April 11, 1947
Mr. Chairman Orders of the day. Mr. Jackman
to move the following resolution:
Whereas it is desirable that the National
Convention and the people of Newfoundland
should be fully informed, so far as possible,
of all the facts having any bearing upon forms
of government that might be submitted to the
people in a national referendum.
Therefore be it resolved that the appropriate authorities he advised that the Convention
desires to inform the Government of
the United States of America of the Convention's wish to learn that government's attitude
on the question of the federal union of
Newfoundland with the United States of
America: and further wishes to ascertain the
terms and conditions on the basis of which
the Government of the United States of
America consider that such federal union
might be effected, for which purpose this
Convention desires to send a delegation to
Washington, D.C.
Be it further resolved that the delegation
shall have no authority whatsoever to negotiate or conclude any agreement or in any
manner to bind the Convention or the people
of Newfoundland.
Mr. Jackman Mr. Chairman, in rising to move
this resolution I do not do so with any undue
enthusiasm. I feel very sad about the whole situation. I am a Newfoundlander and I
am very proud
of my birth. I lost in the first world war the only
brother in the world I could have as a companion,
who laid down his life at Beaumont Hamel in
1916, for the rights of all people to choose their
own way of living. But I do recognise, sir, a
certain subtle line of propaganda which we fell
for in 1933, and which we are beginning to fall
for again today. Mr. Chairman, I have your last
speech that you gave in this House when you
were the Leader of the Opposition. I have it home
on file, I have kept it for years. I just want to note
one part of it, when you said that the government
was making serfs of the people of Newfoundland.
Now Mr. Chairman, my idea in moving this
resolution is only to satisfy a number of my
constituents who are in favour of this. I have
listened to a number of people apart from my
constituency talking about the same thing. Personally, whilst I move this, I do not
agree with it.
It sounds inconsistent but nevertheless I cannot
help it. I believe that if we as a people want to get
down to brass tacks, that there is only one way
we can do it, and that is by standing on our own
feet. I do not believe in getting everything from
a government. As John Stuart Mill says, "The
worth of a nation is the worth of the individual."
We have been subjected, not only lately, but for
a number of years, to this line of propaganda:
"Give me your mind, and I will give you something to eat." I think it is appropriate
to recall a
warning from one of the greatest philosophers of
modern times — by the way he was a German —
Hegel. He told the German people over 100 years
ago, "Men are not free when they are not thinking." Of course the logical follow-up
is this: there
is only one way to bring it into action, and that is
by the ballot, a secret weapon which all of us
fought for, and it is sad to think that the battle of
Runnymede, which was fought so long ago,
should have been sabotaged in 1933. I do not
wish to hold up the investigations of this Convention, in fact I am very anxious to
get it concluded
as quickly as possible, because as I have said
before, it is the common people who are paying
for it and I don't want to take anything off of
anyone. Now at this time I think it would be very
appropriate to quote a reference from the Bible,
very appropriate. This is it: "For verily I say unto
you that whosoever shall say unto this mountain:
'Be thou removed and be thou cast into the sea
and shall not doubt in his heart, but shall believe
that those things which he saith shall come to
pass, he shall have whatsoever he saith."
Shakespeare says, "Our doubts are traitors,
and make us lose the good we oft might win by
fearing to attempt." Mr. Chairman, in moving
this resolution I do it in this way: I have faith in
474 NATIONAL CONVENTION April 1947
our people, I have faith in Newfoundland and
Newfoundlanders. We fought in two wars and we
came out on top, and not only on top, but we got
from the highest rank and authorities in England
these continents. Lord Haig said in the last war,
"Newfoundlanders are better than the best."
Montgomery said, "Give me a million Newfoundlanders and we will clean up all the Germans
in the world." Here is what I say: I have
faith in my country, and I have faith in our people,
and I do not like the idea of sending delegations
anywhere. I do, however, agree with the delegation going to England, and that's one
of the
reasons why I move this resolution, because
when our delegation goes to England they are
going to be asked, "Well, what do the people in
Newfoundland think?" The answer is, "Some say
responsible government, and some confederation", and it stops there. Now if this resolution
is
passed today, they will be fully aware of this as
well, when the Dominions Secretary asks, "What
do you think of the USA?" Well, we also want to
know what about that. I move this resolution first
of all because I know there are a number of
people in Newfoundland who would vote for
amalgamation with the USA, and secondly because I want our delegation when they go
to
England to let the British government know that
we are beginning to get pretty itchy — in other
words we are willing to go in with anyone. I
personally do not agree with it. I am a Newfoundlander, and I want Newfoundland for
Newfoundlanders, but as I see it you are having a
delegation sent to England and one to Canada,
and in order to give the people what they want,
and in accordance with our terms of reference and
what Professor Wheare told us, I move that this
delegation be also included.
