Mr. EULER:

That was incidental to

granting the intermediate tariff. As a matter of fact we import fruits from the United States and can them in this country.

Mr. McLEAN (Melfort):

He does not

want you to do that.

Mr. EULER:

I do not want to delay the

committee, but I submit that in quite a number of instances we got the limit of the reduction that could be granted, namely, 50 per cent. We got the full 50 per cent reduction on 27 items with a value in 1934 of

823,400,000. We got a reduction of from 40 to 49 per cent, which is pretty close to 50 per cent,, on 11 items. We got a reduction of from 30 to 39 per cent on 11 other items. In only one case is the reduction less than 20 per cent. On 21 items we are assured of entirely free entry, which can be called 100 per cent.

Mr. ROWE (Dufferin):

But these were free.

Mr. EULER:

Yes, but they are fixed.

Mr. ROWE (Dufferin):

The minister should be fair; they were free before.

Mr. EULER:

But the important point is that they are bound; they cannot be changed now for the life of the agreement, and under the free items now bound the amount is $111,000,000.

Canada-U. S. Trade Agreement

Mr. TUCKER:

The members of the Conservative party take one position one minute and another position the next. They complained bitterly that we were not getting a low enough tariff on goods we shipped into the United States, and now the hon. gentleman who has been speaking for the Conservatives-

Mr. BAKER:

Is the hon. gentleman discussing leather?

Mr. TUCKER:

They take the attitude now that this item is too low and-

The CHAIRMAN (Sir Eugene Fiset):

I must call the hon. member to order; he is not discussing the item under consideration.

Mr. TUCKER:

I have not taken up any of the time of the committee discussing this agreement and I should like now to make this remark. We know that proportionately to value there is more labour going into the production of primary products in these days of machinery than there is going into highly finished products turned out in the factories. Do my hon. friends object to more labour being employed in the primary industries of the country? That seems to be their attitude. They argue that because we are producing material for the United States market, in connection with our primary industries, Canadians are being made hewers of wood and drawers of water. I say that if this agreement will enable thousands upon thousands of people in Canada to make their living in the primary industries, which they would not do before, it matters not whether you call them hewers of wood or drawers of water. If it means more employment for Canadians let us hew more wood and ship it to the United States.

Mr. ROBICHAUD:

Hon. gentlemen object that we have accorded a greater reduction in duties than the United States has done. It seems to me that their argument proves that we are wiser and know better than the Americans do what is good for us.

Mr. EULER:

The outstanding fact with regard to this item is that five or six years ago we exported to the United States patent leather to the value of over $1,000,000, which dropped in 1934 to a bare $32,000, and it is hoped and reasonably expected that with the reduction from 15 to 10 per cent some of that business can be recovered by the Canadian manufacturer.

Mr. STEWART:

Will the minister tell us in what year that comparatively large export was made?

Mr. EULER:

In 1929.

Mr. STEWART:

Was that before the Hawley-Smoot tariff?

Mr. EULER:

Yes.

Mr. STEWART:

Certainly it was; and what did we send in 1931 after the Hawley-Smoot tariff went into effect? The Minister of Trade and Commerce unintentionally made a statement that ought to be cleared up.

Mr. EULER:

What year does the hon. gentleman want?