² The Pioneer Fringe (New York, 1931), pp. 152–3.Google Scholar

³ A Report on the Rehabilitation of the Dry Areas of Alberta and Crop Insurance, 1935-36 (Edmonton, King's Printer, 1936), p. 45.Google Scholar See also Annual Reports of the Department of Natural Resources of the Province of Saskatchewan, 1930-1 to 1935-6, and Report of the Commissioner of Northern Settlers' Re-establishment to the Government of Saskatchewan (Regina, 12, 1935, typewritten).Google Scholar

⁴ See the Hon. Gardiner, J. G. as reported in the Regina Leader-Post, 07 22, 1937.Google Scholar

⁵ See Innis, H. A. et al., The Dairy Industry in Canada (Toronto, 1937).Google Scholar

⁶ See Grindley, T. W., “Production Trends and Policies” (Proceedings of the Seventh Annual Meeting of the Canadian Society of Agricultural Economics, 1935), p. 14.Google Scholar

⁷ See The Agricultural Situation and Outlook, 1937 (Ottawa, Departments of Agriculture and Trade and Commerce, 1937), p. 18.Google Scholar

⁸ Grindley, , “Production Trends and Policies”, p. 15.Google Scholar See also Grant, H. C., “Canadian Agricultural Policy—Some Selected Lessons” (Journal of Farm Economics, vol. XIX, 02, 1937, pp. 253–63).CrossRefGoogle Scholar

⁹ See Currie, B. W., “The Climate of Saskatchewan” (Guide to Saskatchewan Agriculture, published by the Agricultural Extension Department, University of Saskatchewan, Saskatoon, 1936), p. 85 Google Scholar: “There is no reason for believing that our climate is changing. Comparison of Saskatchewan rainfall data with similar data from weather stations in the middle States shows the same variations. A discussion of twenty-three and forty-six year weather cycles in the great plains area by Dr. Charles G. Abbott, climatologist and secretary of the Smithsonian Institute, Washington, was reported in the Winnipeg Free Press, Aug. 26 and 27, 1937. See also Report on the Rehabilitation of the Dry Areas of Alberta, p. 11: “Early records very effectively answer a mis-statement that is frequently made to-day, namely, that the climate of Western Canada has changed and is becoming more dry as the years go by. This is definitely not so. The Western Plains have always been subject to recurring cycles of deficient rainfall.” The early records referred to are those of Palliser (1857-8), Hind (1857-60), and Macoun (1872-9). A convenient summary of the activities and observations of these writers is given by Mackintosh, W. A., Prairie Settlement: The Geographical Background (Toronto, 1934), ch. ii.Google Scholar For precipitation records at various representative points in the Prairie Provinces, of which some records date back to 1884, see Hopkins, E. S., Palmer, A. E., and Chepil, W. S., Soil Drifting Control in the Prairie Provinces (Ottawa, King's Printer, 1937), pp. 49–51 Google Scholar; and Ellis, J. H. el al., “The Recent Drought Situation in Southwestern Manitoba” (Scientific Agriculture, vol. XVI, 05, 1936, pp. 478–88).Google Scholar

¹⁰ See Joel, A. H., Mitchell, J., Edmunds, F. H., and Moss, H. C., Reconnaissance Soil Survey of Saskatchewan from the International Boundary on the South to the Top of Township 48 on the North (Report no. 10, Saskatoon, College of Agriculture, University of Saskatchewan, 1936), p. 78.Google Scholar

¹¹ Ibid. See also Guide to Saskatchewan Agriculture, p. 11; and Mitchell, J., “The Extent and Areas subject to Soil Drifting in Saskatchewan” (Report of the Regional Committee on Soil Drifting appointed under the National Advisory Committee on Agricultural Services and the Prairie Farm Rehabilitation Act, Lethbridge, mimeo., 1935), p. 15 Google Scholar: “It is a notable fact that the heavy, silty soil of the Melfort area has been observed to drift fairly severely on some farms in spite of favourable moisture conditions and the high organic matter content of the soil.”

¹² Joel, et al., Reconnaissance Soil Survey of Saskatchewan, p. 78.Google Scholar

¹³ Report on the Rehabilitation of the Dry Areas of Alberta, p. 26.

