present for the products of the western provinces. It is needless for me to repeat, but I sometimes think cannot be too often repeated, that we will have tremendous resorces in those western provinces when they are properly developed. We have realized during recent years the difficulties and disadvantages from which we suffer on account of being located in the centre of the continent, where transportation has become the one great problem which we must and shall overcome. It seems to me that the Hudson bay route as

Hudson Bay Railway

an alternative outlet for our products will to a very large extent solve our transportation difficulties. Not only will it be an outlet but it will be a competing outlet for our produce to the sea, bringing into line the other routes and the interests that control the other outlets.

It has been pointed out by the seconder, and I think also by the mover of the resolution, that Canada has suffered no loss through the building of the Hudson bay railway. Too often we hear repeated what the East has done for the West. I do not like that kind of argument, because I do not believe there is very much in it. Most of the money that has ever been invested in the West has been at so much per cent, and I hope the interest has been paid most of the time. When we come to deal with the building of railways I think we will find that the railways of the West have been largely financed from the values that have accrued through the building of the railways in the West,' and the Hudson bay railway at the present time, as far as I can understand the situation, has not cost this country very much, because the land that has been set aside for that purpose has met the demands made in this respect. So that from a financial point of view we have not suffered very much in the building of the Hudson bay railway up to the present time.

It has been pointed out that the natural outlet to the western provinces has been to the south of us. Those of us who live in the West realize that fact, but I think we are good enough Canadians to say that if we can possibly make things go along successfully, we are prepared to do anything we possibly can to develop a national feeling and a national business within ourselves. We appreciate to a very large extent anything that would tend to develop trade between Great Britain and Canada, which I claim would be of great benefit both to Canada and Great Britain.

Now the opening up of this suggested route, should it be feasible-and I believe it is- would do a great deal towards solving one of the great problems we have in the West at the present time. Agriculturists who have studied the situation in the West, and who know the conditions as they exist, are pretty well convinced that the salvation of our western provinces will be in the development of the live stock industry. I know very well that for a great many years to come wheat will be the principal export value that will be produced in these western prairie provinces. Not only that, Mr. Speaker, but I believe the public debt will have to be paid to a very

large extent by the produce of those same western provinces, and that the wheat will play a very large part in paying that debt. Nevertheless from experience we are finding out that, in order to carry on agriculture successfully, there must be diversified farming, and there must be a rating of live stock. The transportation of live stock to the sea by a long railway haul ia a much more difficult problem than the hauling of grain, and if we could make it possible to export cattle by the Hudson bay route, I believe we would be going a long way towards solving a great many of the difficulties in the way of the development of agriculture in the western prairie provinces.

I should like to point out to the eastern people that the eastern agricultural interests can well supply all eastern wants in that direction. That is one of the unfortunate situations of the western people. I do not care what interests you have in the East, you know very well that the eastern provinces are quite capable of supplying all the agricultural needs of any industries you are likely to have in the East for many years to come, and the western provinces are impressed with the fact that they have to find a market outside for their products.

I hope hon. members of this House will look upon this situation sympathetically and will not dismiss it without consideration. I have heard round the corridors of this House, almost with a laugh, the question: "I suppose you are going to bring up the Hudson Bay railway question"? I want these gentlemen not to dismiss the matter without giving it the attention it deserves. If it can be shown that the project is impracticable, then by all means we do not want the Hudson Bay railway. I would qualify that, however, by saying that I believe the completion of the railway would in itself be a feasible thing, even though the development of the bay should not go on. As the mover of this resolution has said, the road would be a colonization road, and the completing of the line would be something well worth doing, something which would contribute to the development of northern Manitoba. We do not want money spent foolishly; we want the question decided on its merits. But I do believe there will never be contentment in the West; never will the western people be satisfied, until that railway has been completed and the question has been decided by actual experience. It has been demonstrated conclusively that the route is feasible, because the charts in the department show that vessels have made the trip back and forth time and again without encountering ice at all

Hudson Bay Railway

I met the proprietor of a magazine not long ago and he told me he was going to publish photographs which were similar to the ones the member for Lunenburg (Mr. Duff) was displaying this afternoon. Well, they never appeared in the magazine; I suppose he got a little more knowledge of the subject and thought it just as well not to publish them, at least for the present. I have no doubt that there will be abnormal ice conditions up there at times and if you are anxious to do so you can get photographs that will present the matter in a very unfavourable light. Anybody who knows anything about the northern seas -and I know the hon. member for Lunenburg knows about ice floes and all that sort of thing -will realize that the conditions vary a great deal. I do not think we need take seriously the hon. gentleman's little joke about melting the ice with electricity, but it is possible that a great many difficulties that were formerly considered insuperable may under modem conditions be easily overcome. By the use of electrical appliances, aerial inventions, beacons, buoys, and so on, navigation into the harbour at least can, perhaps, be made perfectly safe.