Mr. Chairman I allow the resolution, but in
doing so I feel that it is my duty to point out
clearly to the Convention that this proposal
directly and essentially involves a secession from
the British Commonwealth of Nations, and the
incorporation of Newfoundland into a foreign
power, under a foreign flag. Does anyone second
the motion?
Mr. Figary I rise to second the motion made by
Mr. Jackman. I am not going to make any comments because I think it has been well
covered by
Mr. Jackman. I want to say that I am not altogether in favour of it, but there are
a lot of
people in this country and in the district which I
represent, and in many other districts, expecting
this resolution to come up, and if it did not I
believe these people would be very disappointed.
I do not see anything wrong with it. I think we
should have all the facts and information that we
can get. I am not so much concerned about federal
union with the USA, but I think we should get
some information with regards to trade between
the USA and Newfoundland, and I believe there
is a lot of information that can be obtained. On
these grounds I have much pleasure in supporting
this motion.
Mr. Banfield I am much opposed to this Convention sending a delegation to the USA, and I
will vote against it.
Mr. Hillier With regard to the resolution before
us, I feel we all have to have the greatest respect
for the USA and its people, and we wish to be
forever on good terms with them, but despite that
I am not able to support this motion.
Mr. Butt I feel we have had too little time to
consider a question which to me is of great importance. I realise that I may be considered
rather
crazy and unpatriotic, but sometime or other
somebody has got to say it. I am as interested in
the welfare of Newfoundland as anyone else. All
my people came from England, and for three
generations we have been born and brought up in
Newfoundland, but we have had the terms of
reference interpreted to include all forms of
government. There are a number of people who
feel that the time has come when we, as Newfoundlanders, ought to make a decision
for ourselves as to what we want to do. Now that's the
question. We ought to make a decision for ourselves as to what we ought to do. There
are, so
far as I canjudge, quite a number of people who
would consider it. I have people of my own in the
United States, and I know that they look upon
themselves as blood brothers to Britishers. Now
I don't want to go into consideration of the
reasons why we should or should not debate this
question. I think it is the wrong time for us to do
it, and i want to move that the whole question be
deferred to a later date so that we can have time
to think about it.
Mr. Chairman It has been moved by Mr. Butt
April 1947 NATIONAL CONVENTION 475
and seconded by Mr. Harrington in amendment
that the consideration of this matter be deferred
to a later date.
Mr. Chairman It is in order for you to speak on
the amendment once.
Mr. Jackman My point in moving this resolution was that I felt that when our delegation goes
to England, it should be fully armed with all the
facts regarding forms of government in Newfoundland. That is the only reason why I
moved
it. I am not in favour of federation with anyone.
I am a Newfoundlander, and I believe in Newfoundland and Newfoundlanders, but my whole
object in moving this motion was this: that when
the delegation would go to England, they would
be able to tell the British people that there is
sentiment here in Newfoundland favouring amalgamation or federation with the United
States.
That is the only reason I put it, and I think it is
only fair that this Convention should vote on it
now, and give this delegation the full facts. What
are we holding back for? I was told yesterday
when I decided to bring this resolution in, "Don't
do that, it is political suicide." I am not a
politician, and I am not looking for anything in
that respect. The only way you can classify me as
a politician is that I will fight and die for the right
to bring my family up as decent human beings,
and my next door neighbours' children as well.
If the delegation goes to England and is asked,
"What is the sentiment in Newfoundland?", they
can say, "Well, some want Commission government, some responsible government, and
some
confederation with Canada." Then they might
say, "What about the United States, how do they
think about that?" Now here's what I look at, by
giving this resolution passage, when the
Dominions Secretary asks them that question
they can pass it on. There is a lot of sentiment
regarding the United States. Personally I do not
want to see my country put out on hook to
anybody, but seeing it is going to go that way, and
there are so many wishing to let it go that way,
my argument is let it go to the highest bidder. I
want to put myself on record, and I think there is
as much British blood in me as any man in this
Convention, that I admire the British people and
what they fought and died for.