¹⁴ “Almost any cultivated land of this area [the brown and dark brown prairie soil zones] is subject to some drifting, but it remains true that light soils and heavy soils are more susceptible than intermediate textures, with certain notable exceptions dependent upon soil types” ( Mitchell, , “The Extent and Areas subject to Soil Drifting in Saskatchewan”, p. 14 Google Scholar).

See also Moss, H. C., “Some Field and Laboratory Studies of Soil Drifting in Saskatchewan” (Scientific Agriculture, vol. XV, 06, 1935, pp. 665–79)Google Scholar; F. A. Wyatt, “Extent and Areas Susceptible to Soil Drifting in Alberta” and Ellis, J. H., “Soil Drifting in Manitoba” (Report of the Regional Committee on Soil Drifting).Google Scholar

¹⁵ “Soil drifted from one acre, to a depth of one inch, is equivalent to the removal of approximately 694 pounds of nitrogen, 155 pounds of phosphorus and 5,380 pounds of potash. The above amount of phosphorus alone is approximately equal to that removed from the soil in the production of 485 bushels of wheat…. The influence of drifting on soil productivity, as reflected in the yields of subsequent crops, varies greatly with different soil and subsoils. There are a few localities with deep soils that have had five or six inches of soil blown off and still produce good crops. In the majority of cases, however, where two or four inches of top soil have been lost, crop yields have been much lower for many years afterwards. In some cases the injury appears to be almost permanent” ( Hopkins, et al., Soil Drifting Control in the Prairie Provinces, p. 6 Google Scholar). See also Report on the Rehabilitation of the Dry Areas of Alberta, p. 29.

¹⁶ For fuller descriptions of methods used in combating soil drifting on cultivated lands, see Hopkins et al., Soil Drifting Control in the Prairie Provinces; Report of the Regional Committee on Soil Drifting; Guide to Saskatchewan Agriculture, pp. 8-12; Report on the Rehabilitation of the Dry Areas of Alberta, pp. 26-30; and Hon. Taggart, J. G. “The Maintenance of Dry Land Farming on the Southern Prairies” (C.S.T.A. Review no. 6, 09, 1935, pp. 331–7).Google Scholar

¹⁷ See the Hon. Taggart, J. G., “The Maintenance of Dry Land Farming on the Southern Prairies”, pp. 335–6.Google Scholar See also Hopkins, et al., Soil Drifting Control in the Prairie Provinces, p. 35 Google Scholar; Barnes, S., “Economic Aspects of Drought Resistance” (Scientific Agriculture, vol. XII, 12, 1931, pp. 206–8)Google Scholar; H. J. Kemp and H. A. Purdy, “Suitable Cereals for Dry Land Farming on the Prairies” (ibid., vol. XVI, Nov., 1935, pp. 135-40); Guide to Saskatchewan Agriculture, pp. 29–34 Google Scholar; and, Joel, et al., Reconnaissance Soil Survey of Saskatchewan, pp. 78–9.Google Scholar

¹⁸ Ross, Norman M., “The Role of Trees in Modifying the Agriculture of the Dry Areas of the Prairie Provinces” (Scientific Agriculture, vol. XVI, 01, 1935, p. 266).Google Scholar

¹⁹ Ibid., p. 269. “If a farmer is able to maintain a modest number of trees and hedges close to his buildings, he will do exceedingly well. The effort involved in the planting and maintenance of extensive shelterbelts and hedges is entirely beyond the capacity of a great majority of the farmers. Even if trees and shelterbelts did do all that is claimed for them as protectors of field crops, very few farmers could command the energy necessary to maintain such extensive plantations” ( Taggart, , “The Maintenance of Dry Land Farming on the Southern Prairies”, p. 337 Google Scholar). “It is an obvious fact that windbreaks which have become established and which have attained a height of from 8 to 12 feet will break the force of the wind and thus give some protection to the crop for from 100 to 150 feet on the leeward side of it, but in order to be completely effective in controlling soil drifting, it would mean that hedges of the height mentioned would have to be established every 10 rods at right angles to the prevailing wind. Granting that such a system of hedges would be effective in controlling soil drifting and to some extent would lessen evaporation by preventing hot winds from blowing along the surface of the ground, there remains the difficulty of getting these windbreaks established. First, there is the difficulty of getting a suitable material for a windbreak that is cheap, and secondly in districts where they are most needed the danger of the young trees being smothered by tumbleweeds and drifting soil is a very real problem. Caragana hedges are probably the most suitable kind of hedge material for the dry areas, and the experience of many farmers has been that while it is not impossible, there is great difficulty in getting them successfully established under open field conditions” (Report on the Rehabilitation of the Dry Areas of Alberta, p. 24). See also Shaw, A. M., Drought on the Canadian Prairies (Saskatchewan, University of Saskatchewan, Agricultural Extension Department, 1934)Google Scholar; and Hopkins, et al., Soil Drifting Control in the Prairie Provinces, p. 35.Google Scholar