So far as dredging in the bay is concerned, I do not think dredging has been very extensively carried on. The information I have is to the effect that what has been dredged has remained clear; so that these difficulties may be very easily overcome. I know it is difficult to get within quite a number of miles of where the harbour would be, but that area has been charted and the investigations already made no doubt point to a solution of the difficulty in that respect. It would surprise hon. members who have not gone into the question to find what a large amount of data the department has accumulated in this connection. It would well repay the attention of those who have not investigated the conditions to find out just what they are to-day. I had an opportunity of seeing the photographs to which reference has been made, and a great many more, and quite a number of them are favourable to the proposed route, indicating, as they do, that the bay is open for a great many months of the year.

I do not wish to take up any more of the time of the House; other hon. members are very much better posted than I am in regard to the conditions that exist in Hudson bay. Of course the difficulty is not in the bay, but in the straits; the great question to decide is how far the straits are navigable. I have not discussed the matter with the mover and the seconder of the resolution but I think it would be well to go a little carefully at first, and to that end a thorough investigation would be in

order. I do think, however, that the government should at least complete the railway to the bay and put us in a position to obtain more accurate information along these lines.

I hope that the matter will not be dropped without further investigation and without a decision to complete the construction of the line to the bay.

Mr. W. F. MACLEAN (South York):

Mr. Speaker, I am thoroughly in sympathy with the proposal that has been made. My view of this matter is that Canada is committed to the early construction of the Hudson Bay railway. The boast of Great Britain in connection with her war debt to the United States-and it was expressed by the Chancellor of the Exchequer the other day-has been that England keeps her word and pays her debts. Just as seriously have we committed ourselves to the people of the West to build this road. We voted the money, and for the psychological reason alone, if for nothing else; if only to put heart into the people of the West we ought to complete it. But I can give another reason, and it has been advanced this afternoon. The opening up of that country would result in the road paying for itself. There would be made available the most valuable mineralized area in the world. Ontario to-day has a road within 120 miles of Hudson bay, and it is the intention of the province to complete that line to the bay this year. One of their reasons for doing it is to open up the northern portion of Ontario, a district, which, sloping down to the bay, has much good land and much valuable timber. A fine fishing industry * can be worked up in Hudson bay, and a traffic in fur can be carried on. Power can be developed on the rivers on the Hudson bay slope and made available to the mines that have been opened up in that part of Ontario -the most marvellous mines in the world. The territory in Quebec adjacent .to Hudson bay is equally rich, if we are to believe the reports of the geologists who have made investigations there; and the same applies to portions of Manitoba. The hon. member for Nelson (Mr. Bird) quoted from the remarks of the president of the Canadian Institute ol Mining and Metallurgy, who pointed out that that pre-Cambrian shield was the richest mineral area on the whole face of the globe. The successes in Cobalt and Porcupine are such as to justify the completion of this line on its own account. I believe there is enough power on that Hudson bay slope to drive all our locomotives on the Canadian National between Winnipeg and Montreal, and to meet the needs of all the mines and pulp mills in

Hudson Bay Railway

that district. Besides, employment would be furnished to large numbers of people and opportunities for settlement would be afforded.

For these reasons and many others I could give, I say we should complete that road. The amount involved would not be very great, and the experiment is worth making, if only in order that we may keep our word. The main source of the money expended on that road has been the public lands of the West. The West is therefore security for it, and there certainly will be just as much local traffic over that road to Hudson bay, altogether apart from any consideration of sea traffic, as has followed from the development of the Northern Ontario and Temiskaming road. That is almost the best piece of railroad in Ontario today, although when it was first projected everyone declared that it was a mere chimera, that there was nothing in it for the province or for those who put their money into it. That part of the country is one of the best sections of the Dominion to-day; it is the best country in the world for men to go to, whether they have capital or are seeking labour. It is the best market in America for labour at the present time, because the demand for men for the mines cannot be supplied. And it may be a great coal country; we shall probably get anthracite there if we are to believe what some of the geologists tell us. But at all events there are great coal and timber resources in that part of the country, and there is also a good chance for farming.

