Mr. THOMAS VIEN (Lotbiniere):

I move that the select standing committee on Banking and Commerce be instructed to lay on the Table of the House as an appendix to their sixth report, the minutes and proceedings of all their sittings during the present session prior to the adoption of the said report.

1. Having reference to Return No. 266, calling for all correspondence in reference to the removal of the fisheries office from Vancouver, did the Superintendent of Fisheries, Mr. Found, receive a report from Mr. Motherwell, fisheries official at Vancouver?

Questions

2. Did the fisheries superintendent or Department of Fisheries receive extensive correspondence having vital bearing on the proposed closing of this office?

3. Did any of the officials of the department, or the Minister of Marine and Fisheries, receive correspondence from firms engaged in the canning industry, or from organizations representing the fishing industry?

4. Did the Minister of Marine and Fisheries, or officers of his department, receive letters from the hon. member for Skeena or the hon. member for Chilliwack, regarding the closing of this office?

5. Did the Minister of Marine and Fisheries, or an official of his department, receive representations verbally from the member from Skeena dealing with the matter and urging the closing of same?

6. If so, what was the purport of said verbal representations and did he support or oppose removal of said office? .

7. What was the reason for not replying to the motion of the House on May 19th for full return of the complete correspondence and was any of the above mentioned correspondence marked "confidential," and if so, what?

1. Communications relative to the closing of the Fisheries office at Vancouver were received by Mr. Found from Mr. Motherwell as follows: (a) March 21 last, forwarding clipping from Vancouver Sun; (b) March 26, forwarding clipping from the Cowichan Leader; (c) March 27, forwarding clipping from the Victoria Times; (d) March 28, forwarding clippings from the Victoria Colonist and Vancouver Sun; (e) March 29, forwarding clipping from the Vancouver Evening Sun; (f) March 31, forwarding clipping from the Vancouver Province; (g) April 5, forwarding clipping from the Vancouver Province; (h) April 9, forwarding clipping from the Vancouver Sun; (i) April 8, forwarding clipping from the Vancouver Evening Sun; (j) May 14, forwarding clippings from the New Westminister British Columbia and the Province; (k) May 19, forwarding clipping from the Province; (1) May 13, enclosingwhat purported to be copies of private letters alleged to have been written and received by Inspector Halladay of New Westminster, which he states were delivered to him anonymously; (m) May 16, enclosing a further instalment of correspondence referred to in (1); (n) May 19, enclosing a further instalment of correspondence referred to in (1) and (m); (o) May 16, forwarding a

clipping from the British Columbian stating that the office of Inspector Halladay of New Westminster had been entered during his absence and certain private correspondence taken.

2. Yes.

3. Yes.

4. No.

5. The member for Skeena communicated verbally to the Minister of Marine and

Fisheries the substance of that portion of his speech in parliament dealing with the matter.

6. See Hansard of March 6 last.

7. Eeason for not replying fully to the motion of the 19th May in the first instance was that the greater part of the correspondence had not been properly filed. The whole of the correspondence has now been produced.

1. What quantity of rolling stock, equipment and material was imported by the Canadian National Railways for its use during 1922 and 1923, and what was the amount of duty paid?

2. What (approximate) percentage of the total purchases of rolling stock, equipment and material respectively was imported?

Hon. Mr. GRAHAM:

Mr. Speaker, in

reply to the first part of this question, there was no rolling stock imported. With reference to the last part, some working equipment not made in Canada was imported, but to get the information asked would require the examination of innumerable accounts running back into the old Grand Trunk days, because the Grand Trunk was not amalgamated with the Canadian National Railways until early in 1923. Perhaps my hon. friend would see his way clear to accept that answer. It is the only answer I have at the present time.

Mr. CAMPBELL:

That will be quite

satisfactory, Mr. Speaker.

1. Has the government under consideration the building of any additional mercantile ships?

2. If so, is it intended to build one at Prince Rupert?

3. What would be the cost of building at Prince Rupert as compared with the purchase price of a ship of equal value built in Great Britain?

Hon. Mr. GRAHAM:

I understand the

Canadian National Railway Company has been considering the advisability of having a ship constructed for their Pacific business. The government has not under consideration the purchase of any addition to its mercantile marine.