We have been told that if we go into confederation that we will get baby bonuses and
family allowances, and that if we go in with the
Americans everything will he "hunky dory".
What did Churchill tell the people in 1940? Here
is what he told them, and here's what I tell the
people of Newfoundland, regardless of what
form of government they take up. He said, "I have
only one thing to offer you — blood, sweat and
tears." He did not say, "Give me your mind and
let me do your thinking for you, and we will give
you baby bonuses." Well, I have six children and
I can figure out quickly $48 a month — very fine.
He told them blood, sweat and tears, and I tell
them the same. I am used to hard times all my life,
and I know what hunger is, and what it is to stand
in the breadline, and what it is to wake up in the
morning and wonder how in God's name are you
going to raise your children up. I know all these
things, and I am not looking for it from confederation with Canada or the United States
or
anyone else, but I am looking for it in one way
only — through ourselves, and we can do it.
Mr. Chairman, I am sorry if I am out of order, but
I can't help it.
Now as I see it as far as our country is concerned, we are Split wide open. But the
people
have the final choice and believe it or not the
ordinary man, even if he does not know his
ABCs, is pretty commonsense after all. Now we
are here, sent here by our people to explore,
investigate and find out what is best for Newfoundland. We have different personal
ideas. My
idea from the beginning is only one thing, responsible government, but it is not for
me or you or
anyone else to say what form of government we
should have. All we can do is give our opinion,
and it is up to the people to decide. But I do say
this, give them the chance anyway. If I could get
up with the ability of Mr. Smallwood, with his
oratorical power, I would talk here for the next
ten weeks if I were allowed on responsible
government, but, as I was saying, it is not me or
you, but what the people think. However, I think
that if we are going to send delegations to Ottawa
and to England why not, as many of our people
want to know, why not send a delegation to the
United States as well?
Mr. Chairman Pardon me, but you should confine your remarks to the amendment. You have
already spoken on the main question. The amendment is that of deferring the resolution.
Mr. Jackman I just wanted to make it clear that
476 NATIONAL CONVENTION April 1947
in moving this resolution I do so with no enthusiasm. I am a Newfoundlander and a
British
subject, and I believe the only country in the
world today that is doing anything towards the
welfare of the common man is the British government, and I don't want anyone to think
for a
moment that I am, by moving this resolution,
disloyal to what I think is the best we have, but I
do say that a lot of people want a delegation to
the USA and why should we not send one there?
Possibly the United States won't have it, and I
hope they won't, but when the time comes for our
delegation to go over to England, let them go with
the thought that there is a sentiment in Newfoundland on this line.
Mr. Higgins I had no intention of indulging in
this debate myself. In fact I felt very much like
adopting Mr. Butt's attitude, but as this debate
has gone so far I would much prefer now to have
the motion on the main question put....
What I want to say is this. There's a lot of parts
of the British Empire today where they are behaving like rats trying to leave a ship
that they
believe is in trouble. This is the oldest colony of
Britain, the oldest colony and the first colony, and
I want to say this to you: is the oldest colony, even
by words, going to stab a Britain that's now
practically on her back, going to stab her in that
recumbent back today, even if it is only by
words? I have got as much, not British but Irish
blood as anyone, and I would be the last to
support this motion. You ask how I am being
consistent by uttering words like that. Well,
Canada is part of the Empire, and if this country
decides, if we as a people decide, to join Canada,
we will not be getting out of the British Empire;
but once we adopt such a motion, or the country
adopts what would follow such a motion, we
would lose our nationality, we would be no
longer British. I don't think there is a possibility
of this happening, but I don't like to see such a
motion brought into the House like this. I want to
raise every objection to this motion. Mr Jackman
says, "What about India?" India is becoming a
rat, are we going to become another rat?
Mr. Hollett Gentlemen, I don't intend to make
any speech, because I know I would lose my
temper, but I shall vote against the amendment,
and I shall vote against the motion. I have faith
enough in the men of this Convention that if the
question is put now we shall get the correct
verdict. If I am in order, I beg to move that the
amendment and motion be now put.
Mr. Ashbourne I beg to second the motion just
made by Mr. Hollett, and I intend to vote against
the amendment and also against the motion.
Mr. Chairman The motion is that the previous
question be now put. The motion is carried. I shall
now put the previous question.