One thing, however, is lacking; and for some reason or other this parliament is reluctant to keep its word. Why should we not keep our word and complete that road? I believe, Mr. Speaker, that the government will see its way to complete this railway, and I hope that before this debate closes the Minister of Railways (Mr. Graham) will announce on behalf of the administration that it is the intention to carry out the contracts that were made, first by Sir Wilfrid Laurier and then by the Conservative government. I do not know whether the Union government was committed to the undertaking, but certainly this House has pledged its word in the matter; and the people of Canada want to see the road completed. The people of Ontario, the people of Manitoba, and the people of the West generally are anxious to have the work carried through, because they see in the completion of the road some hope of relief from the excessive freight rates that have obtained in the past. The western people hope for some relief from the opening up of the Vancouver route' in conjunction with the Panama canal, fMr. W. F. Maclean.]

as an outlet for the grain of the West. And we in Ontario wish to see the waterways between Port Arthur and the Atlantic, by way of the St. Lawrence and the canals, improved as another outlet for the products of the West. We must try all these things and make various experiments, because the providing of more outlets for our products is a vital necessity.

And here let me say a word for the National Railways. The greatest asset Canada has today is its national railways. These railways have not done their best; they have done their worst so far. But a new and better management is perhaps coming into operation, and the men now in charge will be held responsible for a genuine attempt to solve the grievances of the West in so far as the railways can do so. Up to the present this has not been done; there is rather too much delay in putting the National Railways to the work they are capable of doing. Certainly a reasonable time should be given the new board to organize. But after all we want results; and I have no doubt as to what the National Railways will be able to do if they are properly managed. There is not a better railway in the world; and I will say, to the credit of Sir Wilfrid Laurier, although I do not know where he got the inspiration, that the greatest branch of the National Railways to-day is that line running form Winnipeg to Quebec. It is on the top of a great plain and has a two-fifths grade; and the part of the country through which it runs is rich in agricultural possibilities and in mining. It is a fine country in every way, and the railway from Winnipeg to Quebec is one of the best pieces of railway we have on the Canadian National. No matter what we do with the waterways, this line from Winnipeg to Quebec is one of the solutions of the grievances of the western farmers. These farmers have two real grievances, one in regard to transportation, and the other the fact that they are debarred from the great American market. Whether in the new and broader view that mankind is inclined to take of some of these problems that have arisen since the war, this impediment will be removed, I do not know. There seems, however, a possibility of better relations between the people of the United States and those of Canada, although I do not say that there is. At any rate, there is a better feeling growing up between Englishspeaking people generally. On the whole, therefore, I do not despair of the future of the Canadian West, but this parliament must help them in the present situation; and I will give what little support I can to this proposition. Canada owes it as a duty to carry out this work, because the country has beer

Hudson Bay Railway

pledged to it. The government is committed, not so much to further investigations as to a completion of the work that has been undertaken.

If we do that work the West will have no great grievance against this parliament, except that we must also do what we can to develop the port of Vancouver and our waterways. We must go after the. railways, both the Canadian Pacific Railway and the Canadian National Railways, and try to find out, either by experiment or by litigation, what justification there is for these abnormal charges that have obtained in the West. This parliament, too, or the Railway Commission, or whatever body has jurisdiction in the matter, must get after the shipping profiteers on the upper lakes. I do not know anything more discreditable in the history of America than these abnormal freight charges which have been put into force since the war by the people who control the shipping on the upper lakes and on the St. Lawrence. Every concession which the railways have given to the western people has always been absorbed in shipping charges. There seems to be, I was almost going to say, an infamous understanding between the two. Perhaps there is a quiet "divvy"; I do not know whether that is so or not. The fact, however, is that there have been unfair charges levied by the shipowners and the railways. We have got after the railways in an endeavour to obtain, reductions and we must get after these other people as well. The main thing is to put heart into the people of the West by building this railway which they require. If we do I feel confident that substantial results will accrue to the people who live in the western provinces and who to-day ask this parliament for relief in various ways. I hope that this parliament will give them that relief not only in regard to transportation but in regard to reasonable banking facilities, and possibly the improved credit which has come to the United States in the last two or three years might also come to the people of the west of Canada. I shall therefore have much satisfaction in supporting the motion. Still greater satisfaction will it be to me if the government make good the pledge of Sir Wilfrid Laurier and complete this experiment -even if it is only an experiment-and so keep faith with the people of the western provinces.

At six o'clock the House took recess.

After Recess

The House resumed at eight o'clock.

Mr. C. C. DAVIES (North Battleford):

In rising to support the resolution moved by my hon. friend for Prince Albert (Mr. Knox) it is not my intention to deal at any great length with the subject. I understand that there are a number of other speakers who will have something to say on this question, and it would not be fair to them if I made any extended remarks at this moment. But the question of transportation, and especially the question of the early completion of the Hudson Bay railway, is of such vital importance to the agriculturalists of western Canada that I feel I should be remiss in my duty if I did not in my poor way try to add something to this debate.

