1. What is the total amount paid or payable for the services of the several Exemption Tribunals in the County of L'Assomption-Montealm?

2. What amount has been, or is still, payable to each of these tribunals for rent, fees for judges and salaries of other employees?

3. What are the names and addresses of the persons who have been so paid or to whom amounts are still due?

4. What amount has been paid', or is still due. to each of these persons, and for what service?

Hon, Mr. DOHERTY:

1 and 2. Tribunal No. 129, $542.50; tribunal No. 130, $349.16; tribunal No. 156,

$457; tribunal No. 157, $65; tribunal No. 158, $516.65; tribunal No. 159, $256.68.

3. Tribunal No. 129: J. E. Duhamel, TAssomption, Que., services of member, $50; J. S. Rivest, TAssomption, Que., services of member and stationery, $122; Louis Potras, TAssomption, Que., services of constable, $58; E. Marcelois, TAssomption, Que., services of member, $120; corporation TAssomption, TAssomption, Que., rent and beating, $120; Jules Jairy, TAssomption, Que., services clerk, $72.50. Total, $542.50.

Tribunal No. 130: D. Locat, Laurentides, Que., services of clerk, $60; L. Desmaris, Laurentides, Que., services of member, $120; G. Brossard, Laurentides, Que., services of member, stationery and postage, $126.16; corporation Ville de Laurentides, Que., rent, $40; Jos. Paquette, Laurentides, Que., services of constable, $53. Total $349.16.

Tribunal No. 156: J. H. Lesage, St. Jacques, Que., services of member, stationery and postage, $160; J. A. D. Forrest, St. Jacques, Que., rent, $80; Albert Dugas, St. Jacques, Que., services of constable, $62; J. B. Dugas, St. Jacques, Que., services of member, $155. Total, $457.

Tribunal No. 157: D. Beauchamp, St. Donat, Que., services of member and rent, $40; J. H. Lavoie, St. Donat, Que., services of member, $25. Total, $65.

Tribunal No. 158: John Copping, St. Patrick de Rawdon, Que., services of member, $150; Ed. Morin, Rawdon, Que., services of member, $150; J. B. Morin, Rawdon, Que., services of clerk, rent, postage, etc., $216.65. Total, $516.65.

Tribunal No. 159: J. A. Perrault, services of member, $79.18; Jos. Beaudry, services of member, $75; I. Beaudry, services of secretairy, $37.50; Emile Efhier, services of constable, $30; E. Ethier, rent and caretaking, $35. Total, $256.68.

4. All accounts received from the above tribunals have been passed for payment, but amounts due cannot be ascertained until further accounts have been reoeived.

1. Have all the Judges of Exemption Tribunals established under the Military Service Act, 1917, been paid the fees to which they are entitled in connection with their work?

2. If not, when does the Government intend to settle with them?

1. All accounts received have been paid or are in course of audit and payment.

2. Any accounts not paid will be paid as soon as the amount justly chargeable can be ascertained.

M. D. No. 4 ADVANCES.

1. Has the attention of the Minister of Militia and Defence been called to the two items which appear in Vol. 4 of the Auditor General's Report, recently tabled, under the expenditure for the Fourth Military Divisional Area (Montreal) : Capt. W. H. Suckling, advance unaccounted for, $5,500, Hon. Lt.-Col. Du Verger, advance unaccounted for, $1,000'?

2. Have the above amounts unaccounted for been remitted?

3. If so. when?

Major-General MEWBURN:

1. These two items represent advances on account of recruiting expenses, 242nd Battalion, $5,500; 150th Battalion, $1,000. Both items have been under observation. Capt. Suckling has submitted vouchers which were returned for correction on February 27th last, to the headquarters of the Battalion in France. The Paymaster, Military District No. 4, submitted vouchers from Lt.-Col. Du Verger on 18th March last, for additional information. No replies have come to hand in either case. A reminder has been sent out in both cases.

2. No.

3. Answered by No. 2.

1. Has the Government suppressed or Forbidden the circulation of a book or pamphlet edited by the Rev. Benjamin Spence, Toronto, containing an article wholly or in part written by Arthur Mee. on Temperance?

2. Was such book or pamphlet printed in the city of Toronto?

3. Was any member of the Government aware of the fact that such book or pamphlet was being prepared, before the same was in print?

4. What action has the Government taken to suppress such book or pamphlet?

5. Will the Government produce the said book or pamphlet for the information of the members of the House?

6. Is a criminal proceeding now pending against the Rev. Benjamin Spence for publish-

ing and circulating such book or pamphlet? If so, what are the grounds for such criminal proceedings?

7. Was the said book or pamphlet published or circulated by the Rev. Benjamin Spence with the knowledge or sanction of any member of the Government?

S. If so, what member of the Government was aware of its publication or circulation?

9. Has the said Rev. Benjamin Spence or any of his friends interviewed or conferred with any members of the Government regarding the criminal proceedings now proceeding against the said Rev. Benjamin Spence? If so, w'hat took place at such interview or interviews?

10. Has the said Rev. Benjamin Spence written or communicated with the Premier or any members of the Government regarding the criminal proceedings which are now pending? If so, what was the nature of such communication?

11. Did any members of the Government answer in w'riting any of the written communications received in connection with the book from'the Rev. Benjamin Spence, or any of his friends? If so, what wag the nature of the replies ?

12. Has any member of the Government interviewed or conferred with the Censor regarding the said book or pamphlet edited by the said Rev. Benjamin Spence?

13. Did the Censor make any report to the Government for the suppression of the said book or pamphlet? If so, what was the nature of the report?

1. Yes.

2. Yes.

3. No.

4. Suppressed under the authority of the Censorship Regulations.

5. As distribution of the hook was prohibited it is obviously undesirable to have it produced.

6. It is understood that the local authorities instituted proceedings.

7. No.

8. Answered by No. 7.

9 and 10. A lawyer representing Mr. Spence saw the Minister of Justice and suggested that in view of Mr. Spence's submission to the Order criminal proceedings be dropped, and was informed that action in such a matter was a question for the Attorney General of the province and the Government had no desire to interfere.

11. Various letters were received and some answered. It was pointed out to Mr. Spence that it was not considered desirable to remove the decision arrived at.

12. The Chief Censor conferred with the Secretary of State and recommended the suppression of the book.

13. Answered by No. 12. .

Hon. Mr. BURRELL:

1, 2, 3, 4. Matters of the character alluded to aie necessarily confidential.

5. The Government has no such information.

6. Yes:

7. SI,322.93.

1. Has the attention of the Government been drawn to an article in the Montreal Star of April 27, 1918, under the heading:

"My Canadian Visit-Continued."

"/By the Right Hon. Sir Frederick Smith, Bart., His Majesty's Atttoi'ney-General, Treasurer of Gray's Inn, Hon. Fellow of Wad-ham College, Oxford", and containing the following:.-

"Thursday, January 2'4.-In tihe morning we skated again.

"We lunched at the new hotel, the 'Chateau Laurier,' with the members of the Canadian Club. Judge Duff, one of the ablest members of the Bench, who is to-day sitting in Anal appeal over the decisions of the tribunals in the Province of Quebec, was in the Chair, Sir Robert Borden and many other ministers were present."

2. Did any member of the Government inform Sir Freedrick Smith that Judge Duff ) c 1 to

deal only with appeals from the Province of Quebec ?

3. Was any such instruction or direction given Judge Puff as Central Appeal Judge under the Military Service Act?

4. If so, wliat other Judge was appointed to deal with appeals from the other provinces?