Mr. CRERAR:

There were a good many

practices which developed after confederation in the matter of public expenditures that we would do well to reconsider to-day. Up until the war the revenues of Canada were pretty buoyant, and the voting of a few million dollars more or less annually by the House was not of very much consequence. I submit, however, that the situation is wholly different to-day. It is not too much to say that this country to-day is groaning under a burden of taxation and it behooves every member of this House to endeavour to curtail public expenditures in every way possible.

I submit again that the policy of taking money out of the pockets of the taxpayers of Canada to build warehouses for the benefit of private business interests is an unsound policy.

If we do it in this case why not provide such a facility at every other point where it is desired? I submit that if the government does the dredging, or provides a wharf or docks, at Blind River, the people who benefit from that work ought surely to build the warehouse.

Mr. CARROLL:

Would my hon. friend

suggest that the stations along lines of railway should be built by the people in the immediate locality? The principle is the same as in this case.

Mr. CRERAR:

No.

Mr. CARROLL:

It is the very same.

No.

Mr. CARROLL:

I understand from the

hon. member who represents the county that a line of boats runs from this point to the Soo and to other places, and the goods carried on these vessels consigned to so many different parties, are placed in this warehouse. My hon. friends cite the case of Vancouver where elevators for grain are being built to-day by the public funds of the country. That is ail right. The same thing exactly applies to a warehouse on a wharf and a station on a railway.

Mr. CRERAR:

My hon. friend is wholly wrong, and I will prove it to him in a moment. When a line of railway is built the transportation companies erect their warehouses and collect freight for the goods they hand'e; they use the warehouse and the other facilities in handling the goods.

Mr. CARROLL:

Wliat about the elevators?

Mr. CRERAR:

I will come to that in a moment. If my hon. friend carried out his analogy in regard to the case we are considering he would see that the steamship companies that get the benefit of the warehouses and dredging should build the warehouses for the convenience of the people.

Mr. HAMMELL:

Who would give the

steamship companies the authority to build a warehouse on public property? I have in mind many cases in my own constituency where there is such a shelter as I presume this will be, where a small waiting room is built for the convenience of the public in stormy weather, and at the other end of the wharf a warehouse is built to store the perishable goods. How *would my hon. friend provide for private companies in a village or town erecting a warehouse on top of a publicly owned dock?

Supply-Public Works

Mr. CRERAR:

I do not know whether the government owns the property where the wharf is built.

Mr. HAMMELL:

They own it.

Mr. CRERAR:

Then there would be no difficulty in the Department of Public Works making the arrangement with the steamship companies to build the facilities.

Mr. HAMMELL:

It is not for the steamships primarily that these facilities are provided; it is for the people of the locality.

Mr. CRERAR:

Then I will put it the other way: why then should not the government build all the station houses on a railroad?

Mr. CARROLL:

So they do, on government railways.

Mr. CRERAR:

Of course they do on the government railways. The analogy cannot apply at all. I submit in all good faith that the principle is not a sound one, and if it can be invoked at Blind River or any other river or harbour in the manner provided here, the same thing can be made to apply all over the country.

Mr. CARRUTHERS:

It has, from timi immemorial.

Mr. CRERAR:

Does the hon. gentleman say that all the warehouse facilities on docks are all provided by the government?

Mr. CARRUTHERS:

Yes, they put warehouses upon them.