Public opinion in the West has been practically unanimous upon this subject for very many years. I remember when I first came to this country over twenty years ago how the Hudson Bay railway was dangled as a bait to the settlers in the West, and it seems almost inconceivable to me that after twenty-three years we are debating in this House of Commons the question whether this is a feasible route or not. From the beginning of this year the question has been discussed iri practically every public assembly in western Canada. Unanimous resolutions have been passed by all the great farmers' organizations in western Canada, and by the board of trade of practically every city and town of importance in that part of the country. During the past few weeks the question has been thoroughly discussed in the legislature of Manitoba and the legislature of Saskatchewan, where unanimous resolutions have been passed pressing this government to complete the Hudson bay route as early as possible.

I wonder if hon. members who represent the eastern part of Canada ever realize the vital importance of the question of transportation to the western farmer. We in western Canada have a great problem to solve: how to raise our agricultural products and place them on the markets of the world in open competition with agriculturalists from every other part of the world, situated as we are fifteen hundreds miles away from a seaport. That is the question we have to solve in western Canada, and it can be solved if we open up the Hudson bay route. The problem of transportation in relation to the distribution of agricultural products is of vital interest to western Canada, and a route which brings us one thousand miles nearer the sea is a route which must receive the earnest consideration of this government.

Hudson Bay Railway

, I listened with very great interest to the speech this afternoon of the hon. member for Lunenburg (Mr. Duff) and I was pleased to note the warm feeling of sympathy that he manifested towards the western farmer. I have noticed before that a number of members on the government benches are willing to show us very great sympathy in some of these projects which are of such importance to the farmers of western Canada, but I would say to them that a little practical help is worth a great deal of sympathy, and at this time if they will support this project which we believe will help to solve the agricultural problems of western Canada, it will perhaps be better than showing us quite so much sympathy.

The statement has been made on the floor of this House a number of times this year that when the economic chaos in Europe rights itself once more, the price of our agricultural products will be enhanced. I cannot subscribe to that doctrine. I do not think the price of agricultural products will go up in Europe, and consequently they will not go up here. Wheat in the Old Country markets is above normal value. Reef and meat products are away above normal value in the Old Country markets. Butter is 100 per cent above normal value at the present time, and if our agricultural products are to compete in the European markets we must reduce the cost of production and the cost of transportation. The question before us is the question of reducing the cost of transportation. We have to compete with the other nations of the world who are not under the physical and geographical handicap that we settlers in western Canada have to contend with. We are in competition with the Argentine with its peon labour, with its short railway haul, and no expensive handling system. We are in competition with India, with practically slave labour, and no long railway haul. We are in competition with Australia, with its fringe of agricultural land around the coast, and with a twelve months working season. We have also to compete with Denmark and other European countries which are rapidly coming back to normal, and I say that if we are to build up in this country a permanent agricultural policy which will leave the farmers something over the cost of production, then this question of the Hudson bay route is of vital importance to us.

I am not going to talk about the feasibility of the route for very long, but I should like to bring to the attention of hon. members a report which was issued by the Manitoba government in the year 1884. I am taking that year because in those days the various

aids to navigation in the matter of buoys and so forth, the depth of vessels and their strength, were not nearly so perfect as they are to-day. If, as far back as 1884, practical men who had great experience in navigating these northern waters said that the route was a feasible one, how much more feasible should it be at the present time in view of the perfection that has been reached in the construction of oceangoing vessels? Now, I want to read a few extracts from the report to which I have referred. Dr. Bell, director of the Canadian Geological Survey, who made five voyages through the straits, stated that the straits are: "Navigable from middle of June to middle of November. Captain Chisby, of New London, Conn., who has had fourteen years' experience in these waters, stated that "the straits are navigable for four months and often five." Captain William Kennedy, who acompanied an expedition in search of the remains of Sir John Franklin, and who had had eight years' experience of the straits, declared that the straits are navigable "from June to November."

Captain William Pritchard, who was in the Hudson's Bay Company's service for 39 years, reported as follows:

The straits never freeze; there is no reason why steamships should not navigate at any time.

He also said:

The icebergs seen in Hudson's straits in August and September would form no great barrier to navigation, nor do those met with off the straits of Belle Isle, nor were they more numerous in Hudson's straits than they frequently are off Belle Isle.

Further on in his evidence, he stated:

Steam has now effected a complete revolution in ice navigation and the most advantageous time for pushing on is when the ice is loose.