²⁰ See Elliott, G. A., “Problems of a Retrograde Area in Alberta” (Mackintosh, W. A. et al., Economic Problems of the Prairie Provinces, Toronto, 1935, pp. 291–4).Google Scholar

²¹ Statutes of Saskatchewan, 25 Geo. V, c. 62; 1 Edw. VIII, c. 81; and 1 Geo. VI, c. 67. The Board consists of the deputy ministers of agriculture, municipal affairs and natural resources, the chairman of the Local Government Board, and the head of the Farm Management Department at the University of Saskatchewan. See also the Control of Soil Drifting Act, Statutes of Alberta, 1935, c. 40.

²² See Preliminary Announcement of Census of Agriculture of the Prairie Provinces 1936 (bulletins V and XI, Ottawa, 1936).Google Scholar “Vacant and abandoned” farms in the drought area of Saskatchewan alone were given as 9,431.

²³ See Easterbrook, W. T., “Agricultural Debt Adjustment” (Canadian Journal of Economics and Political Science, vol. II, 08, 1936, pp. 390–403)CrossRefGoogle Scholar; and G. E. Britnell, “The Saskatchewan Debt Adjustment Programme” (ibid., vol. III, Aug., 1937, pp. 370-4).

²⁴ Bowman, Isaiah, “The Land of Your Possession” (Science, vol. LXXXII, no. 2126, 09 27, 1935, p. 289).Google Scholar

²⁵ Heaton, Herbert, Economic History of Europe (New York, 1936), p. 633.Google Scholar

²⁶ Statutes of Saskatchewan, 1 Geo. V, c. 67, s. 12b.

²⁷ For a discussion and classification of the adaptability of Saskatchewan soils to wheat production, see Joel, et al., Reconnaissance Soil Survey of Saskatchewan, pp. 75–6.Google Scholar

²⁸ Classification and analysis of these data are proceeding. See Preliminary Report of a Study of Certain Physical and Economic Factors related to Land Use Classification in Southwest Central Saskatchewan, 1935 (Saskatoon, 11, 1936, typed)Google Scholar; Preliminary Report for Official Use: Summary of Progress made in connection with the Classification of Land Areas in South Central Saskatchewan, 1936 (Ottawa, 05, 1937, mimeo.)Google Scholar; Craig, G. H., Land Utilization and Farm Management Practices in the Prairie Region of Alberta, with Special Reference to the Vulcan and Lomond Districts (Ottawa, 1937, typed).Google Scholar Certain aspects have received special treatment in papers already published, including the following: Hansen, W. J., “Some Facts concerning Life Insurance in South-Western Saskatchewan” (Economic Annalist, vol. VI, 02, 1936, pp. 6–10)Google Scholar; W. J. Hansen and J. Proskie, “Life Insurance Carried by Farmers in the Lomond and Vulcan Districts, Alberta” (ibid., Oct., 1936, pp. 76-9); C. C. Spence, “Land Utilization in Southwest Central Saskatchewan” (ibid., vol. VII, Dec, 1936, pp. 84-8); G. C. Elliott, “Real Estate Indebtedness in Southwest Central Saskatchewan” (ibid., vol. VII, Feb., 1937, pp. 8-14); G. H. Craig, “Land Settlement and Tenancy in the Lomond and Vulcan Districts, Alberta” (ibid., vol. VII, April, 1937, pp. 22-3). See also A. Stewart, “Economic Surveys in the Drought Area” (ibid., Aug., 1937, pp. 39-43).