The motion is that the consideration of this
resolution be deferred to a later date. I declare the
amendment lost. The original motion is of extreme importance. I shall permit other
speakers
to this question if there are any who desire to
address the Chair.
Mr. Reddy Mr. Chairman, while I believe the
resolution now before the House has been badly
timed, still I consider it my duty in fairness to the
people who sent me here to entertain the resolution.
England so far has promised us nothing.
Canada will only offer us just barely what she
thinks would convince us that confederation
would be the best thing for us. Canada is not a
market for our fish. This resolution would be a
means of helping the English delegation. It would
greatly strengthen the delegation to Canada.
If it were possible for this country to associate
itself with the USA our fishery problem, which
is the greatest problem in this country, would be
solved by giving us free access to the greatest fish
market of the world and assuring our fishermen
of a higher standard of living never before enjoyed by them, and removing forever
the awful
Spectre of poverty always hovering over our fishing population. Hundreds of thousands
of our
fellow Newfoundlanders are residing in the
United States. They are longing for the day when
Newfoundland will perhaps become part and parcel of that great republic. It is too
important a
matter to be slighted in any way. If any delegate
here objects to this resolution, he will be depriving his people of an opportunity
to obtain real
facts so vital to the country's welfare.
Mr. Vardy Mr. Chairman, I am sure we are all
very conscious of the fact that this is a very
delicate subject. We are also conscious that we
are British subjects. Now it is a changing world,
and all down through these several hundred years
since Newfoundland was colonised we have not
seen eye to eye with the mother country, but out
April 1947 NATIONAL CONVENTION 477
of all our little petty differences, when the mother
country was in trouble we immediately donned
our uniforms and rushed to the colours. We are
also conscious of our very close friendship with
the United States. That is an undeniable fact. In
fact we see Canada, Newfoundland and the
USA flirting so closely that many times we feel
perhaps that they should get married; yet down
deep in our inner consciousness is that longing
for freedom, the longing to cement even closer
our relationship with Great Britain. I cannot see
eye to eye with many of the things that have been
said. I spent, during the two wars, something over
seven years in the Pacific, around the British
coast and in various parts of Britain. I have never
yet been able to find a word that I could say in
disrespect of the British people. I know that our
treatment in 1932-33-34 was not really the wish
of the British people.... It was not the people, but
the Dominions Office who gave us that treatment.
It was a handful like that who betrayed Belgium
and France.... I want to see this National Convention uphold the principle that the
mother country
and the Union Jack have stood for for so long....
Since I have come in here today I have worded
an amendment to the motion. It is along the lines
that Mr. Butt suggested in the early part of the
debate: "That, in view of the fact that a delegation
is about to proceed to the United Kingdom to
ascertain what the mother country is prepared to
do, no further discussion should take place on this
resolution until the delegation returns and its
results are discussed." I think that in all fairness,
with that consciousness in our hearts that the
mother country has stood up for us at all times,
that we should give her the last chance of giving
our delegation the proper information and proof
in realistic terms, that they still stand behind
Newfoundland, as Britain's oldest colony, and
that they are prepared to liquidate our national
debt for the blood we have given to protect the
British Isles. We were told repeatedly over there
that if it had not been for the colonial troops the
mother country would have gone under....
I know there is an element who would welcome the idea of annexation with the USA.
I have
a lot of friends in the USA, and I know that they
are a fine people, but I don't think that those in
authority in the United States would give it one
moment's consideration at the present time, because there are bigger factors than
New
foundland, this tiny island of rock. When you
start to come north and look at the chart on the
bridge and look at this island, you think of our
300,000-odd people, and you think of the people
you left in their millions, and you then become
very conscious that as far as the rest of the world
is concerned, we are very unimportant, and that
our only hope is to stick to Britain until she shows
definite signs of forsaking us. I am not going to
deny the fact that it was Englishmen, the Pilgrim
Fathers, who founded the United States, and
eventually Great Britain herself will be only too
happy to see all the western hemisphere come
together as one I am sorry, but while I have a lot
of respect for the motion, and for the courage
Mr. Jackman has shown by bringing it in, I cannot really suppon it, but I would have
it discussed
later on.
Mr. MacDonald Mr. Chairman, I am emphatically and irrevocably against it. I think it should
be at once put before the Convention to get the
treatment it deserves — to be thrown out.