Under similar circumstances a sailing ship would be utterly helpless. It is therefore only reasonable to infer that what has been performed regularly and year after year by sailing ships can be accomplished with greater regularity and certainty by well-constructed steamers, especially built for ice navigation and provided with powerful machinery.

The legislature of the province of Manitoba appointed a select standing committee in 1884 to procure evidence and report upon the practicability of establishing a system of communication via Hudson bay. After taking the evidence of a number of men, with thorough knowledge of the subject, the committee say in their report:

Many of the gentlemen examined have had personal and extended experience as officers and servants of the Hudson's Bay Company at their ports on Hudson and Ungava bays. No evidence has been given that goes to prove that Hudson straits and bay proper freeze over or that the ice met with in these waters is sufficient to prevent navigation at any time of the year; that consequently the period of navigation is defined

Hudson Bay Railway

by the time during which the ports, harbours, or roadsteads on the shores of the bay can be entered by vessels of a suitable description for such navigation.

From the evidence adduced it appears that such ports or harbours are open on an average from four and a half to five months in each year to ordinary vessels.

The latest report that we have had on the subject, that of the Senate of Canada, declares that the route is a feasible route and that in time it will be profitable.

I said a moment ago that I first heard of the Hudson Bay railway when I came to this country over twenty-three years ago. I well remember how, in the first general election in Canada of which I have any knowledge, that of 1908, speakers on behalf of Liberal candidates made a number of statements at that time referring to the Hudson Bay railway. They pointed to the courageous manner in which the late Liberal chieftain, Sir Wilfrid Laurier, had made his announcement in the town of Welland, Ontario, that the Liberal government of that day were going to build this railway. When the Conservative party came into power in the year 1911 they took up the question of the Hudson Bay railway and began to carry it to completion. I cannot conceive that the Liberal government in 1908 would undertake such a work as this without full and complete investigation. Neither can I believe that the Conservative party, when they came into power, would carry on such a work without a very exhaustive investigation as to the possibilities of this route. Engineers were sent out by both governments. Both governments proclaimed that the Hudson Bay railway was a feasible route and that they were going to carry it to completion. I know, Mr. Speaker, that sometimes in the West we hear it said, in regard to the completion of the Hudson Bay railway, that both parties were playing politics, and that the project was simply a bait used at election time to obtain the votes of the western people. I cannot, Mr. Speaker, subscribe to that idea either. I do not believe that our governments and our statesmen have sunk so low in this country that they would willingly spend $20,000,000 of western money in order to bribe the electors of western Canada. I believe that both governments came to the definite conclusion that this route was a feasible one and determined to carry out the work.

I would like now, for a moment or two, to discuss the question of the financing of this railway because I know that it is not generally understood in the West-or in the East either for that matter-how the financing of the Hudson Bay railway was undertaken. It has been understood that the whole of Canada

. had been financing the Hudson Bay railway. The facts, however, are as follows: In the *year 1908, when the Dominion Lands Act was brought before parliament, provision was made whereby homesteads, or second homesteads and pre-emptions were set apart, a large area of land in western Canada being selected for the purpose, and the proceeds of the sale of this land were to be devoted to the financing of the Hudson Bay railway. Under the statute of 1908 approximately 8,050,720 acres of land have already been sold, the revenue derived therefrom being $24,152,160, and the whole of this amount has not yet been spent. There are 2,500,000 acres at the present time which have not been paid for in full. You will see, therefore, that practically the whole of the revenue devoted to the building of the Hudson Bay railwaycame from the lands of the West.

It is western land that is paying for this road, and there are enough homesteads or second homesteads and pre-emptions still in the West to yield sufficient revenue for the completion of the project.

I would like to quote here as an additional authority on this matter, what was said during the session of 1912-13 by a former Minister of the Interior, Hon Mr. Oliver. As reported at page 10951 of Hansard, Mr. Oliver said:

The question has been raised here in regard to the cost of this railway, the charge upon the treasury. Some years ago the principle of pre-emptions was introduced into the western country, with the understanding that the fund accruing from the sale of preemptions would be considered as an extra source of revenue from which the Hudson bay railway might be constructed. There was no ear-marking of money received. When the policy of the sale of pre-emptions was introduced, it was introduced with the understanding that a new source of revenue was being created, which would relieve the general treasury from the cost of the Hudson bay railway. Therefore, the treasury of Canada is not finding the money for building the railway. It is the land of the Northwest and the price that is being paid for that land that is building the Hudson bay railway. Enough money is being taken out of pre-emptions of the West to pay for that railway.

