ROYAL COMMISSION re ALBERT RICHARD BAKER,
Chairman of Game Conservation Board.
(Under "Public Inquiries Act.")
REPORT OF H. C. SHAW, Commissioner.
Vancouver, B.C., February 16th, 1922.
To the Honourable the Lieutenant-Governor in Council, Victoria, B.C.
Sir,—By Order in Council approved ony the 21st day of November, a.d. 1921, under the
provisions of the " Public Inquiries Act," I, Henry Curtis Shaw, was appointed a Commissioner
to' inquire into the conduct of Albert Richard Baker as Chairman of the Game Conservation
Board, and into all allegations of malpractice alleged to have been carried on by the said
Albert Richard Baker as Chairman of the Game Conservation Board, and more particularly into
the charges preferred by Robert Henry Pooley, member of the Legislative Assembly for Esquimalt,
against the said Albert Richard Baker as specifically set out in the said Commission; and as
such Commissioner I beg to report as follows:—
Having been duly sworn under the " Public Inquiries Act," I caused due notice to be given
in the British Columbia Gazette and in the local papers, and opened the Commission in the
City of "Victoria on the 25th day of November, 1921, attended by Mr. W. E. G. Johnson, who had
been duly appointed stenographer and sworn. Mr. J. X. Ellis, K.C., attended as counsel on behalf
of the Government and Mr. D. Donaghy on behalf of Dr. A. R. Baker. Mr. Pooley, who made
the charges, although requested by Mr. Ellis to attend and press the charges, did not appear,
but sent a letter which Mr. Ellis read, to the effect that he would take no part in the proceedings.
I then expressed my desire to receive evidence from any source that would have a bearing on
the matters to be investigated or assist me in arriving at a conclusion, and took such evidence
as offered or that Mr. Ellis could obtain.
On December 1st, after due notice, I sat as such Commissioner in the City of Vancouver
and so on from day to day as witnesses were available; and on December 28th resumed sittings
at Victoria, having subpoenaed Mr. Pooley at the request of counsel. Mr. Pooley appeared before
me and gave evidence, represented by Mr. H. W. R. Moore as counsel, to whom I gave full
privilege of calling witnesses and full liberty to cross-examine all witnesses, and from that time
until the closing of the Commission Mr. Moore was present. I also allowed Mr. J. A. Hird, until
recently Chief Game Inspector, who seemed very active and zealous against Dr. A. R. Baker,
to be represented by counsel, Mr. W. H. Moresby, to examine and cross-examine such witnesses
as he desired.
On the 27th day of January, 1922, all witnesses who had presented themselves and who were
called upon by the various counsel having been examined, and counsel informing me they had no
further evidence to offer, I again called upon any and all who had any material evidence or
who knew of any one who had any material evidence to come forward or to give me the names
of any such, and no further evidence being forthcoming, at the request of counsel, I allowed
several counsel to sum up the evidence, and I then formally closed the Commission.
The inquiry in the terms of the Commission falls into two parts: First, the general inquiry
into the conduct of Albert Richard Baker as Chairman of the Game Conservation Board, and
the conduct of the Game Department, and into all allegations of malpractices alleged to have
been carried on by the said Albert Richard Baker, as Chairman of the Game Conservation Board,
in the administration of the " Game Act" ; and, secondly, the eighteen specific charges made
by Mr. Robert Henry Pooley, as set out in detail in the said Commission.
It will be more satisfactory and convenient to deal with the specific charges first.
Charge No. 1.—Using Government motor-cars and launches for his own personal needs and
requirements. The evidence shows that on some occasions Dr. Baker combined departmental
business with private pleasure, taking with him his wife and friends at his own expense, except
V17 -
V 18
Royal Commission
1922
so far as the use of the boat or car, as the case might be, was concerned, and on some few
occasions Dr. Baker frankly admitted he used the boat and car for pleasure-trips, alleging that
as he drew no salary for his work on the Game Board he thought there was nothing wrong and
that it was a common practice. I make no comment, except to say that technically he had no
right to so use the boat and car, but the charge is a very trivial one.
Charge No. 2.—Supplying pheasants in large numbers raised at the expense of the people to
his own game preserve. There is no evidence of Dr. Baker having any game preserve, and
Mr. Moore admitted this, and I report that there is nothing in this charge.