Mr. Chairman No, sir. Is the House ready for
the question? Well, Mr. Jackman, you may close
the debate.
Mr. Jackman It is not my idea at all. I did not
bring in this resolution because I believe in it. I
believe in Newfoundland for Newfoundlanders,
and I think we are going to be absolutely wrong.
After all, who are we? Are we masters or servants? I was sent here to this Convention
to find
out what I could do for my country. As far as I
can see, we have been given instructions in this
respect according to our terms of reference.
Professor Wheare ruled that we can recommend
any form of government. Now here's my position, and I hope I make myself clear; it's
not for
me or for you to decide, it's up to the people of
Newfoundland to decide, and we have been told
by a constitutional expert from Great Britain that
it is in order to put the United States on our ballot
paper in the referendum.
Mr. Chairman I have to correct you there.
Mr. Wheare never made any such statement.
Mr. Jackman Well, Mr. Chairman, I think
Mr. Butt put the question, and as I understood it
he did say so.
Mr. Chairman I can assure you that he never
made any such statement.
Mr. Jackman Well, sir, if I had known that I
478 NATIONAL CONVENTION April 1947
would never have attempted to bring it in. The
only reason was that I felt that there are a certain
number of people in Newfoundland who would
want to be given a chance to vote for union with
the United States. I quote the
Sunday Herald. I
like that paper, you get a lot of news out of that,
I have seen in that paper where the United States,
in a straw ballot, topped all other forms of
government. Have we the right to turn around and
be dictators and say: "No, you are not going to
have any chance whatever to vote for the United
States, you are not going to have any chance to
vote for confederation, or any chance to vote any
way"? Is that what we say — we 45 delegates?
Who are we? Are we dictators? If this is turned
down, we are dictators. We are telling people that
as far as we are concerned they have no right to
vote for federal union with the United States. I
protest in fairness as a democratic citizen, as a
true blooded Britisher. Possibly there is a great
deal more British blood in my veins than in a
good many here. I protest in the name of Runnymede and the Bill of Rights. After all,
when the
Convention is over and we discuss forms of
government, it is all finished. Are we the
masters? No, we are only the servants. The
people of Newfoundland, as far as my experience
is concerned, and I have been a working man
always associated with labour, I know they are
pretty good. They might not know the three Rs,
but they know the difference between a codfish
and a herring. Let us give them the final say. I
protest with all my power against this dictatorial
attitude, against the attitude of this Convention in
saying to the people of Newfoundland, "You
can't put you name on the ballot paper for the
United States." I think we should consider it very
carefully. I challenge any member as far as my
loyalty is concerned. I believe in Britain, she is
the cradle of democracy. It was there that trade
unions started, out of which I get my living today.
Hitler's first move was to bust the trade and
labour unions wide open, but thanks be to God
the trade and labour movement in England stood
by when the blackshirts and everyone else....
Mr. Chairman I must ask you to confine yourself to the question. We are not concerned with
Hitler.
Mr. Jackman Well, no, I don't want to talk
about Hitler, he is not worth talking about, but in
my opinion it is quite possible the people will turn
it down. I wish they would, but my argument is
that we have no right to take it off the ballot paper.
If we do we are dictators. It is the people who
have the last say on this matter. Why not put it on
the ballot paper and give them a chance?
One of our men said last September, after the
ruling of the late Judge Fox, he did say, and
Professor Wheare ruled on it, "You can send a
delegation to Timbuctoo if you want to." We
have got one going to England and one to
Canada, and there's a lot of people in Newfoundland who want one to go to the United
States. Give the people the chance. If we turn
down that amendment we are putting ourselves
in a position where we are 45 people who have
decided that we are going to take the destiny of
Newfoundland in our own hands. You can do
what you like, but I will vote to give the people
of Newfoundland what they want.
Mr. Chairman I will put it in the ordinary way
first. The motion is that this resolution, which has
been read twice already, do pass. Those in favour
please say "aye", contrary "nay". I think the
"nays" have it. Those who are in favour of the
resolution please stand — two. Those who are
against it please stand. Mr. Clerk, I have not
recorded my vote on any resolution. I intend to
record it today with the "nays". You will please
record it accordingly.
Mr. Chairman Order, please. I declare the
resolution lost by a vote of 34 to 3.
Mr. Chairman The section dealing with the La
Manche mine has been read and is now open for
discussion.
