Mr. R. L. BORDEN.

What part of my remarks were intended to excite dissatisfaction ?

Mr. OLIVER.

The whole of them, as 1 understood them, by trying to create a grievance where no grievance exists, and where none has yet been shown. My hon. friend has laid some stress on the assertion he makes that there was no attempt at a conference with regard to this question. Had he been here last night, or had he read the proceedings of last night in the ' Hansard,' he would have seen that there was a direct statement made by three members on this side of the House that there was a conference held in which the question of the division between the two districts was discussed, and during which, according to the statement of the hon. member for Alberta (Mr. Herron), other questions in that connection were discussed ; and that the conference was not continued because it was evident from the results of the meeting that there was no use in continuing it. There was no refusal on the part of members of this side to go on, but there was an absence of willingness on the part of members on the other side of the House when it was desired to go on.

Mr. M. S. MCCARTHY.

What is the hon. gentleman referring to ?

Mr. OLIVER.

I say there was a meeting held at which the hon. member for Alberta

was present and at which I was present. Does lie deny it ? Is the hon. gentleman contradicting what I say ?

Mr. iM. S. MCCARTHY. I merely wish to say, Mr. Chairman

Mr. OLIVER.

I have the floor.. If the hon. gentleman wishes to make a contradiction let him make it, and I will sit down ; but I will not sit down to let him make a speech.

Mr. M. S. MCCARTHY.

I simply desire to ask a question.

Mr. FOSTER.

Does the Minister of the Interior take the ground that when a gentleman rises on the other side of the House and asks leave to ask him a question which has to do with an emphatic statement made by the minister, and which is denied on the other side, that he is going to stand on his rights and not allow it ?

Mr. OLIVER.

I mean to say that when I make an emphatic statement, if the hon. gentleman has any denial to make, I will sit down and let him make it.

Mr. INGRAM.

My hon. friend (Mr. M. S. McCarthy) asked the hon. gentleman for an explanation.

Mr. OLIVER.

I asked him to deny my statement if he could. I stated that there was a meeting at which were present the hon. member for Saskatchewan (Mr. La-mont), the hon. member for West Assini-boia (Mr. Scott) and the hon. member for Alberta (Mr. Herron), at which the question of the division between the two districts was discussed, along with other questions in that connection, as stated by the hon. member for Alberta last night. Now, does he deny that ?

Mr. M. S. MCCARTHY.

Does he mean the division between the two provinces ?

Mr. OLIVER.

Between the two provinces.

Mr. M. S. MCCARTHY.

Well, so far as that goes, the minister is correct.

Mr. OLIVER.

Thank you. I have only to say that when the hon. leader of the opposition rung the .changes on the alleged fact that there was no conference-

Mr. R. L. BORDEN.

I was not referring to a conference about the boundaries between the two provinces, I was talking of a conference respecting the delimitation of the ridings.

Mr. OLIVER.

He was denying that there was a conference.

Mr. R. L. BORDEN.

The hon. gentleman surely knew what I was referring to, and what I expressly stated. There was no conference, so far as I am aware, certainly not with myself, respecting the delimitation of the ridings in either of the two provinces. That is what I said.

Mr. OLIVER.

Mr. OLIVER.

The hon. gentleman is certainly depending upon his legal ability.

Mr. R. L. BORDEN.

I am not, I am depending upon the truth.