²⁹ Statutes of Canada, 25-26 Geo. V, c. 23. See also 1 Geo. VI, c. 14, an amendment widening the scope of the original Act to include land utilization and land settlement.

³⁰ See Annual, Summary, Progress, and other Reports of activities under the Prairie Farm Rehabilitation Act for the years 1935, 1936, and 1937. Total expenditures under the programme amounted to $1,371,334 as of March 31, 1937, of which $982,438 was charged to P.F.R.A. and $388,896 to a Western Conservation Works Vote under Statutes of Canada, 25-26 Geo. V, c. 34, administered by the P.F.R.A.

³¹ A dugout is defined as a relatively small excavation on the ground for the coIlection of water; a stock-watering dam, as an earthen structure across a relatively deep basin to be used for watering stock; a small irrigation dam, as an earthen dam across a basin or coulee to collect the spring run-off water for the purpose of irrigating relatively level land below the dam, a storage capacity of approximately 50 acre feet being the basis for assistance.

³² See Progress Report of Activities under the Prairie Farm Rehabilitation Act; From December 1, 1936, to July 31, 1937 (Ottawa, mimeo.), pp. 5–7.Google Scholar Completion of 650 dugouts and 38 stock-watering dams was reported in Manitoba; 453 dugouts, 455 stock-watering dams, and 92 small irrigation projects, in Saskatchewan; and 65 dugouts, 225 stock-watering dams, and 64 small irrigation projects, in Alberta.

³³ Information by interview and correspondence with E. S. Archibald, director, Dominion Experimental Farms, Ottawa, August, 1937. Expenditures on these projects are paid out of the Western Conservation Works Vote.

³⁴ See Regina Leader-Post, Sept. 8, 1937.

³⁵ Progress Report: Water Development Committee, appointed under the Prairie Farm Rehabilitation Act, 1935 (Swift Current, Nov., 1935, mimeo.), p. 3.Google Scholar With respect to the small projects the Committee declares: “It is not so much irrigation in the strict sense of the word, but the storing of run-off water to insure at least one crop of feed and work along with natural conditions as near as possible.” In the larger projects in both Saskatchewan and Alberta, the Committee has been influenced by the experience of the latter province: “In recommending the applications for new irrigation works the Committee has not been unmindful of the serious financial difficulties encountered by existing projects and also according to estimates, that more than $50,000,000 have been spent in works to serve some million acres of land of which only about fifty per cent has so far been irrigated. The basic importance of these projects to the communities served has been kept in mind, however, and while over-development in the past has contributed largely to the present financial difficulties, there are areas throughout the plains region where irrigation is feasible and the building of comparatively small community projects would provide means of growing feed and by stabilizing agriculture in this way serve to achieve in considerable measure the purpose of the rehabilitation programme” ( Summary Report: Water Development Committee, Swift Current, 11, 1935, mimeo., pp. 2–3).Google Scholar

³⁶ See Progress Report: Water Development Committee, p. 3.

³⁷ Taggart, , “The Maintenance of Dry Land Farming on the Southern Prairies”, p. 334.Google Scholar See also Shaw, , Drought on the Canadian Prairies, p. 8 Google Scholar; Surface Water Supply of Canada; Arctic and Western Hudson Bay Drainage (and Mississippi Drainage in Canada in Alberta, Saskatchewan, Manitoba and Western Ontario, Climatic Years 1933-34 and 1934-35), Water Resources Paper no. 75 (Ottawa, King's Printer, 1937); and Johnson, J. T., “Surface Water Supply and Run-off of the Prairie Provinces” (Engineering Journal, 04, 1935, pp. 1–13).Google Scholar For a list of major irrigation works in Alberta and a discussion of possible irrigation projects in Alberta and Saskatchewan, see Mackintosh, , Prairie Settlement; the Geographical Setting, pp. 107–10.Google Scholar