Mr. Hollett Before proceeding I would like to
correct an error which I made in a statement
yesterday. It has been pointed out to me. Yesterday when I was referring to the Buchans
Mining
Co. railway cars which were made up at Bishop's
April 1947 NATIONAL CONVENTION 479
Falls and taken to Buchans, I said the AND
Co. had made them up and put them on. I meant
of course the Newfoundland Railway. I would
like to get that straight now.
[There followed a brief discussion of the section on the La Manche mine. The Secretary
then read the section on Bell Island, and Mr. Higgins answered questions on points
of detail]
Mr. Jackman I am beginning to get at home
now, and I welcome this opportunity to explain
the economic relationship which exists on Bell
Island today. You will note on page 4 that there
was a closedown of the mine in 1943 due to
labour trouble. The workers at Bell Island
decided that things were not as we would like
them to be. We could not live.... We decided we
wanted more money for our work. Well, the
thought was to throw us out of work, but we came
back and got things adjusted between us, but not
as we wanted them. All around that time, 1943-
44-45, the relationship between labour and
management on Bell Island was a dog-eat-dog
relationship, but early in the year we negotiated
a new contract. I believe that if the same relationship between capital and labour
which exists on
Bell Island today could be brought into effect
throughout Newfoundland, we would not have
any worry about how we are going to live. We
would be self-supporting. Here is the exact position. In order for our people to live
we must have
an outside market for our output. The only permanent market we had before was the
Sydney
market, and that would only give us about two
days a week. I must give the Commission of
Government credit for helping in this matter,
especially Commissioner Neill. We were very
anxious to obtain an English market to absorb our
extra output. In order to do so we had to get
around the table, not with chips on our shoulders,
but get down to work it out between ourselves
and find out how we could get at it. Anyway, the
management told us that they could break in on
an English market for 750,000 tons of ore, but the
question was the matter of price. We decided that
this market would be a benefit the whole community and the whole country, so we decided
we
would get out and get this market. The management were very fair and very frank and
put their
cards on the table.
Now I know there are certain men over on Bell
Island listening to me now, and it is quite possible
that they would knock my head off if they could
get it. They are reactionaries and don't want to do
anything for the common good. Anyway, the
company put their cards on the table and so did
we. We wanted to live and so did they. This
market meant 750,000 tons of ore, so we forgot
our differences in 1943 and got down and shook
hands and decided that we were going out to get
this market. Now the reason I bring this up is
because I feel regardless of what our people
decide on later with regard to forms of government, that it is not the forms of government
that
count but the effect they have....
Now as I said a moment ago, there are a few
who would knock my head off because I am
standing with the company. I am not standing
with the company or anyone, but we got together
and in order to get that market it took co-operation on both sides. Labour and management
are
working hand in hand, and if you will notice here
anything over 5,000 tons of ore we all share in
the profit. We have a general bonus for everyone,
but when we get above 5,000 tons everyone gets
his share. For example, our basic rate of pay is 58
cents an hour, but after we got this working, the
very first week every man on this job got 3 cents
an hour extra because of production....
Mr. Higgins Mr. Jackman is assistant chairman
of the subcommittee on Bell Island, as well as
chairman of the Mineworkers on Bell Island.
That's why he is talking at such length.
Mr. Northcott I would like to know if in order
to get 65 cents per hour the men overwork themselves?
Mr. Jackman ....What happened over our way,
we were trying to get the worth of our labour. We
had to fight to get it, but the equipment is there
and this schedule can be easily taken care of by
the equipment. We have a certain type of labour
which I would call "enforced labour", but the
company did promise us that as soon as it is
possible to get equipment to take the place of
hand labour they would institute it....
Mr. Smallwood This table shows that in 1934
we exported to Great Britain an amount of 22,000
tons, and the next year 24,000 tons. I am curious
to know why that much ore was exported over
there.... Why would there be any ore going to
Britain if there was not a quantity of a quarter of
a million tons or around there? Can you explain
that?
480 NATIONAL CONVENTION April 1947
Mr. Hollett I think that they took that amount to
test it out on certain furnaces. That's what I heard
when I happened to be there.
Mr. Smallwood I remember in 1925 in London
talking with Major General Sir Newton Moore,
who was the European representative of the Bell
Island company, and he had been contacting the
smelters in England, and they claimed that our
Bell Island ore was not suitable for use in
England because it had too much silica, phosphorus, etc.... Has the Committee any
further
information on the prospects of selling ore in
Britain this year?