Again in the year 1901, during a discussion in Committee of Supply, the following question was put by Mr. Lake, the representative of a western constituency at that time, and replied to by the hon. gentleman who is now Acting Minister of Railways.

Mr. Lake: It was understood by this House I think that the money to be expended on the construction of the Hudson bay railway was to come from a special fund to be created by the sale of pre-emptions?

Mr. Graham: Yes. .

I would like to take up the question of the Hudson Bay railway and the branch lines, which was referred to by the hon. member for Prince Albert (Mr. Knox) in his speech

Hudson Bay Railway

this afternoon. When men who are in authority in the West are questioned upon the feasibility of the Hudson Bay railway, they always sheer off from the main question, and ask "which would you rather have, the Hudson Bay railway on branch line railways?" We know, Mr. Speaker, that branch line railways are vitally necessary to western Canada, but I claim there is no connection whatever between them. This special vote, as I showed a moment ago, was created for the purpose of building the Hudson Bay railway. It is a national undertaking and has nothing to do with the branch line construction.

I notice by the Estimates that we are going to spend $11,800,000 this year for the Welland canal. I claim it would be just as right and fair for us, and for hon. members who oppose the Hudson Bay railway, or who advocate branch lines in lieu of the Hudson Bay railway, to argue that we should cut down the estimates for the Welland canal. I noticed last year the hon. Minister of Agriculture (Mr. Motherwell) took that side of the question, but when the question of a grant of $8,000,000 for the Welland canal was proposed, I observed the Minister of Agriculture had nothing whatever to say about branch line construction. I think he still holds that view. When the vote for $11,800,000 for the Welland canal comes before the House, I at least expect him to move for a very substantial reduction in that item.

I have the honour to represent a constituency in the northwestern part of Saskatchewan which is one of the finest mixed farming constituencies in Canada. There is no doubt about that. It lends itself to immigration. Large tracts of land are waiting for the settler, and I think the hon. Minister of the Interior (Mr. Stewart), if he would look over that country and see the land that we have there ready for settlement, would immediately become a very strong advocate of the building of the Hudson Bay railway, because it would be of very great assistance to him in bringing in new 'settlers. We must have a shorter outlet for our wheat, our live stock and dairy produce-the products of the farm. If the western farmer is to continue to place his products in the markets of the world in open competition with the products of all the countries of the world, having to buy all the commodities which enter into the cost of production on his farm, he cannot under present conditions succeed, but it would certainly be a vast help to the western farmer if the Hudson bay project were completed. If vessels were sailing out of Hudson bay with cattle, dairy products and wheat, and if it were only possible for the government to

TMr. Davies.]

increase the British preference, so that the vessels coming back to Hudson bay could bring back a return cargo, it would have a very great bearing on the freight rate we would have to pay. I agree with the hon. member for Prince Albert and every other western member in the House, that we have a great country and a great heritage in western Canada. I am not pessimistic. The West does not breed pessimists. I believe if we had a fair field and no favour, if the government would assist us and complete the Hudson Bay railway, western Canada would yet become what we always conceived it was designed by nature to be, the granary of the Empire.

Mr. WILLIS KEITH BALDWIN (Stan-stead):

I cannot believe that politics have been played by either the Liberal or the Conservative party in undertaking such a vast construction as the Hudson Bay railway. I have listened to the speeches and I have not heard anything in this House in opposition to the proposition, as the hon. member who has just resumed his seat has suggested. The member for Lunenburg (Mr. Duff) has referred to the climatic conditions and has spoken of the ice which is to be found in the Hudson strait. Considering that so much money has been spent on this undertaking, I am going to say frankly, without hedging, .that if I understand the amount that is to be spent on this railway, I am in favour of it, because I understand this railway has been graded and the rails are now there, and it would be a great *waste not to open up a country that has such vast possibilities. The natural resources of this country have been mentioned in this debate, and I think it would be well worth while to construct the line, if we only got to the navigable part of the river, which I understand is about 30 miles from the end of the rails already laid.