³⁸ “In the case of the farmer-rancher, when he loses his crop through drought, he is in a much more serious situation than the straight wheat farmer, because he is faced with the responsibility of either securing feed to carry his stock over the winter or selling them in poor condition at a sacrifice. This type of man has been a shoe-string operator attempting to carry a bigger load than his resources justified. His cattle were often of inferior quality and this, coupled with an insufficient supply of pasture and feed meant that returns were disappointing when he was forced to market his stock as a result of feed shortage. The unloading of large numbers of under-finished, low quality cattle always has a demoralizing effect on the market with the result that the man with good stock is penalized as well as the man with the poor stuff. Generally speaking, the farmer-rancher has paid less attention to the management side of his enterprise than any other type of operator…. Considered from every angle, it would appear that the rancher in the dry area has been the most successful of the three main types of settler found there. Although he undoubtedly has the advantage of using the land for the purpose for which it is best suited, he also must be credited with being more systematic and bringing a greater degree of sound management to his enterprise than either of his neighbors, the dry farmer or the farmer-rancher” (Report on the Rehabilitation of the Drought Areas of Alberta, pp. 37-8).

³⁹ This situation developed in a particularly acute form in 1936 and 1937. See files of Regina Leader-Post, June-Sept., 1936 and 1937.

⁴⁰ Report on the Rehabilitation of the Drought Areas of Alberta, p. 39. This does not mean that ranching is necessarily the main concern of such an operator, since throughout the region a minimum of 30 acres is commonly considered necessary to provide pasture and feed for one head of livestock under normal conditions. If land has been over-grazed—and practically all of it is in this condition—or in periods of drought, as much as 120 acres per head may be required. See: above Report, p. 38; Thomson, L. B., superintendent of the Dominion Experimental Station at Swift Current, “The Carrying Capacity and Improvement of Grazing Land”, as reported in The Western Producer, 06 3, 1937 Google Scholar; Barnes, , “Economic Aspects of Drought Resistance”, p. 206 Google Scholar; Report of the Royal Commission of Enquiry into Farming Conditions (Regina, King's Printer, 1921), pp. 44–5Google Scholar; Russell, B. and Snelson, W. H., Report on Southern Alberta Drought Area East of Range 13 Bounded by Red Deer and South Saskatchewan Rivers (Edmonton, 1924, typed), pp. 6–7.Google Scholar

⁴¹ See “Pasture and Irrigation Policies for Drought Area approved at Rehabilitation Meeting in Regina” (Regina Leader-Post, 06 2, 1937).Google Scholar See also “A Plan of Settlement for the Dry Area” (Report on the Rehabilitation of the Drought Areas of Alberta, pp. 43–7).Google Scholar

⁴² “The success of such a plan is greatly enhanced where modern motorized farm equipment is used. In fact, under horse economy it would be difficult, if not impossible, to work out…. All the equipment in the way of buildings needed on this farm would be a few granaries, and a tool house or machine shed where implements could be stored and repairs made…. The objections that are likely to be made to such a plan are that people will prefer to remain on the farm; that the cost of re-locating will be too high; that the farmer would have to travel too great a distance to work his farm, and that such community projects have been tried and failed. The only answers to these objections are that if the advantages of this community plan do not outweigh the disadvantages of the present mode of residence, it should not be undertaken or encouraged. Actually, these objections may or may not be serious. For example, if we consider the matter of travel, if a farmer is forced to travel 20 miles per day to and from work, he will not likely have to do so for more than 200 days per season. Thus, he would travel 4,000 miles per year, which at a cost of 5 cents per mile (actual recorded costs) would be $200.00. In other words, the additional cost of permitting his family to enjoy good school and other facilities by living in a community centre is approximately $200.00 per year. Such additional costs as this might be more than offset by the use of community water supply instead of individual wells and by the saving in operating schools, building roads and telephone lines” (ibid.).

⁴³ Shaw, , Drought on the Canadian Prairies, p. 8.Google Scholar

⁴⁴ Ibid., p. 11. “The guiding principie as to numbers of livestock in the dry farming areas should always be the minimum number required to adequately supply family needs” (Report on the Rehabilitation of the Dry Areas of Alberta, p. 52).Google Scholar

⁴⁵ See Guide to Saskatchewan Agriculture, pp. 20-9 and 42-9.