Mr. Higgins You will remember sometime last
year there was a big announcement stating that
Bell Island ore had been sold for some ten years
ahead, some 750,000 tons a year. We questioned
Mr. Anson and Mr. Archibald and they told us
that this is not so; but they did feel that if they
could compete with the prices of ore from Spain
and the other places, Sweden, etc., that the market
could be maintained. It is all a question of competitive prices. They feel if they
can continue to
sell at the market price, that they would get their
fair share, or their quote. That's as far as the
Committee could go.
Mr. Higgins Not up to the time we talked to
Mr. Anson, sometime in February, but they had
good hopes of getting the order.
Mr. Smallwood Assuming they get the order,
700,000 tons would run to how much money
roughly?
Mr. Smallwood Did the General Manager say
anything about spending money in Britain from
the standpoint of dollars?
Mr. Higgins He did not seem to worry about
that at all. If they could meet the price of their
competitors he felt they could secure the order.
Mr. Jackman In our last meeting with the company they notified us that they have an order for
one million tons.... The impression we got from
the company is that if we keep our production up
above 500,000 tons of ore, we can compete in the
British market or any market in price, but we
must keep it up to 500,000 tons.... Some of the
men are working a bit harder than they should on
account of lack of equipment, but our position is
that we are in the British market and we are going
to stay there. The workers will see to that. The
workers say, "That's our business, not the
Dominion Iron and Steel Company's, but ours.
We want to live and work, and if we want to do
that we must produce." Mr. Bullen told me — he
is the purchasing agent in England — that if we
can keep within that figure there is no worry for
the next five years.
Mr. Smallwood I take it that the Island has now
got a firm contract signed with Great Britain for
the sale of one million tons of ore in 1947, and
that if the men on the Island keep the daily
production up and the cost of production down to
the present level they can sell more ore in the next
five years.
Mr. Jackman The system on Bell Island today
is a profit-sharing system between capital and
labour.... I wish the rest of Newfoundland would
do likewise.
Mr. Smallwood Mr. Jackman is a wonderful
man, and I guess the crowd over there knew what
they were doing when they sent him over here.
Mr. Smallwood On page 8, showing the number of employees on Bell Island for each year, is
that the correct number for the year or the average
number?
Mr. Smallwood But they would not be employed all the year round, would they?
Mr. Higgins That's the largest number, is that
not so Mr. Watton?
Mr. Smallwood An average of l,575 for each
year in that period. On page 9, "In the schedule
to this act, etc.", I am asking this before we pass
on from Bell Island, can we get Major Cashin,
who I believe was Minister of Finance in 1930,
and who would have some first hand knowledge
of that act of 1930, which expires in 1949....
Mr. Cashin It came into effect January l, 1929.
I introduced the act.
Mr. Smallwood It was probably brought into
the House when it opened that winter. In that act
it says: "The Company is not liable for customs
duties on coal, explosives, and such equipment
April 1947 NATIONAL CONVENTION 481
(not including hand tools) as shall be used in the
mining, transportation and shipping of ore and
the generation of power in connection therewith." On the other hand, they have to
"pay duty
on spare parts, articles and materials required for
renewals, replacements, and repairs in connection with the Company's equipment for
the mining, transportation, and shipping of ore and the
generation of power for the purposes in connection therewith, but in no case is the
duty to exceed
25 percent." How does that compare with the
other mining and industrial companies in the
country? Does that apply to St. Lawrence,
Buchans, etc.?
Mr. Higgins St. Lawrence has no concessions.
They come under the 1930 act, so they informed
us.
Mr. Smallwood In the next paragraph it goes on
to say what the tax is, expiring in 1949. Maybe
there will be changing that and making a new
contract. Let me read it out: "The Company pays
no royalties but instead pays an export tax, and
under the above mentioned act for the 20 year
period the export tax payable is (a) on the first
1,000,000 tons or part thereof exported by said
Company during any one year, 10 cents per ton;
(b) on iron ore exported by the Company during
one year in excess of 1,000,000 tons and not
exceeding a further 500,000, tons the sum of 3
cents per ton." '
Now I remember after the general election of
1928, when Major Cashin was Minister of
Finance. I remember the great joy, his voice
literally rang with pleasure, when he got up and
announced that he had managed to collect
$48,000.
