Mr. SPEAKER:

I have the honour to inform the House that a message has been received from the Senate acquainting this House that the Senate doth unite with the House of Commons, in the approval of the treaty for the suppression of smuggling operations along the international boundary between the Dominion of Canada and the United States, and assisting in the arrest and prosecution of persons violating the narcotic laws of either government and for kindred purposes, which was signed at Washington on the sixth day of June, one thousand nine hundred and twenty-four, and which was signed on behalf of His Majesty in respect of Canada by the plenipotentiary therein named, by filling in the blank space therein with the words "Senate and".

Annual Report of the Superintendent of Penitentiaries for the year ending December 31, 1924.-Hon. Mr. Lapointe.

Right Hon. W. L. MACKENZIE KING (Prime Minister):

I beg to lay on the table

such correspondence as has come to my office relating to representations on ocean rates requested by the right hon. leader of the opposition. I might say that there is a great deal of correspondence, I find, in the different departments, and it will take some days to get a copy of all the correspondence from the Department of Trade and Commerce. Some of the other departments have correspondence relating to this subject ready 68

to table to-day. When the right hon. gentleman made his request I immediately asked each department to expedite the return.

Hon. P. J. A. CARDIN (Minister of Marine and Fisheries):

I beg to lay on the table correspondence of the Department of Marine and Fisheries in regard to ocean freight rates.

Hon. GEORGE P. GRAHAM (Minister of Railways and Canals): I wish to lay on the table of the House, following the suggestion to the right hon. leader of the opposition, certain correspondence received by the Department of Railways concerning ocean rates. Considerable of this is inter-departmental correspondence, and I suppose some of these letters and memoranda will probably appear in the returns brought down from other departments. However, there may be some things here that are not included1 in the others.

Right Hon. ARTHUR MEIGHEN (Leader

of the Opposition): I did not quite catch

what that was.

Mr. GRAHAM:

This is following along the line of tabling all the correspondence in reference to ocean rates. These are letters received complaining of ocean rates, and a good many of them, I think, complaining of the rates on the merchant marine; that is the way they got to the Railway department. The unimportant part of the file is merely interdepartmental correspondence transferring correspondence from other departments to the Railway department.

Mr. MEIGHEN:

In this relation the government must be under a misapprehension as to what I asked for. I am sure Hansard will confirm what I say, when I give this confirmation of my request. What I asked was not the correspondence of individuals with the department, nor of companies nor anything else, nor with any department. I asked only for correspondence of the government, first of all between the previous government in 1920 and 1921 with the British government, or with the Imperial Shipping committee, in relation to ocean rates. Then yesterday I asked for similar correspondence between this government and the British government, or the Imperial Shipping committee, in relation to ocean rates. The return filed yesterday, or the day before, of a lot of correspondence with the Trade and Commerce department on the subject from individuals in Canada, as far as I could see, was in no way a compliance with my request. Similarly this that is filed to-day has nothing to do with my request. I have no objection to it being filed; it may be

104S

Copyright Act

necessary; but it has nothing to do with the correspondence I asked for.

Mr. MACKENZIE KING:

I must confess I thought that my right hon. friend wanted all the correspondence that dealt with the subject of ocean rates, and I have been trying to get all the correspondence together.

Mr. MEIGHEN:

I made myself clear again the day before yesterday. From the first that is all I have asked for.

Mr. W. G. RAYMOND (Brantford) moved:

That the report of the special committee appointed to consider and report upon Bill No. 2, an act to amend and make operative certain provisions of the Copyright Act, 1921, presented this day, be concurred in.

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

I was not quite certain, Mr. Speaker, whether you said the report was presented this day or not.

Mr. SPEAKER:

It was presented to the House two days ago. The hon. gentleman (Mr. Raymond) moved concurrence in the report on that occasion, but objection was taken, and notice was given.

Mr. MEIGHEN:

I do not rise to debate the merits of the report, because I want to frankly say I do not know what the report is; but I rise to take the same exception which I took last session to policies being adopted on motions, even after one day's notice, to concur in reports of committees. The committee's report should be used as a basis on which legislation may or may not be proposed, according as the government see fit. I do not think any one is prepared to debate the merits of copyright amendments now; the subject is very complicated. It is a subject which should be. introduced and placed before this House in the form of a measure, thereby giving the House all the opportunities for criticism and for review of its decision that a bill presents. If we now deal with the subject and the matter is closed just after one debate, we abandon all those safeguards which I think the House is entitled to.

Mr. RAYMOND:

I beg to say that the

report, which was read some two days ago when notice of this motion was given, was simply to the effect that the committee might have the authority of the House for the printing of the evidence before it and of its proceedings. That is all that is involved

in the report. I agree with the right hon. member for Grenville (Mr. Meighen) that it is necessary that important matters should receive the consideration of the House, but if he had noticed the report of the committee at the time it was presented he would have seen that what I have explained is all that is involved in it.

Mr. IRVINE:

At this end of the chamber we cannot hear what the report is about. As I am very much interested in the copyright question I should like to know what the report is that is being adopted.

Mr. RAYMOND:

The report was read,

as I stated, some two days ago, and it simply asked the permission and authority of the House to have its proceedings and evidence printed for the benefit of the members of the House and for the benefit of the members of the committee.

Mr. SPEAKER:

As a safeguard may I be

allowed to read the report itself which is very brief. It reads as follows:

Your committee, in accordance with the resolution which it has adopted, recommends that it be granted leave to print its proceedings and evidence, when deemed advisable, for the use of the committee and for the use of the members of this House; and that rule 74 in relation thereto be suspended.