⁴⁶ See Harrington, J. B., “Cereal Crop Improvement for Dry Farming Conditions” (Scientific Agriculture, vol. XVI, 11, 1935, pp. 113–20)Google Scholar; and Kemp and Purdy, “Suitable Cereals for Dry Land Farming on the Prairies” (ibid., pp. 135-40).

⁴⁷ See Grest, E. G., An Analysis of Farm Power in Alberta and Saskalchewan (Ottawa, 1936)Google Scholar; Stewart, A., The Economy of Machine Production in Agriculture (Montreal, 1931)Google Scholar; and “Trends in Farm Power and Their Influence on Agricultural Development” ( Murchie, R. W. et al., Agricultural Progress on the Prairie Frontier, Toronto, 1936, appendix A).Google Scholar

⁴⁸ “The medium textured soils in drier areas of the southwest require further testing over a period of years to prove what value phosphate fertilizers may have” (Guide to Saskatchewan Agriculture, p. 12).Google Scholar

⁴⁹ Taggart, , “The Maintenance of Dry Land Farming on the Southern Prairies”, p. 336.Google Scholar

⁵⁰ “Since 1929, on the basis of studies made by the University of Saskatchewan, it is estimated that the farm equipment of this province has suffered a cumulative deterioration of at least 50 per cent. Buildings, fences and in many cases even the lands used for cultivation have also deteriorated heavily. Reserves of feed and supplies have been exhausted and much is needed to make up for the drains of the years of poor crops. In the farm homes household equipment, furnishings and clothing and even the people of the farm, bear pathetic testimony to depleted revenues” ( Allen, William, “Recent Adjustments in the Organization of Canadian Agriculture”, Scientific Agriculture, vol. XVII, 04, 1937, p. 480).Google Scholar See also Britnell, G. E., “Saskatchewan 1930-35” (Canadian Journal of Economics and Political Science, vol. II, 05, 1936, pp. 143–66).CrossRefGoogle Scholar

⁵¹ See Preliminary Report of the Committee on Crop Insurance (Regina, King's Printer, 1937)Google Scholar; Hansen, W. J., “Economic Aspects of Crop (Yield) Insurance with reference to the Province of Saskatchewan” (paper given at the ninth annual meeting of the Canadian Society of Agricultural Economics, Saskatoon, 06, 1937, mimeo.)Google Scholar; Report on the Rehabilitation of the Drought Areas of Alberta and Crop Insurance, 1935-36, part II, “Crop Insurance”, pp. 64-80; Taggart, , “The Maintenance of Dry Land Farming on the Southern Prairies”, p. 336 Google Scholar; and Shaw, A. M., “Rehabilitation of the Drought Area” (Alumni Bulletin, University of Saskatchewan, vol. V, 04, 1935).Google Scholar For a discussion of crop insurance possibilities in the United States, see Valgren, C. N., Crop Insurance: Risk, Losses and Principles of Protection (U.S. Department of Agriculture Bulletin no. 1043, Washington, 1922)CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Hoffman, G. W., “The Outlook for Crop Insurance” (Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, 03, 1929, pp. 302–11)Google Scholar, and “Insurance for Agriculture” (ibid., May, 1932, pp. 159-62).

⁵² See Directors' and Auditors' Reports of the Saskatchewan Municipal Hail Insurance Association for the years ending January 31, 1919-37.

⁵³ See Report and Recommendations of the President's Committee on Crop Insurance (Washington, 1936)Google Scholar; Hearings before a Sub-Committee of the Committee on Agriculture and Forestry of the United States Senate on a Bill to Create a Federal Crap Insurance Corporation and for Other Purposes, February-March, 1937 (Washington, 1937)Google Scholar; and Hearings Before a Special Sub-Committee of the Committee on Agriculture, House of Representatives, on S. 1397 to Create a Federal Crop Insurance Corporation and for Other Purposes, May-June, 1937 (Washington, 1937).Google Scholar The Home Insurance Company of New York wrote some crop insurance in Saskatchewan and Alberta in 1921, but incurred losses and withdrew. For a review of earlier crop insurance plans and policies in the different states, see Preliminary Report ofthe Committee on Crop Insurance, pp. 4-7.

