Mr. BARBER:

I. Has the government acted upon the recommendation of the special committee, appointed to investigate the administration of the Department of Customs and Excise, as contained in their third and final report on June 18, 1926, as follows:-

"The committee further recommends that as soon as possible regulations be made to prohibit clearance being granted to vessels carrying liquor as cargo sailing from a Canadian port to a United States port; such regulations to make an exception in favour of liquor being imported into the United States in accordance with the laws of that country."

78594-20$

and also as contained in the report of the judicial committee presented on October 15, 1927, as follows: -

"We also express our entire concurrence in the recommendation of the special committee of the House of Commons, as contained in paragraph 10 of the committee's report. An effective method of carrying out the treaty (Canada and the United States) would be to prohibit clearance to vessels of all kinds carrying a cargo of liquor to the United States, contrary to the laws of that country"?

2. If so, what action has been taken?

3. If not, why?

Mr. EULER:

Prior to June 18, 1926. there had been a communication from the United States Secretary of State, through the British ambassador suggesting the negotiation of a treaty supplementary to the treaty of the 6th of June, 1924, providing for the refusal of clearance to shipments of merchandise from a port of either country to a port of the other country if such shipments comprised articles prohibited or restricted importation in the country of destination. These proposals were followed in April and May, 1926 by requests for a statement of opinion on the part of the Canadian government and at the date of the report of the special committee of the House of Commons negotiations for a conference on the subject were still pending. The royal commission appointed later instituted enquiries in respect of the same subject and the Canadian government expressed its willingness to hold a conference with the United States' authorities as suggested, but felt that the conference should not take place until the report of the royal commission was available. A conference was finally arranged between the representatives of Canada and the United States on the 8th, 9th and 10th of January, 1929 and the report of that conference is now receiving consideration.

1. Was any electric power imported into Canada from the United States of America during the year 1929?

2. If so, (a) by whom or what corporations; (b) at what points was such importation made; (e) was such power imported under license; (d) what other terms or conditions were applicable to such importation?

Mr. EULER;

1. Yes.

2. (a) It is contrary to the practice of the Department of National Revenue to give information which would disclose the business of an individual concern.

(b) Coaticook, St. Armand, St. John's, Emerson, Gretna, North Portal, Lethbridge, Niagara Falls, Sarnia.

Questions

(o) A license is not required for the importation of electric power.

(d) Importers are required to furnish monthly returns in terms of kilowatt hours covering the quantity and value of electrical energy imported.

1. Has any communication been received from the British government on the further question of naval plans and the curtailment of the same by Great Britain and the United States, or any communication from the government of the United Kingdom for a conference thereon, and when will it be held and where?

2. Has the attention of the government been called to such a declaration of policy as reported in daily press of February 18 and February 19 by Sir Esme Howard, British ambassador at Washington, that such a policy has been decided on by the British government and such action immediately contemplated in which the dominions are to participate?

3. Has any communication on this matter yet been received from the minister plenipotentiary and envoy extraordinary of Canada to the United States by Canada's official foreign office? If so, what was it and will all the papers be laid on the table of the house by the Department of External Affairs?

1. It is understood that the question of naval relations is receiving the attention of the British government. No communication has been received indicating that it is proposing to summon a conference on disarmament.

2. No.

3. The Canadian minister at Washington has kept the government advised on such phases of this matter as were considered relevant. It is not proposed to table any papers.

1. What has been the annual cost, since its inception, of the League of Nations to Canada?

2. Who were the delegates from Canada for years 1927, 1928 and 1929?

3. What members of the government, or officials, or private citizens were appointed as representatives in any and every capacity, and what were the travelling expenses, hotel, and other expenditures of each delegate aforesaid?

4. How many sailed from: (a) American

ports, and (b) Canadian ports on these journeys?

5- What has been the cost: (a) For capital, (t>) for maintenance for the past ten years of

(a) Canada house. London. England, (b) Canadian embassy at Washington since its inception?

Mr. MACKENZIE KING:

1. 1919-20: $64,043.15; 1920-21: $219,071.81;

1921-22: 8196,526.69; 1922-23 $210,531.83;1923-24: $193,712.19; 1924-25 $180,252.49;1925-26: $185,774.66; 1926-27 $181,119.54;1927-28: $185,670.87; 1928-29: $191,865.86 toFebruary 1, 1929. 2. 1926-27: Sir Herbert Ames, Sir GeorgeFoster, Hon. Philippe Roy, 7th assembly; 1927-28: Senator Dandurand, Hon. Charles Stewart, Hon. Philippe Roy, Dr. 0. D. Skelton, 8th assembly; Senator Dandurand, 48th meeting of council; Senator Dandurand, 49th meeting of council; 1928-29: Hon.

Philippe Roy, 50th meeting of council; Right Hon. W. L. Mackenzie King, 9th assembly, 51st, and 52nd meeting of council; Senator Dandurand, Hon. C. A. Dunning, Hon. Philippe Roy, Dr. 0. D. Skelton, 9th assembly; Senator Dandurand, 53rd meeting of council.

3. 1926-27: Sir George Foster, 83,577; Sir Herbert Ames, 81,040; Hon. Philippe Roy, 81,040; 1927-28: Senator Dandurand, 83,108, 8th assembly; Hon. Charles Stewart and staff, S6,002.50, 8th assembly; Hon. Philippe Roy, 8624.73. 8th assembly; Dr. O. D. Skelton, S2,687.20, 8th assembly; Senator Dandurand, $2,121, 48th council; Senator Dandurand, 81,100. 49th council; 1928-29: Hon. Philippe Roy, 8192.96. 50th council; Right Hon. W. L. Mackenzie King and staff, $5,968.25, 9th assembly, 51st and 52nd council; Senator Dandurand, $2,400, 9th assembly; Hon. C. A. Dunning and staff, 84,780.06, 9th assembly; Hon. Philippe Roy, $753.80, 9th assembly; Dr. Skelton, Sl.679.50, 9th assembly; 1929: No meeting up to present.

4. No information.

5. Canada House, London, England

(a) For capital, Public Works reports, 81,540,781.56; (b) For maintenance Public

Works reports, S151,380.86; External Affairs reports, $746,605.99.

Canadian Embassy at Washington

(a) For capital, Public Works reports, $477,754.35; (b) For maintenance, External Affairs reports, 8225,502.59.

1. Number of applications received up to date for revaluation of lands held by soldier settlers under the provisions of the Soldier Settlement band Act and its amendments: (a) total number; (b) by provinces.

Speculation in Securities