1. Has the government any knowledge that the Dominion Glass Company imports from the United States goods under item " unfinished article " when these are finished articles, and, that labels made in the United States are removed from the goods and those made in Canada substituted in its factory at Toronto, and that it distributes to the public said goods as thus received?

2. If so, is the government in a position to prevent this state of affairs which is contrary to the best interests of the Canadian workmen?

Hon. Mr. COPP:

The government have

not the information to answer No. 1, and the answer will therefore be, No.

1. What are the monthly percentages of tonnage originating in the different provinces on the Canadian National Railways and affiliated companies to the total traffic of the year for each of the years 1923 and 1924?

Questions

Hon. Mr. LOW:

Mr. GOULD:

Referring to question No. 21 on the order paper of the 27th day of February, 1925, partly answered as follows by Minister of Trade and Commerce,

'' One report of a special nature had been received in 1924, and has not been printed

1. Why was the special report submitted in 1924, not printed?

2. Are there any other reports from Dr. Birchard

available?

3. If so, how many, and on what dates? If not, why?

4. Did the department ask for any report from the grain testing laboratory at Winnipeg or from Dr. Birchard during the years 1921, 1922, 1923 and 1924?

1. As stated in part 6 of the answer to question No. 21 on the order paper of February 27, 1925, referred to above, the report referred to has not yet been printed, as it was referred to Dr. H. M. Tory, Chairman of the Honorary Advisory Council for Scientific and Industrial Research for consideration as to the value and practicability of the work covered therein. Dr. Tory was in the west at the time and stated he desired to discuss the matter further with the minister when he (Dr. Tory) was next in Ottawa. There the matter rests at the moment.

2. The only reports of Dr. Birchard published were: Report on trial shipments of bulk wheat from Vancouver via the Panama canal to the United Kingdom (1918); and a progress report dated December 31, 1919, covering the work of the Dominion Grain Research Laboratory since its inception in 1918. These were widely distributed at the time, and while there are no copies now available

of the first mentioned, there are a few of the second.

As to the availability of other reports, there are on file numerous progress reports furnished the Board of Grain Commissioners by Dr. Birchard, many of which consist of one or more typewritten pages reciting the work done during the current month, and stating that certain experiments were under way or being continued, but at the time no conclusions could be drawn. Many other lengthy analytical and statistical reports were also sent to the board. There are also reports on file regarding tests made on specific samples furnished Dr. Birchard by the Chief Grain Inspector.

3. Answered by No. 2.

4. Dr. Birchard had standing instructions with regard to reports. In April 1914, he was informed by direction of the minister to make a monthly progress report, but no direct requests for reports in the years mentioned were sent to Dr. Birchard from the department, as by the terms of Dr. Birchard's instructions from Sir George Foster, Minister of Trade and Commerce, under date of February 8, 1916, Dr. Birchard was placed under the direction of the Board of Grain Commissioners, with whom he was "to co-operate and report results." Dr. Birchard was further informed that his instructions as to the line of work he was to carry out "would come from the Board of Grain Commissioners."

In 1921, however, the department wrote to Dr. Birchard asking him to revise the proofs of his booklet No. 2, the publication of which had been approved of by the Board of Grain

Questions

Commissioners in July 1920. Two thousand copies of this had been ordered printed in August 1920. It was impossible, however, to get the revised proofs back from Dr. Birchard; hence in November 1921, the department was obliged to instruct the Printing Bureau to cancel the requisition and disperse the type.

1. Were tenders called for repairs to C.G.S. Lauren-tian about the month of August, 1924, and, if so, when did such tenders close?

2. What tenders were received, what were the amounts of such tenders and who was the successful tenderer?

3. Within what time was the work required to be completed ?

4. When was the work actually completed?

1. Yes, in local St. John newspapers. Closed September 13, 1924 at 12 o'clock noon.

2. Tenders received and amounts of such tenders as follows:-

Woodwork and Caulking.-Chapman & Moore, St. John, N.B., $1,000; Herbert E. Stackhouse, St. John, N.B. $375; Union Foundry and Machine Works, Ltd., St. John, N.B. $350.

Canvas work.-Howard E. Holder, St. John, N.B., $350; George E. Holder, St. John, N.B., $287.

Upholstering work.-Emery's Ltd., St. John, N.B., $74.50.

Iron work.-Wm. Lewis & Son, St. John, N.B., $1,280; Union Foundry and Machine Works, Ltd., St. John, N.B., $1,500; St.

John Iron Works, St. John, N.B., $1,800. Painting.-John E. Courtney, St. John, N.B., $185; John Johnston & Son, St. John, N.B., $225; James Huey, St. John, N.B., $268; Red Cross Memorial Workshop, St. John, N.B., $325.

Machinery repairs.-St. John Iron Works, Ltd., St. John, N.B., $440.

Boiler.-St. John Iron Works, Ltd., St. John, N.B., $179.

Painting, Boiler, Ironwork, Machinery and Woodwork repairs.-St. John Dry Dock and Shipbuilding Co., Ltd., St. John, N.B , $4,600.

The successful tenderers were as follows:- Machinery repairs.-St. John Iron Works, $440.

Woodwork and Caulking.-Union Foundry and Machine Works, Ltd., $350.

Canvas work.-George E. Holder, $287. Upholstering work.-Emery's Ltd., $74.50. Painting.-John E. Courtney, $185.

Boiler repairs.-St. John Iron Works, $179.

Iron work.-Wm, Lewis & Son's tender,-$1,-280 was accepted but they later advised they could not complete work in time specified by the next lowest tenderer the Union Foundry & Machine Works, namely-15 days, therefore the latter tender was accepted their tender price being $1,500. Work completed in 10 days.

3. In calling for tenders there. was no specified time required for work to be completed; tenderers were asked to state the number of days they would require to complete the work and the firm agreeing to perform the specific work tendered on in the shortest period was given preference, but not until the lower tenderer was offered the contract to be completed by the time specified by his competitor. The various contracts were to be completed within periods ranging from six to fifteen days depending on the extent of the work undertaken.

4. All contracts completed by November 1, 1924.

Mr. NEILL:

Regarding the 105 Chinamen allowed into Nova Scotia to work on the steamers of the British Empire Steamship Corporation, and for whom a bond of 5105,000 was put up by the said corporation, guaranteeing that the Chinamen would ultimately be checked out of Canada, as stated in this House on April 28, 1924.

Have any of -these men been checked out, or are they all still employed by the said corporation?

Hon. Mr. ROBB:

Ninety-five Chinese, only, have been employed as members of the crews of vessels operated by the British Empire Steel Corporation, Limited, since the deposit of the bond in the sum of $105,000. Of this number, 73 have been passed out of Canada, 5 deserted -at Canadian ports, for which the British Empire Steel Corporation, Limited, have been penalized in the sum of $5,000; and 17 remain as members of the crew of the SS. Rosecastle.

VANCOUVER HARBOUR COMMISSION Mr. BLACK (Yukon):

1. Do the members of the Vancouver Harbour Commission have to devote their entire time to duties of the harbour board?

2. Can the Harbour Comissioners have any interest, directly or indirectly, in any firm or corporation dealing with said harbour board?

1. No.

2. By-law No. 8 of the Vancouver Harbour Commissioners, reads as follows:-

Questions

The corporation shall have no dealings of any kind *with any of its members; nor shall any member thereof, or any officer or any person employed by, or in the service of the commissioners, be concerned, directly or indirectly, in any contract that may hereafter be entered into appertaining to any work carried en by the commissioners; but all transactions shall be conducted by and through the secretary or other officer specially authorized, subject to the approval of the commissioners.