I cannot believe that this railway would hurt Port Arthur, at the head of the Great Lakes, or would injure the railways of this country. Quite the contrary. I believe you cannot benefit one part of the great Dominion of Canada without helping the whole country. The member for South York (Mr. Maclean) has said that Ontario has a railway within 130 miles of-he said Hudson bay, although, I think he meant James bay. In looking at the map I see our Transcontinental railway, running from Quebec to Winnipeg, runs within 250 or 300 miles of the south end of James bay. I will be glad when the province of Ontario has completed that railway, and I likewise will be glad when the great province of Quebec, builds a railway to James bay. Hudson bay has more than 3,000 miles

Hudson Bay Railway

of shore line; we may call it an inland sea, for I believe, according to the scale, it is the largest bay on the map of the world. Practically a thousand miles of the province of Quebec borders on Hudson bay; in Ontario we have 500 miles and in Manitoba more than 500; then there is the great district of Kee-watin. People living to the south of us wonder why Canada has not struck out into its vast interior country. The amount it woud take to complete the railway is surely not a ponderous sum. I am emphatically in favour of the Hudson Bay railway because it would conduce to interprovincial trade. It is sometimes difficult for us to get a proper perspective of these things. We are asking immigrants to come here but we have not developed more thant one-tenth of the vast area which comprises the Dominion. Are we always going to be picayune, small in our conceptions of things? If we are to get people to come to our country we must do big things. We must let the world know that Canada is a country of vigorous people who are ready to take any reasonable step that will lead to its fuller development. The great barrier that is in the way of action of this kind, of course, is our vast debt, and more particularly is that true because of the fact that our railroads have been the cause of much of our present taxation. I wonder what my own constituents will think of my standing here to-night and advocating the extension of railways at this time. Well, I can justify my attitude by saying that we have already spent $20,000,000 on this project; that we have a road bed; tjiat we have the rails laid on a great part ot the line, though it is true that the ties are rotten. By making a further small expenditure at this time we can open up that great interior with all its possibilities. And it is an interesting fact that north of the territory through which this line runs lies nearly one-half the area of the province of Manitoba. Mr. Speaker, I am entirely in accord with the resolution.

Mr. D. W. WARNER (Strathcona):

Mr. Speaker, in discussing this resolution I wish to take occasion to present to the House a new idea. It is unnecessary for me to try to establish the feasibility of that route; that has already been done. I have been somewhat interested in the matter; I have taken note of the facts, and I am convinced that the evidence of its feasibility is beyond question. I would like to point out, however, that we have modern steamships which go where sailing vessels formerly could not. But with regard to the length of time during which

navigation is possible on that route, I think there is more to be said than has been stated here to-day. I believe we can use the Hudson bay route during a longer period throughout the year than we can use the Great Lakes. In those parts of the world where ice conditions have to be overcome, ice-breakers are maintained to keep navigation open the year round, and they operate in ice to the depth of four feet. Salt water will not freeze as readily or as firmly as fresh water. I have just been reading of Mr. Stefansson's explorations in the north, and he tells us that the thickest ice he ever encountered, frozen in one season, was six feet. It has been represented here to-day by the hon. member for Lunenburg (Mr. Duff) that ice in Hudson bay freezes to the depth of eight feet in one season. Well, I do not see how the ice there could be so much heavier than the ice a thousand miles or more to the north, in the areas explored by Stefansson. We have evidence however, that will offset any argument of that kind, especially when that argument is brought forward by one who claims he does not know anything about it.

I am convinced that the straits are navigable for at least four months in the year, during which time we can be shipping our grain out in that way. That is important. The part of the country in which I live is as good as can be found anywhere else in Canada; so far as productiveness is concerned I would not exchange it for any other part of the world that I have any knowledge of. Our climatic conditions and our soil are such that there is a possibility of production beyond the imagination of the Canadian people-that is, if all the land is used. I am not going to lay much stress on what we want for the future; it is what we need now that counts. We do need that outlet; we are producing in such amounts that it would be of advantage to us. From a mixed farming country we are sending out large quantities of beef, pork, and dairy products, and if we had the advantage of a better transportation rate, our production would increase very substantially and very rapidly.

It has been stated here to-day that it would be of advantage to the Minister of the Interior (Mr. Stewart) in connection with immigration to have this route in operation. I am sure that to go ahead with this project would be one way of giving heart to the people in the West and of making it easier for the Minister of Immigration to get people to come to our country.

We have in Alberta large coal seams; the coal is there in any quantity that we want to

\

Hudson Bay Railway

take it. We want to sell that coal. There is a fuel problem before Canada that we cannot ignore. I have been told on good authority that this winter coal has been shipped 2,100 miles into Winnipeg, which is only 700 or 800 miles from our coal fields. Upon reference to a government map I find that the distance from Edmonton to Hudson bay is only about 800 miles, and from Port Nelson to the southern end of James bay is another 650 or 700 miles. According to the map the distance from this point to the National railway in Ontario south of James bay is 125 miles-I am taking the government maps for my measurement-and the total distance traversed by the time we reach Cochrane on the National line is 1,575 miles. At this point we commence to distribute coal both ways east and west on the National Railways. We also have government railways to carry it south to the bigger centres, and the railways could be getting traffic from the south as well to carry back west.

