Hon. HLTGH GUTHRIE (Minister of Militia and Defence):

I beg to move, Mr. Speaker, seconded by Hon. Mr. Crothers:

_ That a special committee be appointed to consider and report upon the question of what memorials, if any, should he erected on the battlefields of the late war to commemorate the gallantry of the Canadian troops and all matters arising out of or connected with the same, and that Messrs. Mewburn, Clark (Red Deer), Le-mieux, Bfiland, McCurdy, Peck, Mowat, Power

and Blake be the members of such committee, with power to sit during the sessions of the House.

He said: As the House is no doubt aware, during the past year, eight sites have been selected in France and Flanders for the purpose of erecting memorials to commemorate the victories of Canadian soldiers during the Great War. These sites which have be.en selected are in respect of the battles which are now known, and which will be known to history, under the following names:

1. St. Julien, a battle which was fought during the month of April, 1915, and also known as the second battle of Ypres.

2. The battle of Passehendaele, -a battle which extended from the 22nd October to the 17th November, 1917.

3. The battle of Observatory Ridge, sometime known as the battle of St. Eloi, which extended from May until June in the year 1916.

4. The battle of Viiny Ridge which took place on the 9th April, 1917, and continued till May 3 following.

5. The battle of Arras which took place during the months of August and September. 1918.

6. The battle of Bourlon Wood which took place on September 27, 1918.

7. The battle of Courcelette, which was part of the great battle of the Somme, fought during the months of September and October, 1916.

8. The battle of Amiens which took place during the months of August and September, 1918.

These eight sites have been acquired partly by purchase and partly by contributions from the Governments of France and Belgium. One site in particular has been contributed iby a private gentleman in France, Count de Francqville. As the House is aware $500,000 was placed in the Estimates last year for the purpose of erecting memorials. I think the only part of this money expended has been a payment of about $1,500 which was the net cost to Canada of acquiring these sites. All of these sites have now been conveyed to the Government of Canada. As the House is aware, in the Estimates of this year the only sum mentioned for this purpose is $10,000. That is to carry on the necessary work of survey, road construction, and the like. The Government deems it proper to ask the House to take the ^whole question into consideration, and for this purpose that a special committee of nine members be now appointed who will go fully into the facts and determine upon some general policy for the

erection of permanent memorials. It is for the appointment of such a committee that the motion is now made.

Rt. Hon. Mr. DOHERTY:

The facts appear to be that Mr. Cimon, without authority or instructions from the Government, demanded and received from the defaulters referred to certain sums of money adjudged to be paid by the convicting magistrate as costs to which in the opinion of the Department of Justice he was not legally entitled. Any right of action to compel reimbursement of those sums would belong to the parties from whom they were obtained and not to the Government of Canada. The Minister did not state and is not aware of the amounts in question. The minister caused Mr. Cimon to be informed that it was in the minister's opinion, his duty to refund these amounts to the persons from whom he received them. The case seems to be one calling for the attention of the Bar to which Mr. Cimon belongs.

1. A soldier who served with the Canadian Expeditionary Force in Bermuda is considered a "returned soldier." He holds the same position in that respect as a soldier who only saw service in England; and is entitled to a Class "C" Badge.

2. Where two candidates are considered to be at all points on a parity, if one is a

civilian and the other has voluntarily enlisted and been drafted to Bermuda, the latter would be giifen the preference.

1. What amount has been paid by the National Transcontinental Railway, in 1919, for the rent of rolling stock, from the Intercolonial railway and other roads?

2. What amount has been paid by the National Transcontinental Railway, in 1919, to the Intercolonial Railway for repairs to rolling stock?

3. What amount has been paid by the National Transcontinental Railway, in 1919, to the Canadian Pacific Railway for use of their terminal at Quebec?

4. What amount has been paid by the National Transcontinental Railway, in 1919, to the Quebec Harbour Commission for use of Quebec docks and elevator?

5. What amount has been paid by the National Transcontinental Railway, in 1919, to the Grand Trunk Railway for use of Fort William branch?

6. What amount has been paid by the National Transcontinental Railway, in 1919, to the Ontario Government Railway for use of its line from Cochrane to North Bay?

1. The National Transcontinental railway is operated as part of the Canadian Government Railway system, said railway bearing its proportion of the cost of repairs, etc., to equipment.

2. Cost of maintenance and equipment charged to National Transcontinental for year 1919 was, $2,822,010.17.

3. Amount of Canadian Pacific charges for use of Quebec terminal for the year 1919 was, $131,015.97.

4. The amount paid to the Quebec Harbour Commission for the use of Quebec docks and elevator for the year 1919 was, $10,345.60.

5. The yearly rental of the Lake Superior branch is $600,000, and said amount has been applied against the amount due the Canadian Government Railways by the Grand Trunk Pacific Railway.

6. Traffic, both passenger and freight, is interchanged between the National Transcontinental and the Temiskaming and Northern Ontario Railway; the earnings derived therefrom Ibeing apportioned (on mileage basis, as usually employed between railways in proportion to the freight and passenger tolls.

1. Is it the policy or intention of the Government to transfer to Alberta, Saskatchewan and Manitoba their natural resources?

.1462

2. If so, how long has this been the policy of the Government?

3. Is Parliamentary action necessary to effect such transfer?

4. If so, will such action be taken (luring this session?