Charge No. 3.—Wasting public funds. This charge is general and must be dealt with under
the general clause.
Charge No. I}.—Wrongfully hiring and dismissing men and illegally paying them cash for
services without obtaining vouchers. There was no evidence of any public moneys being paid
in cash to any employees. There was no evidence of any wrongful hiring or dismissal. There is
evidence of men being employed who complained of not much for them to do, but not knowing
all the exigencies of the case it is impossible for me to report on what is a matter of individual
judgment and discretion.
Charge No. 5.—Falsifying records of the House of Assembly. I find no evidence to substantiate this charge and Mr. Moore practically admitted that there is none. (See page 1874 of the
transcript.)
Charge No. 6.—Infringing the " Game Act" by illegally dealing in beaver-skins in close
season. This charge was evidently made on the assumption that the Order in Council was not
in force. Much evidence was given that the Order in Council was ultra vires and that the policy
of the Government was detrimental to the beaver industry. In my view I have no jurisdiction
in this inquiry to decide on the validity of the Order in Council and no right to comment on
the Government policy, but only on Dr. Baker's conduct in carrying out such policy. Such being
the case, I must treat the Order in Council as valid, and, if so, there is no evidence to support
the charge.    Mr. Moore practically admits this.    (Page 1874.)
Charge No. 7.—Illegal use of public funds. The only transaction pressed by Mr. Moore in
support of this charge is the purchase of 7,5C0 feet of film, referred to by Mr. Kean (page 1478
et seq.) when he received $1,122 by cheque for certain pictures and returned to Dr. Baker
$506.50 in cash as the price of raw films used by him in making said pictures. This cash was
not put through any books, as Dr. Baker said he did not have any cash account in connection
with these films, but simply had to show to the auditor the necessary amount of xfilm; that he
bought from Mr. Edwards (dealer in raw film) 7,500 feet of film, worth $506.50, and put it
into stock. There is much criticism of this course, the suggestion being that Dr. Baker used
this money and when the auditor came, some months later, bought film and made good the
shortage. If this were proven it would be a serious breach of duty, but I cannot find that he
did so in view of the evidence of Mr. Edwards, a reputable citizen, who swears Dr. Baker bought
and paid for 7,500 feet of film w'ithin a very few days of the payment to him by Kean. I must
accept Edwards's evidence. I must comment on this most unbusinesslike way of paying out
Government funds without any record of same, but cannot in this transaction report any
malfeasance by Baker, since the money seems to have been actually used to make good the
amount of film he was required to have on hand to keep his stock right for the auditor. The
transaction was very complicated and certainly justified suspicion. (See Kean's evidence, pages
1478 to 1484.)    I find no other evidence in connection with this charge.
Charge No. 8.—Inducing his officials to. break the laws of this Province. This can only be so
on the assumption that the Order in Council is invalid and that Dr. Baker knew7 it. There is
absolutely no evidence to support the charge and Mr. Moore admits this.
■Charge No. .9.—Being in collusion with Korsch & Company in the illegal buying and selling
of beaver-skins for personal gain. Mr. Moore admitted there is rio evidence of this (page 1875),
and I find no evidence of any collusion and no suggestion of personal gain on the part of
Dr. Baker. Dr. Baker's dealings with Korsch come more properly under the other division
of the inquiry and will be dealt with later.
Charge No. 10.—Using the public moneys illegally to further his own personal financial ends.
Counsel admits that there is no evidence to support this charge and I find none.    (Page 1875.)
Charge No. 11.—Buying and selling beaver-skins for his own personal use and benefit.
There is no evidence in support of this charge and counsel so admits.    (Page 1875.) 12 Geo. 5
Re Albert Richard Baker.