The hon. member for Bonaventure (Mr. Marcil) asked what the effect would be on the National Railways if we opened up this route. In my judgment we should be giving these railways more to do than they can possibly get if the route is left unopened. We should have increased settlement and production and should be able to supply our people with our own coal, so that we could retain in Canada about $60,000,000 a year that we now send out of the country for this commodity. If it is possible to haul coal 2,100 miles to Winnipeg, I contend that it is possible for our National Railways to haul coal from Alberta to central Ontario for distribution from Cochrane. We want to supply our people with our own coal and to employ our own miners in bringing this coal to the surface. At present, however, we are dealing with a financial problem in connection with our coal supply which we must solve sooner or later, and it is the duty of this parliament to solve that problem. It seems to me that we should do everything in our power to keep this $60,000,000 a year in our own country instead of sending it away to keep in employment the railwaymen and miners of another country. We can help to make our railways a success by hauling our own produce both ways. Now, we can ship coal from Port Nelson to the south end of James bay. Because the water is salt I am absolutely sure we can use that water route as long as we can ship on the waters of the Great Lakes, although probably there should be a greater emphasis on the facility of shipping grain, beef, pork and dairy products and lumber through Hudson Strait. I think that this route would be better than

any other for the shipping of any perishable products such as meat; dairy products and whatever is produced in the mixed farming line.

Mr. MACLEAN (Halifax):

What would be the probable cost pf that coal delivered at points in central Ontario?

Mr. WARNER:

I can give only an approximate estimate, but I believe it could be laid down at Cochrane at $15 a ton, coming practically all the way over the National Railways.

Mr. MACLEAN (Halifax):

If it were

shipped to Port Nelson and then by water carriage on James bay, and thence by rail into Ontario, what would it cost then?

Mr. WARNER:

I could not give any definite answer to that question. I believe, however, that we could lay the lignite and bituminous coal clown in Ontario cheap enough for the people to use it. Scientists have told us that our anthracite coal in Alberta is practically equal to the best anthracite in Pennsylvania. I have, of course, only their statement for that; but we can see what possibilities there are. And when we reflect that our National Railways are not paying and that we have been sending out about $60,000,000 for fuel, it seems to me that this House might give some consideration to this problem.

Mr. MACLEAN (Halifax):

Suppose

American coal could be landed at a given point in central Ontario at $9 a ton, would my hon. friend be in favour of prohibiting the importation of that coal by means of a customs tariff?

Mr. WARNER:

I am not aware that American coal can be laid down in central Ontario at $9 a ton.

Mr. MACLEAN (Halifax):

Well, say,$13.99.

Mr. BUREAU:

Including graft?

Mr. MACLEAN (Halifax):

Suppose it

could be got in at that figure, how would the hon. member exclude it?

Mr. WARNER:

The best information I have leads me to believe that $15 or $16 is about the lowest you can buy good coal for in Ontario to-day. Now, all that we want is something that is reasonable. I would impress upon the House this fact, that it would be worth something to eastern Canada to have western Canada given a better transportation service. If we were enabled, through the production of more coal along with the rest of our products, to use more of the manufactured goods of the East, surely that is a

Hudson Bay Railway

matter that should be taken into consideration. The people of the district in which I live are more interested in shipping westward, and I want to express my appreciation of what has been done in the way of opening up that western route. The government did something worth while when they granted money to facilitate the establishment of elevators at Vancouver and the opening up of that western route, and while we are more interested in that route at present, we are nevertheless interested in the opening up of the Hudson bay route. We want that route opened up and tested, and we believe that Canada can afford to do this, because nearly all the money needed has already been expended. And as has been shown, the East was not called upon to pay for what has so far been done. I do not know whether there is enough money in the western lands to pay for the completion of the rest of the road and the opening up of the harbour. I do not know all the details, but, if we had to do it, it seems to me that we could afford to complete the work into which we have already put $20,000,000 by expending a few more millions on it. I do not believe there is any reason to doubt the feasibility of this route. By proving that the route is worth while you will have a more contented West, for the people will realize that you have done something to help them out. And they need your help. In order that they may develop that country as it should be developed we must give them a chance to feel that there will be a profit in what they undertake to do. Therefore we want eastern Canada to feel that it is worth something to the East to have this railway completed.

Mr. MARTELL:

Is not my hon. friend afraid that in the event of the Hudson Bay railroad being completed and the sea route opened up oleomargarine might be imported from England?