1. What is the number of bond issues of the war loan, and the amount of each?

2. What rate of interest does each bear?

3. What price did each issue sell at?

4. What was the actual amount received by the Government from each sale?

5. What amount has been paid to brokers or others for selling the bonds?

6. What was the amount, if any, of other expenses in connection with the sales of said bonds?

Sir THOMAS WHITE:

1, 2 and 3. Three bond issues as follows: 5 per cent 1915-25 war loan, $100,000,000, issue price 97J; 5 per cent 1916-31 war loan,

$100,000,000, issue price 97i; 5 per cent 191737 war loan, $150,000,000, issue price 96.

4. 1915-25 war loan, $97,003,600.27; 1916-31 war loan, $97,789,580.17; 1917-37 war loan, $139,882,508.04-to date; returns not yet completed.

5. Brokers. Recognized bond and stock brokers were allowed a commission on allotments made on applications bearing their stamp, as follows:

1915-25 and 1916-31 loans, one-quarter cf one per cent; 1917-37 loan, three-eighths of one per cent.

Banks. Arrangements were made with the banks for a commission as under: 191525 war loan, one-quarter of one per cent;

1916- 31 war loan, one-half of one per cent;

1917- 37 war loan, nine-twentieths of one

per cent. .

For the above commission the banks agreed to receive on behalf of the Government at all their branches subscriptions and payments therefor, deliver provisional receipts, interim certificates and bonds and keep the necessary accounts in connection therewith; to cash at all their branches throughout Canada the coupons of the issues free of exchange; to use their best endeavours through their several offices throughout Canada to obtain public subscriptions to the loans. The banks also agreed to make, if required, cash subscriptions of $50,000,000 to the 1916-31 issue and of $60,000,000 to the 1917-37 issue.

6. Clerical assistance and office contingencies: 1915-25 war loan, $14,130.36; 191631 war loan, $26,998.24; 1917-37 war loan, $19,748.38 to 31st May, 1917.

Advertising: 1915-25 war loan, $36,023.16; 1916-31 war loan, $50,626.67-to 31st May,\ 1917; 1917-37 war loan, $23,367.89-to 31st May, 1917.

Sir ROBERT BORDEN:

I gave notice that I shall move to-morrow that the House sit in the forenoon, on and after Tuesday, 3rd Julv.

Sir WILFRID LAURIER:

I hope my hon. friend will consider the advisability of deferring the consideration of the question of morning sittings until the debate on the Military Service Bill is concluded. If he thinks the debate has been unduly prolonged, or that there has been obstruction, I would not object, but no such condition is alleged to exist. I think it would be well to conclude the debate before we consider the question of morning sittings.

Sir ROBERT BORDEN:

I should be glad to consider the suggestion, but I do not see the reasons on which my right hon. friend's proposal is based. I do not wish to restrict the debate upon this Bill. The proposal I am making is giving greater opportunity for hon. members to be heard without unduly prolonging the debate. This is the _ usual course to pursue. The debate at this stage of the season is, likely to occupy a great deal of time.

Sir WILFRID LAURIER:

I would not say that. It is the most important question we have had before us during the session. When it is disposed of, I shall be happy to facilitate the business before the House, as far as possible. But, in the meantime, we are all very busy, and we cannot see the end of the session at the present time. I would impress upon my right hon. friend the desirability of permitting latitude upon this debate, and we will try to facilitate matters when the debate is concluded.

Sir ROBERT BORDEN:

Can my right hon. friend tell me when the debate On the second reading is likely to be concluded?

Sir WILFRID LAURIER:

I think I shall be able to inform the right hon. leader to-morrow.

Sir ROBERT BORDEN:

That is a circumstance that might influence my judgment very much. The motion may stand.

Sir ROBERT BORDEN (Prime Minister):

Some time ago my right hon. friend the leader of the Opposition made an inquiry with regard to the report of the International Joint Commission fixing the level of the waters of the Lake of the Woods. The report had really been made at the time I gave my answer, although it had not come to my personal attention. I have made inquiries, and I find that it is being printed, and that the printing, will occupy some considerable time as the report is voluminous. For that reason, I thought it desirable to obtain a short abstract, in order that the House might be informed as to the commission's recommendation. The memorandum of the report, which I obtained from the Secretary of the Canadian Section of the International Joint Commission, reads as follows:

Lake of the Woods Report.

The Final Report of the International Joint Commission in the matter of the Lake of the

Woods Reference was filed here and in Washington on June 12>. In answer to the questions submitted by the Governments of Canada and the United States, the Commission recommends the maintenance of an ordinary maximum stage of 1061.25 (sea level datum) on the Lake of the Woods, with an extreme range from 1056 to 1062.50. The former level would only be reached in years of excessive drought, and the latter in years of excessive precipita-[DOT] tion. The level recommended the Commission believes to be in the best interests of all concerned on both sides of the international boundary. It recognizes the water-power interests, particularly those on the Winnipeg river supplying light and power to the city of Winnipeg, as the dominant interests in the Lake of the Woods region, and the level recommended is one that will be of very great benefit to those interests. At the same time the interests of navigation, lumbering, fisheries and agriculture have been effectively safeguarded. The Commission's Report sets forth the means by which the proposed level is to be maintained. The outflow capacity of the Lake of the Woods is to be increased at a cost of about $175,000. Compensation is recommended to interests at the outlets of the lake and on the Winnipeg river, amounting to $2-5,000 and $30,000 respectively; to the owners of lands that will be flooded; on the United States side, $164,000, and in Canada, $81,000 ; and for protection along the water-front of Warroad and other towns, $115,000. The project involves the utilization of Rainy lake and other lakes tributary to the Lake of the Woods as immense reservoirs for the storage of water. It is recommended that the general direction of the proposed system of regulation be vested in the Commission; and that the actual control of the dams and regulating works at Kettle Falls, Koochiching Falls and Kenora, be put in the hands of an International Hoard of Engineers, with one reservation however. The dams at Kenora being in Canadian territory, the Commission recommends the creation also of a Domestic Board, to be appointed by the Governments of Canada and Ontario. This Board would control all the works at the outlets of the Lake of the Woods so long as the level of the lake remained between 1956 and 1061. When it should fall below -the former or rise above, the latter figure, the International Board would assume control. The Commission bases its recommendation on the fact that as long as the level of the lake remains between 1056 and 1061, Canadian interests only will be affected; while above and below those levels, international interests will be affected, and the International Board should therefore control the situation.

As soon as the report is printed it will be laid on the Table and made available to members of the House.

INQUIRY INTO LOSS OF ALCOHOL. On. the Orders of the Day;

Mr. STEELE:

I wish to make an inquiry of the Minister of Militia, based upon the following item appearing in the London Free Press of yesterday:

A board of officers, composed as under, will assemble on Wednesday next, the 27th instant, at

10.30 a.m., for the purpose of inquiring into and reporting upon the loss of alcohol on charge to the medical stores, M. D. No. 1.

I wish to inquire-

Mr. SPEAKER:

Order. I think the hon. member had better place this question on the Order Paper. It is not of such importance as to require the attention of the House on the Orders of the Day.