Mr. ANDREW McMASTER (Brome) presented the fifth report of the special committee appointed to consider the resolution to give the government of Canada control over certain ocean rates.
Mr. MEIGHEN:
Who christened the committee by that name?
Mr. McMASTER:
That question has been asked befo.c in the House and replied to. I invoke the Speaker's aid to prevent useless reiteration.
Mr. SPEAKER presented the report of the secretary of the joint committee on the Library of Parliament.
Hon. CHARLES STEWART (Minister of the Interior) moved for leave to introduce Bill No. 151 to amend the Northwest Territories Act. He said: The purport of this bill is simply to amend the act in order to give us authority to exact licenses from foreigners going into the Northwest Territories. As the House well knows, a number of explorers and traders are going into the northern waters, and we do not appear to have authority to exact licenses from them and thereby assert our soverugnty over that territory. It is in
Questions order to make that perfectly clear that I am asking for the amendment to the act. Motion agreed to and bill read the first time.
(Questions answered orally are indicated by an asterisk.)
1. What was the total exportation of potatoes from Canada into the United States of America, during the respective months of January, February, March and April. 1925?
2. What was the customs tariff rate applied to such exportation by the United States?
1. Exports of potatoes from Canada to the United States:
Months Quantity Value
1925 Bushels
January.. .. .. .. 2,197 $ 1,385February... . . .. 9,679 3,590March . .. 67,972 49,124April .. .. 16,791 11,335
The above were all Canadian produce.
2. The United States rate of duty on potatoes -'m-ted from Canada is fifty cents per one ______j-cunds.
1. Was the Pelagic Sealing Treaty signed at Washington, July 7, 1911?
2. Was it provided under article twelve (12) thereof that Russia should at the end of each season deliver 15 per cent gross in number and value of the total number of seal skins taken on the territory subject to the jurisdiction of Russia, to an authorized agent of the Canadian government?
3. Has this been complied with, and if so, what was received in each of the years since?
4. Under article thirteen (13) of the same treaty, was a similar agreement made on the part of Japan, only in her case to the extent of 10 per cent?
5. Has this agreement been complied with, and if so, what payments were made in each of the succeeding years ?
1. Yes.
2. Yes, for the years in which killing of seals for commercial purposes took place.
3. A close season for five years as provided for by the treaty was enacted by Russia during the years 1912-1916. Since that time until 1920, Canada received the quota of skins provided for by the treaty. Since 1920 no information is available as to whether seals have been taken. The following net amounts were received in the years stated from sales .of Canada's share of the skins taken, but they
represent proceeds from skins taken in
previous years:
1919
$3,501 601921
2,178 641923
80 50
Less expenses, freight, etc.. 544 69
4. Yes, for the years in which killing seals for commercial purposes took place.
5. Yes. No killing took place in 1916 and 1917, as the number of seals visiting the islands in these years fell below the minimum specified by the treaty. The following net amounts were received in the years stated from the sale of Canada's share of the seal skins taken, but they represent the proceeds from skins taken in previous years:
1917
$2,620 361918 :
962 311922
1,333 561925
448 08
1. Did the Department of Public Works, in 1912-13, purchase a parcel of land in order to erect a public building at Loretteville, County of Quebec?
2. If so, from whom was this land purchased, and at what price?
3. Was there another parcel of land purchased in 1923-24?
4. If so, from whom was the latter parcel of land purchased, and at what price?
5. Why was a second parcel of land purchased?
6. Was the Post Office Department consulted in -connection with the purchase of said parcels of land ?
7. Did the department approve of the latter parcel of land in preference to the former?
1. Yes.
2. Mr. Jos. Renaud for $2,250.
3. Yes.
4. Mr. A. Savard for $4,800.
5. Renaud property not suitably located for post office purposes.
6. Yes, as to property purchased in 1913 and were well acquainted with details as to property purchased in 1923.
7. Yes, as site was recommended by the federal representative and the mayor and councillors of Loretteville.