Mr. SPROULE.

If you had been good enough to allow me to get through, Mr. Speaker, I was going to show where the urgency came in, and how it was absolutely necessary to bring the matter to the attention of the House at the present time.

Mr. SPEAKER.

The article which the hon. member is reading appears to have reference to an election. It is not a question of privilege.

Mr. MACLEAN.

These men want to vote.

Mr. SPEAKER.

I heard enough of the article to see that it does not involve a question of privilege as that is understood by the rules of the House.

Mr. SPROULE.

As I understand, I have a right to bring the matter up either as a question of urgency or a question of privilege. I bring it up as a question of urgency, because the election takes place the day

after to-morrow, and the question concerns the right of individuals to use the franchise.

Mr. SPEAKER.

Perhaps there is some misunderstanding in regard to questions of urgency. I suggested the other day that when any hon. member wishes to bring up a question of urgency, it would perhaps be advisable for him to have an understanding with the government as to the bringing up of that question. The general rule is that no question can be brought up without two days' notice having been given. Besides I do not see that there is any great urgency in the question now brought, up, and I think it should not be allowed.

Mr. SPROULE.

In the first place, I could not give notice because the matter only came into my hands a few moments ago. Surely I am in order in trying to show why this is a question of urgency.

Mr. SPEAKER.

The question has been decided so far as I am concerned. I do not consider this a question of urgency. The question may have been brought to the attention of the hon. member only a few moments ago, but he might give notice of it, and then it could be brought up at a future day.

Mr. BORDEN (Halifax).

Might I rise, Mr. Speaker, for the purpose of obtaining a thorough understanding of your decision ? As I understand, the hon. member for East Grey (Mr. Sproule) is trying to bring to the attention of the House certain alleged conduct of the Post Office Department, which will result in depriving certain electors of North Bruce of the right to vote the day after to-morrow. The matter has been brought to his attention only a few moments ago. He regards it as a matter of urgency. If it is not brought to the attention of the government to-day, it will be too late to bring it to their attention at all, as the election takes place the day after to-morrow. If, under these circumstances, you decide as you apparently have decided, that the matter cannot be dealt with as a question of urgency in the House, we shall bow at once to your decision ; but it may involve consequences which you may not have fully taken into consideration. I would respectfully suggest, with all deference to your ruling, that the hon. gentleman had no other course under the circumstances than to attempt to bring the matter to the attention of the House at the present time, because, as you yourself will see, it would be idle for him to do so at any later day.

Mr. SPEAKER.

Perhaps there is some misunderstanding in regard to the rule. No question can be brought up before the Orders of the Day except by giving notice of motion. It has been allowed sometimes to bring up questions of urgency, without notice, but they are not regular. Even questions of urgency should not be brought up

Mr. SPROULE.

without notice, except with the unanimous consent of the House. I was simply drawing the attention of the hon. member to the fact that I did not think this was a question of privilege, and I did not see that it was of so much urgency that it might be brought up just now.

Mr. MONK.

Mr. Speaker, if I may be allowed to make an observation, is not this a question of privilege ? Would not the alleged fact that certain electors are going to be prevented from exercising their franchise be an infraction of one of the most important privileges of this House ? I have not looked up the point; but it seems to me under the circumstances that it might well be considered a question of privilege-a privilege not of a member, but of the House.

Mr. SPEAKER.

A question of privilege might affect the seat of a member. This question does not appear to affect the seat of any member, and therefore I do not think it should be considered a question of privilege. Orders of the Day.

As I wish to lay on the Table of the House certain correspondence in answer to an inquiry by Sir Charles Hibbert Tupper, I beg to move :

That an Order of the House do issue for copies of all correspondence and papers relating to the issue of an order for the suppression of theatres and gambling houses in Dawson City.

PRIOR (Victoria, B.C.) Mr. Speaker, I am not unmindful of the ruling which you have given to-day, nor of the one you gave a few days ago in regard to a matter brought up by myself ; but I wish to draw the attention of the Minister of Militia (Hon. Mr. Borden) in particular to a matter which I consider of the greatest urgency ; that is, the uniforms which have been issued to the South African Constabulary, who are to leave here in a few days. At present they are clothed in suits of dungaree or blue jean with woven toques, -which are altogether derogatory to men of their standing. I can assure the government that both the non-commissioned officers and men feel very deeply their being obliged to wear such clothing when being enlisted and whilst in town. It is all right on shipboard, but it is not the style of uniform that Canadians should be asked to wear in town. Especially is it noticeable now that we have the Stratheonas here in their picturesque garb, going about our streets; and these men in the constabulary feel very badly about it. I do not blame

the government, as 1 am informed that the government are not paying these men, hut that it is for the Imperial government to provide them with uniforms as the men are under their pay. But I do think that our government might have made some different arrangements so that the men of the constabulary might be clothed in a more suitable uniform. They certainly should be provided with khaki uniforms and puttees, and at least a small forage cap. 1 am informed on good authority that to clothe these men in a becoming uniform would not cost more than $5,000. and 1 feel perfectly certain that if Mr. Chamberlain or the Imperial government were cabled on this matter they would willingly provide the funds to furnish a suitable uniform. If they would not, then I think that Canada could afford to provide for these men, who, I am glad to say, are as fine a body of men as you could find in the world, $5,000 so that they could go out of the country in creditable shape; they will have to land in Cape Town wearing this miserable clothing, and there they will come face to face with the Imperial troops. They will be a laughing-stock, and I am sure that nobody in this House or this country wishes that. I would make an appeal to the government that they should look into this matter. I am informed that in twenty-four hours these men can be provided with khaki uniforms, and I trust that the Minister of Militia (Hon. Mr. Borden, King's), who, I regret to see is not in the House at this time, will give this subject careful and immediate consideration.