Mr. R. B. HANSON (York-Sunbury):

Before the Orders of the Day are called I have a question to ask of the Minister of Public Works (Mr. King), and a request to make. Yesterday at question time the Minister of Public Works asked that question No. 28, standing in my name, should stand as an order for return. The motion carried while I was temporarily out of the chamber, and I wish now to ask him why a short, concise answer should not be given to this question forthwith. If it is desired to supplement the information, that could be done at a later date. I want to protest, against the motion which was passed-

Order.

Mr. SPEAKER:

I think I have already

explained to the House that the Speaker, by Rule 37, subsection 3, and the minister, by section 4 of the same rule, may ask that a question be answered in the form of a return. Here is the rule:

If a question is of such a nature that in the opinion of the minister who is to furnish the reply, such reply should be in the form of a return, arid the minister states that he has no objection to laying such return upon the Table of the House, his statement shall, unless otherwise ordered by the House, be deemed an order of the House to that effect and the same shall be entered in the Votes and Proceedings as such.

Business of the House

. BUSINESS OF THE HOUSE

Right Hon. ARTHUR MEIGHEN (Leader of the Opposition):

Mr. Speaker, I do not

understand the order paper to-day; it is most misleading. On page 3-

Mr. SPEAKER:

Perhaps out of courtesy

to the right hon. gentleman and the House I may say that a mistake has been made by the printer in inserting the first item under "Government Notices of Motions; it should have gone to another page under a different heading. The French edition is correct.

Mr. MEIGHEN:

It has misled hon. members on this side; it was the impression that with that kind of heading under Government Notices of Motions, the Prime Ministers motion regarding the treaty on alcoholic beverages would go into committee upon carrying. While I remember quite well that in the case of previous motions there was no committee, it would seem to me most appropriate that there should be. When a motion comes before the House of the significance of this motion, with no facility for general discussion, no privilege of question or of ascertaining the full effect of the proposal -for example, for the pressing of such questions as the hon. member for St. John (Mr Baxter) was prevented from putting-it does 4 p.m. not do justice to the hon. members of the House or to the subject itself.

I do not know that there is any method now of getting the resolution into committee. I would suggest that under the circumstances the government agree either that we go into committee upon the resolution or that the debate be adjourned until Monday, when we can take it up and conclude it. I am sure there are questions which hon. members desire to put and which in justice to the subject should be put and answered.

Mr. MACKENZIE KING:

I think that the procedure has been entirely regular, and that it is also in accordance with precedents followed by governments with which my right hon. friend has been connected. I have no desire to shut off any discussion. No doubt the questions which have been asked to-day may be asked on some other occasion in reference to some other matter. In fact, I think I have fully answered all questions that have been put. If there are other questions that hon. members desire to ask on the Orders of the Day, I shall be prepared to answer them.

Mr. MEIGHEN:

I am not disputing the regularity of the proceedings at all, but I was disputing the regularity of the order paper, which misled us. From the present form of the order paper one might readily conclude that we would go into committee.

Mr. MACKENZIE KING:

No.

Mr. MEIGHEN:

Well, here is the way it reads-I know it is a mix-up, but it could quite readily lead to a wrong conclusion:

February 28-The Minister of Marine and Fisheries -In Committee of the Whole-the following proposed

resolution:- . , ,

March 6-The Prime Minister-That it be resolved..

Mr. MACKENZIE KING:

I submit that I am not the Minister of Marine and Fisheries.

Mr. MEIGHEN:

I know that, but the

Prime Minister sees very readily that the resolution immediately following was his own.

It is a mix-up; it is a misprint; it is entirely wrong, and I am not attributing the fault to the government; but it is quite clear that the House could very readily be misled.

Mr. GAUVREAU:

The French version is all right; why do you not go by it? You speak French.

Mr. MEIGHEN:

I could read it, I think, but I cannot read both at once. My suggestion is that the debate be considered postponed until Monday. I do not see why that cannot be done, but if not, then let it be resumed this evening so that we may proceed with the discussion.

Mr. MACKENZIE KING:

I have no desire to do other than meet the wishes of hon. members. My right hon. friend usually reads with a great deal of care whatever is put before him. If the House is agreeable to it, I have no objection to resuming the debate now, and concluding it, but I do object to going on either to-night or on Monday. If it can be made regular to reopen the discussion at the moment, I am quite willing that that be done; otherwise I think the record should stand as it is.

Mr. SPEAKER:

As stated a moment ago

by the right hon. leader oi the opposition, the resolution is regularly where it should be though there is a misorint immediately before it. I felt myself during the debate a moment ago that the question was of such importance that I should relax the rule and let hon. members speak once, twice and even thrice as if it were in committee of the whole. The resolution was carried by the House and so declared, but of course the

Business of the House

House can always reverse its decision and order the Speaker not to consider the resolution as carried. I might perhaps remind hon. gentlemen that this resolution will come back to the House from the Senate, so there will be another opportunity to discuss it. It must be concurred in by the Senate. That is why the resolution is couched in the form in which it is: "That it be resolved by the House of Commons."

made application, but they asked that they be given an opportunity to make examination before finally deciding whether they wished to proceed on that application, and that has been granted.