V 19
Charge No. 12.—Misfeasance in office in not enforcing the game laws of this Province and
deliberately winking at infractions thereof and stifling prosecutions. There is some evidence
of prosecutions in several cases being stopped. Bearing in mind that a proper enforcement of
the " Game Act " does not necessarily mean punishment of every boy or man who may unwittingly
infringe the Act, it is very difficult to report whether, in the eases mentioned, Dr. Baker's
judgment may not have been wise. The wisdom of imposing a fine on two boys shooting with
a .22 rifle, and who apparently had shot nothing, is questionable. Imposing a fine on a man who
had shot a deer under the impression given him by a guide that the season was open; the
withdrawal of the charge against one Goldbloom for having beaver castors in his possession
when satisfied in his own mind they had been purchased in Alberta; and other similar charges
referred to, are all matters, I think, which depend on the judgment of the man in charge of
the Department, and I do not think that I, not being in full possession of all the facts should
presume to report that he was wrong. In connection with this charge, I find Dr. Baker, at
the very time the prosecution of Goldbloom was pending, entered into a bargain with Goldbloom
for some marten-skins, and although he may have had a legal right to do so, he can scarcely
wonder that those who were watching his every movement would have cause for suspicion, and
I report that such bargain, under the circumstances, by the Chairman of the Game Conservation
Board was very injudicious.
Charge No. 13.—Using and being party to the wrongful use of Government fur-royalty
stamps, whereby furs were stamped without payment of royalty and the Province defrauded of
revenue. Mr. Moore practically admits that there is no substantial basis for this charge (page
1875), though he claims that Mr. Campbell, of Harpers Camp, was improperly allowed to stamp
furs. Mr. Campbell and his brother, also of Harpers Camp, on account of the insinuation and
suggestion made by Mr. Hird, recently Chief Game Inspector, were brought down at great
expense and fully explained the use of the stamp. Technically Mr. Campbell had no right to
use the stamp, but he satisfied me he did it to help out bona-fide trappers, collected the revenue
from them, and duly paid it to the Government. The Province lost nothing through Mr.
Campbell; and I take this opportunity of stating that Mr. Campbell seemed a man of sterling
integrity and honesty and I regret he should have been subjected to some suspicion and put to
inconvenience.
Charge No. 14-—Personally profiting by reason of the said wrongful use of said stamps.
I find no evidence whatsoever and counsel so admits.    (Page 1876.)
Charge No. 15.—Wilfully allowing the killing of beaver and the purchasing and dealing in
green beaver-skins contrary to the " Game Act" of this Province. Evidence was given that
some green skins were sent down to the Board office and payment was refused. The evidence
further shows that as the Order in Council came into force on July 26th, 1921, even an expert
could not tell if the skins were secured before or after that date.
Charge No. 16.—Winking at traffic in green skins and purchase thereof by agents with
whisky.   Mr. Moore says " there is no evidence in support of that charge," and I agree.
Charge No. 17.—Instructing permit-holders to buy skins from persons other than Indians.
There is no evidence of Dr. Baker having given any such instructions; in fact, the evidence is
all the other way. Some of the buyers, however, assumed no objection would be made if they
disobeyed their written instructions.
Charge No. 18.—-Ordering motor-ears without authority to purchase. Negotiations took place
between one Walters and Dr. Baker re the purchase of certain motor-cars. Dr. Baker had no
power to buy and says he only agreed to report favourably to the Government. Walters says
that Baker ordered them. There was no binding contract entered into, and in the case of oath
against oath I cannot make any report or finding on this charge, particularly in view of tbe
fact that the ears were not purchased.
Dealing now with the second phase of the inquiry, I beg to report that all charges Of
personal wrongdoing by or personal profit to Dr. Baker are not supported by the evidence.
Mr. Pooley states that his charges were based on information/ given him. Mr. Perry specifically
states : " All I charge Dr. Baker with is incompetency." (Page 340.) Mr. Hanes deals entirely
with his views of the law that the Order in Council; was invalid. Mr. Hird, who was recently
Chief Game Inspector and who was particularly zealous against Dr. Baker, and who had a great
many entries in his note-book, made many charges of wrongdoing, frequently based on hearsay
and at other times on suspicion. V 20
Royal Commission
1922
I have to thank Mr. Moore and Mr. Donaghy for their meticulous care in sifting all these
charges to the bottom, and I find most of them cleared up and none of them proven, so far as
personal wrongdoing on Dr. Baker's part is concerned. Much time was spent and much evidence
taken that was very immaterial, and I pass this over, confining myself to the points on which
stress was laid by Mr. Moore in his review of the evidence, realizing that a careful, able counsel
like Mr. Moore would not neglect any material point.