⁵⁴ Ibid., pp. 12-3.

⁵⁵ Hansen, , “Economic Aspects of Crop (Yield) Insurance with Reference to the Province of Saskatchewan”, p. 7.Google Scholar

⁵⁶ See Britnell, G. E., “Profit and Loss: The Depression in Rural Saskatchewan” (The Canadian Economy and its Problems, ed. by Innis, H. A. and Plumptre, A. F. W., Toronto, 1934, 97–110).Google Scholar

⁵⁷ See Reports on the Financial Position of the Provinces of Manitoba, Saskatchewan and Alberta, 1937 (Ottawa, Bank of Canada, 1937).Google Scholar

⁵⁸ See Bank of Canada Report on Alberta, pp. 4-8 and 34. But “from any point of view, if regard is paid to the necessities of rapid development, Alberta's public debt in 1929 could not be regarded as being materially out of line with the rest of Canada” ( Elliott, Courtland and Walker, J. A., Report to Alberta Bondholders' Committee: A Survey of the Fiscal Problems of the Province of Alberta in relaiion to the Economic and Social Conditions affecting Them, Edmonton, 1937, ch. iv, p. 28).Google Scholar

⁵⁹ Bank of Canada Report on Saskatchewan, p. 12.

⁶⁰ Ibid., p. 8.

⁶¹ Waines, W. J., “Federal Public Finance: Canada” (Canadian Journal of Economics and Political Science, vol. III, 05, 1937, p. 196).Google Scholar

⁶² See Report of the Commission of Inquiry into Provincial and Municipal Taxation to the Government of Saskatchewan, 1936 (Regina, King's Printer, 1936).Google Scholar For Alberta, see Report on the Alberta Tax Inquiry Board on Provincial and Municipal Taxation (Edmonton, King's Printer, 1935).Google Scholar

⁶³ Bank of Canada Report on Saskatchewan, p. 27. See also Report on Manitoba, p. 24.

⁶⁴ See Report of the Commission of Inquiry into Provincial and Municipal Taxation to the Government of Saskatchewan, 1936, p. 9.

⁶⁵ See Britnell, G. E., “Alberta, Economic and Political: The Elliott-Walker Report” (Canadian Journal of Economics and Political Science, vol. II, Nov01, 1936, pp. 524–32)Google Scholar; and Waines, , “Federal Public Finance: Canada”, pp. 181–96.Google Scholar “By default Alberta has attempted to spread the costs of the depression more evenly” (p. 195).

⁶⁶ The ultimate national or social aim should perhaps be widened, as ProfessorBladen, V. W. has suggested in “The Economics of Federalism” (Canadian Journal of Economics and Political Science, vol. I, 08, 1935, pp. 348–51)CrossRefGoogle Scholar: “Looking to the future there are two objectives: (a) to achieve some rough equality in standard of living as between the provinces; and (b) to guarantee the financial ability of the government of each of the provinces to perform adequately the functions which are required of it, with reasonable standards of efficiency and economy. Of these two objectives, too much attention has been paid to the latter, too little to the former” (p. 351).

⁶⁷ See Waines, W. J., “Problems of Public Finance in the Prairie Provinces” (Canadian Journal of Economics and Political Science, vol. III, 08, 1937, pp. 355–69).CrossRefGoogle Scholar For a discussion of Australian experience with grants from the federal government to the states through the Commonwealth Grants Commission, see J. A. Maxwell, “Federal Public Finance: Australia” (ibid., vol. III, May, 1937, pp. 197-201); and for a discussion of unconditional and conditional subsidies, Maxwell, J. A., Federal Subsidies to the Provincial Governments of Canada (Cambridge, 1937,) ch. xiv and xviii.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

⁶⁸ Bank of Canada Report on Saskatchewan, p. 4. See also McQueen, R., “Economic Aspects of Federalism: A Prairie View” (Canadian Journal of Economics and Political Science, vol. I, 08, 1935, pp. 358–67)Google Scholar; and D. C. MacGregor, “The Provincial Incidence of the Canadian Tariff” (ibid., pp. 384-95).