Hon. WILLIAM PUGSLEY:

Mr. Speaker.

I rise to a question of privilege. In the Toronto News of Saturday last there appears this despatch from Ottawa:

C.P.R. Leads Bitter Fight.

Opposition to Public Ownership Being Waged on Floor of House.

Ottawa, Aug. 25.-One of the things which goes to prove that the taking over of the Canadian Northern by the Government is in the direct public interest, is the bitter and unreasoning opposition to the Bill by Hon. William Pugsley and Hon. George P. Graham. During the obstructive tactics which have been adopted in the discussion of the legislation in the House, Mr. Pugsley has constituted himself leader of the private ownership clique against public ownership. It is freely rumoured that in doing so, Mr. Pugsley is merely acting as spokesman and general counsel -for the Canadian Pacific Railway. While the voice is the voice of Pugsley, the hand is the hand of Shaughnessy.

I desire, Mr. Speaker to give that statement an unqualified denial. I am not now, nor have I ever been in any way connected with the Canadian Pacific railway as counsel or otherwise. I have had no communication directly or indirectly with the Canadian Pacific railway or with any of its officials on the subject of the Canadian Northern railway.

Sir SAM HUGHES:

Without desiring to

bring on any discussion on the Orders of the Day, I wish to ask my right hon. friend the Prime Minister (Sir Robert Borden) if he will be good enough-to relieve my doubt, and that there may be no equivocation- to furnish the following data: What staff

was at Brighton in the middle of November, 1916?

Mr. SPEAKER:

This information cannot be given now. The proper course to take is to place a question on the Order Paper in the ordinary way and thus obviate the possibility of inaccuracy.

Sir SAM HUGHES:

Perhaps I can get

some of'the information now. I would prefer that the information with regard to the staff should not 'be limited to the admin-strative staff.

Mr. SPEAKER:

I must ask the hon.

gentleman to place his question on the Order Paper. The answer cannot possibly be forthcoming to-day.

Sir SAM HUGHES:

But, Mr. Speaker,

may I not. refer to the answer which has been given by the Prime Minister? The Prime Minister spoke of the administrative staff. My statement refers to the staff and the answer given by him places me in the position before the public of having made a certain misstatement.

Mr. SPEAKER:

Order. It is not competent for the hon. member to discuss at this stage an- answer given by the Government. If he wishes an answer to a further question on the subject I must ask him to place his question on the Order Paper.

Sir SAM HUGHES:

Mr. Speaker, I rise to a question of privilege. The statement which has been made to-day by the First Minister quotes me as having made reference to a certain number of clerks being employed in London. The answer of the Prime Minister speaks only of the admin-

istrative staff and it places them at over 500, but it does not take into account other staffs. The number employed has not been clearly stated.

Mr. SPEAKER:

Order. The hon. member is not speaking to a question of privilege. He is not calling in question any inaccuracy in the statement. The hon. member has a right to ask a question in respect to a matter of urgency, or in respect to a return or something of that character, but he cannot discuss the matter. If he wishes to ask a further question, the answer to which cannot be forthcoming to-day, I would ask him to put his question on the Order Paper in the ordinary course.

Sir SAM HUGHES:

I thank you, Mr. Speaker, for the information; I am following the very same procedure which has been known to exist here for a great many years. But I am entitled on a question of privilege to show that my statement in this House has not been contradicted here today by the statement made by the Prime Minister. There are a couple of other points but I shall not press them as a matter of privilege. I shall take an opportunity of putting them in the form of a question. I desire to ask the Prime Minister if .he has any statement to make with regard to Col. Wilson.

Sir ROBERT BORDEN:

No, I wrote my hon. friend a letter on. that matter. I will give the House the information if my hon. friend desires.