Mr. Smallwood I think my memory is very
good. Well, that he had collected $136,000 from
the Bell Island company in taxes that they ought
to have paid and had not paid, arrears of taxes that
the outgoing government had never bothered to
collect. Major Cashin got it, and then in the fall
of 1929 and the spring of 1930 they got this new
act collecting 10 cents a ton on the first million
tons, and 3 cents a ton thereover up to 1.5 million.
I was not in that government, but I have been
hearing since 1920 about taxing Bell Island, and
I know it has been a filthy story, one of the
filthiest in the history of this country. If it were
written it would be pretty rotten reading.
There were unions, I remember leading a
delegation of the very union you are referring to
in 1926 before the Monroe cabinet. I was the
spokesman for the entire afternoon, and I remember that Chairman Bradley of the Convention
here today was chairman of that meeting, and the
father of Mr. Higgins was Attorney General, and
he supported me from beginning to end that afternoon, and as a result they changed
the
Workrnen's Compensation Act. It was a bone of
contention with the government from 1920 down
to a very short while ago, that the tax ought to be
50 cents a ton, and there was also a contention
that it ought to be $1 a ton. Now I see it is down
to 10 cents a ton on their first million, and 3 cents
a ton over that to 1.5 million. What happens then?
Free? Lovely.
Mr. Jackman They don't make the money, how
can they pay the taxes?
Mr. Smallwood I hope as president of that
union you are not deluded and deceived by the
accounts and talks of mining companies when
they talk about profits.
Mr. Jackman I don't want to get into an argument, but here is the position. Mr. Smallwood is
not right. I do feel that the tax, insofar as royalty
is concerned on the export of our ore, is not
sufficient — it could be more, but here is what
we get. It is the workers get it now and not the
government. We get the full extent of what they
can pay, and we don't pass it to the government.
The less we pay to the government the more we
will have for ourselves.
Mr. Cashin With regard to this Bell Island situation, and the criticism of them for not paying
a
higher royalty, or export tax on ore. In order to
get to the bottom of this we have to go back to
before 1919, when there were two companies
operating. I think around 1920 they came
together and called themselves the British Empire Steel Company — BESCO. They operated
for a year or two and were always in financial
difficulties. They cannot operate without Bell
Island. Up to 1919 they were paying some profits
taxes. There was a new government in 1920, and
another in 1924, and when we came into office in
482 NATIONAL CONVENTION April 1947
1928 I found that they had not paid any royalties
or profits taxes for a number of years. They are
in financial difficulties today and if the Canadian
government foreclosed on them tomorrow they
would be out of business. They owe the Canadian
government many millions of dollars. I am not
defending the company, but it is bankrupt in a
sense today. They are not making any money.
The common stockholders in that company have
not had a dividend for years. I forget what they
owed the treasury — $2-300,000, They sent
down representatives every spring looking for
free export tax for the coming year, and the first
year we were in office we objected, and finally
made a deal whereby they paid 10 cents royalty
up to one million tons and 3 cents up to 1.5
million tons, and in addition they paid us
$136,000 in settlement of back taxes. They paid
$100,000 down and $12,000 each year till it was
paid. The company has been struggling. In this
report you will notice a letter signed by Prime
Minister Baldwin, wherein he indicated to the
Prime Minister of that day that they were going
to try to get some business for the Dominion Steel
Company. They never got it. That 20,000 odd
tons was all. They made certain promises to us
but they did not carry them out. That is the
position. I am glad to see now that Bell Island is
going along well, but it cannot go along unless
you have a prosperous Corporation. They have to
produce at least 1.5 million tons a year in order
to make it prosperous. Up to a month before die
war started the Germans were buying one million
tons a year. Great Britain bought none, Sydney
from 6-700,000 tons, and if she continues to use
that amount and Great Britain takes 750,000 tons
it will be fine....
I am glad Bell Island is going well, and I am
glad Mr. Jackman is making such a good thing of
the union on Bell Island. I hope Great Britain
continues to take ore from us instead of going
back to Sweden. If she can take 750,000 tons of
ore a year to mix with that high grade ore which
will suit the furnaces, it would be a great thing.
One of their greatest excuses was that the docks
could not take the big ships for ore, but suddenly
all this changes, therefore they were kidding us
in the past.
[The committee of the whole rose and reported progress, and the Convention adjourned]
