Mr. J. T. THORSON (Winnipeg South Centre):

With reference to the schedule to

the customs tariff, referred to by the Minister of Finance in his budget speech yesterday, and with a view to facilitating a study of the tariff changes which have been proposed, I desire to ask the Minister of Finance if he would be good enough to prepare and place on Hansard a comparative table showing the old rates and the proposed new rates where changes have been made.

Hon. J. A. ROBB (Minister of Finance):

I may tell my hon. friend that the officers-of the department are now preparing a complete statement such as he requests for the use of the minister in committee. I imagine it is almost complete now, and just as soon as it is finished I will be glad to lay it on the table in order that it may be inserted in Hansard.

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR On the orders of the day:

Hon. R. B. BENNETT (Leader of the Opposition):

I would like to ask the Minister of the Interior (Mr. Stewart) whether Mr. Trade Mark Act

Alexander Smith, K.C., has prepared a report upon the matters he was investigating in connection with the Department of the Interior, and if so, whether the report will be laid upon the table at an early date.

Hon. CHARLES STEWART (Minister of the Interior):

My information is that the

report is almost complete. I cannot say exactly when it will be finished, but as soon as it is ready I will lay it on the table.

Mr. H. B. ADSHEAD (East Calgary):

I

would like to ask the Postmaster General if he has received from the Civil Service Commission any information with regard to the proposed reclassification of the letter carriers, and if so, if he will lay it on the table.

Hon. P. J. VENIOT (Postmaster General):

That matter is now before the Civil Service Commission and is receiving their attention. There has been no reclassification made as yet.

REST1GOUCHE RIVER-SMELT SEASON On the orders of the day:

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

Yesterday in my absence from the house the hon. member for Royal (Mr. Jones) referred to the situation with regard to the smelt fishing season, particularly on the Restigouche river. I may tell my hon. friend that no extension of the smelt fishing season has been granted this year in Quebec or any other province. Of course the fisheries of the province of Quebec are administered by the provincial authorities, but the granting of an extension of any season is within the power of the federal government. We have not granted any such extension, and if any fishing is being carried on beyond the limits of the season it is being done illegally. At all events, we are making inquiries of the provincial government with regard to the real situation, and we will see if the officials are keeping on the job.

TRADE MARK AND DESIGN ACT On the order:

Hon. FERNAND RINFRET (Secretary of State):

Mr. Speaker, with the unanimous consent of the house I would move that Bill No. 8 to amend the Trade Mark and Design Act be referred back to the committee of the whole.

Motion agreed to and the house went into committee, Mr. Johnston in the chair.

On section 1-Minister may refuse to register trade mark in certain eases.

Mr. RINFRET:

This section sets forth

two additional reasons why the minister may refuse to register any trade mark or union label. The object, as I explained when the bill was before the committee previously, is to bring our act into line with the decisions made at The Hague conference, where it was decided that we should not grant trade marks which constituted a reproduction or imitation liable to create confusion with the trade mark of another unionist country. In subsection (f) the following words appear:

with a trade mark known to be the mark of a national of another country -

It has been represented to me that it would be better to have that more clearly defined, and that we should adopt the exact wording of the decision arrived at at The Hague. I therefore move that the words " known to be " be struck out and that there be substituted therefore the words " which is considered by the competent authority to be well known in Canada as ".

Mr. BENNETT:

I am inclined to think that perhaps the sense of The Hague convention -would be better met by specifying the competent authority in this country. The words " competent authority " were used at The Hague in order to meet the requirements of all nations, but as each nation has its competent authority designated by statute, might it not be better to express in our act the name of the competent authority, which in this case I believe is a judge of the exchequer court.

Mr. RINFRET:

Our competent authority under that section would be the commissioner.

Mr. BENNETT:

Yes, subject to appeal.

The CHAIRMAN:

Shall the amendment

cany?

Mr. BENNETT:

If the minister will look

at subsection (f) he will observe this wording:

If the trade_ mark constitutes a reproduction or imitation liable to create confusion with a trade mark known to be the mark of a national of another country which by treaty-

And so on. Now in article 6 of The Hague convention the words used are, "a trade mark considered by the competent authority of the country of registration to be well known" and so on. If we use the words suggested in the amendment I think it may be open to much confusion, and it might therefore be desirable to adopt the expression "known or

Supply-Agriculture

established to the satisfaction of the commissioner to be the mark of a national of another country" or something of that sort. I think if you leave the matter in the terms in which you now have it the law may become very much confused. Has the minister considered the question of designating a competent authority?

have the section perfectly dear, and at the same time to meet the desire of the hon. member for Lincoln (Mr. Chaplin) that the trade mark should be known in Canada. Therefore I will move that we strike out the words "known to be" and insert the words "well known in Canada as."