I touch but lightly on the episode of Mr. Hlrd's book, the loss or taking and finding of the
same being a reason urged for doubting the credibility of Dr. Baker. That the book was found
by the witness Madill seems clear, and the handing of it in to Dr. Baker's office natural.
Although Mr. Hird complained of being handicapped by the loss of the book, he did not use
it when it was returned to him, although I gave him opportunity to do so, and I attach little
importance to the incident.    I have already dealt with the matter of the private use of launches.
With regard to the launch " Rip Rap," much evidence was given. I have to report that this
launch was bought by the Purchasing Agent of the Government on reports of proper officials,
and whether a good or bad bargain, I do not find any wrongdoing on Dr. Baker's part.
Much time was spent on evidence that Dr. Baker used his position to allow friends to buy
beaver-skins privately from Little Bros., the sales agents of the Government, but there was no
evidence that Dr. Baker profited in the slightest degree, and the only remark I think I should
make is, it was an injudicious thing and did arouse suspicion.
The evidence satisfied me that Dr. Baker allowed two friends from Seattle, who were nonresidents of British Columbia, to use his office address and his home address to enable them to
buy resident game licences instead of non-resident, but without any advantage to himself.
Dealing with the beaver policy, for reasons already stated, I confine myself to the conduct
of Dr. Baker in carrying it out. An emergency had arisen. Indians in unorganized districts
had killed and were killing beaver for food and the skins were being illegally sold. Dr. Baker,
realizing this, recommended through the Game Conservation Board that the Board be given
authority to purchase beaver-skins from the Indians, and the Government gave authority to
the Game Conservation Board " to purchase such skins from the said Indians through lawfully
authorized agents in that behalf, and for such purpose to receive advances from the Treasury
and to make payments therefor, together with such reasonable sums for salaries, expenses, and
commissions as may be necessary." The Game Conservation Board entrusted the carrying-out
of the order to Dr. Baker as Chairman. Unfortunately there seems to have been a want of
harmony between the Game Department and the Police Department, which complicated the
situation. The plan suggested of having the India^is bring their skins to the Government Agents
and the agents send them to the Game Board, and when sold the proceedsi paid to the Indians,
less expenses, commends itself, but Dr. Baker decided to license certain fur-traders and send
them among the Indians. This plan certainly could not give satisfaction, and later every
licensed fur-trader was given a permit to buy. This discrimination was bad. There seems to
have been no definite system. The prices to be paid varied in different permits. In the case of
Korsch the remuneration to be paid was not even reduced to writing. In the matter of some
of the permit-holders the impression existed that no objection would he made if skins were
bought from white men as well as from Indians; Korsch's ageilts were even permitted to ship
the skins to Korsch's warehouse in Vancouver and they were then sent over to the Game Board.
While there is no evidence of any profit or gain to Dr. Baker, there was absolutely no check' on
the buyers except their own honesty, which, in the case of some, was very questionable, and
there is to-day no means of ascertaining how many of the skins in the possession of the Indians
reached the Game Board or how much the trader actually paid to the Indians. The plan, too,
is to be condemned, inasmuch as there was a strong tendency to encourage the killing of the
beaver. The auditor swore that skins were sent in for all moneys advanced and the account
balanced, but this does not show how much was actually paid to the Indians or how many skins
were sent out of the Province. On a complete review of all the evidence, I feel I must report
that the plan adopted was a bad one as it allowed a dishonest man full opportunity to be dishonest ; that there were no means of checking them; that it encouraged the Indians and others
for this very reason to kill beaver and sell the pelts; that it made unfair discrimination and
perhaps encouraged the Indians to lose respect for the law, all of which it seems might have
been avoided by having the Indians deal only with Government officials. 12 Geo. 5 Re Albert Richard Baker. V 21
In conclusion, I feel my thanks are due to Mr. Ellis for his assistance to the Commission
. in procuring witnesses and assisting to make the investigation a searching one, handicapped as
he was by not being taken into the confidence of those making the charges and not even knowing
the names of their witnesses.
The evidence taken before the Commission, together with exhibits, is enclosed herewith.
All of which is respectfully submitted.
H. C. SHAW,
Commissioner.
VICTORIA,  B.C. :
Printed by William H. Cullin7, Trinter to the King's Most Excellent Majesty.
1922.