1. What was the total amount paid in compensation in the province of Ontario for animals slaughtered under the Animals Contagious Disease Act, termed "The Health of Animals", in each of the years ending March 31, 1924. 1925, 1926, 1927, and 1928?

2. What amount of compensation was paid for cattle slaughtered as reactors to the TB test for tuberculosis in each year mentioned?

3. What amount w'as paid as compensation for pure-bred registered cattle, and average payment per head; also same for grade cattle?

4. What was the total amount paid in each year in salaries, wages and travelling expenses to officials of the Department of Agriculture in connection with the administration of the TB test for cattle in each year in the province of Ontario, and also in each year for the dominion?

Questions of Privilege

Mr. GARLAND (Bow River):

For a copy of all letters, telegrams, correspondence and/or documents of any character passing between the government of Canada and the government of Great Britain or any department thereof, in regard to the following resolutions, which passed both the Senate and the House of Commons of Canada:-

1. The resolution passed in 1920 which reads as follows: "Any enactment by the parliament of Canada otherwise within the legislative authority of that parliament shall operate and be deemed to have operated extra territorially according to its intention in like manner and to the same extent as if enacted by the parliament of the United Kingdom."

2. The resolution passed in 1924, which reads as follows: "Any enactment intra vires of the parliament of Canada if expressed to operate extra territorially shall be deemed to have had that operation in so far as it is a law for or ancillary to the peace, order and good government of Canada."

Mr. ANDERSON (Halton):

For a copy' of all correspondence, letters, telegrams, reports and other documents in connection with the appointment of a postmaster for the town of Burlington.

Mr. RENNIE:

For a copy of all correspondence, memoranda. and other documents exchanged between the Minister of the Department of Pensions and National Health, or any official of his department, and the Board of Pension Commissioners of Canada or any official thereof, relating to matters of administration, finance statistics, or files, since June, 1928, to the present date.

PRIVILEGE-MR. GLEN On the orders of the day:

Mr. J. A. GLEN (Marquette):

Mr. Speaker, I rise to a question of privilege. I find on page 707 of Hansard of March 5 the following statement made by the hon. member for Nelson (Mr. Bird):

He said that there was something more precious, more sacred than the concrete rights of the people of Manitoba. There was this abstract thing, he said, these provincial rights which have precedence; anything that returns to the people of Manitoba the abstract rights concerning their natural resources was worthy of his support, and I am willing, he said, to let the Seven Sisters go in order to get this abstract right.

Throughout the whole of that statement the hon. member is referring to me. I recall that when he was seconding the resolution which has been before the house for four days he took very high ground with regard to the ideals

of public life. I do think those ideals ought to carry with them some recognition of accuracy and veracity of statement. It will be noticed that this quotation from the hon. member's speech is not based on hearsay; it is a categorical statement of something which he alleges I said.

Now, Mr. Speaker, the other night when the Minister of Railways (Mr. Dunning) used the word "lie" you ruled that it was not a proper expression. I therefore refrain from using that word, but I do say that at no time have I ever stated to the hon. member for Nelson or to any other member of this house the words which I have just read from his speech, or any words which even the most vivid imagination could construe as such. I assert that the hon. member has given a statement to this house so contrary to every word I used, and so contrary to the spirit that actuated me throughout the whole matter, that I can only characterize it as being as false as sin.

Mr. T. W. BIRD (Nelson):

Mr. Speaker,

may I explain that the hon. gentleman is under a misapprehension. A reference to Hansard will confirm this. The words he has repeated to the house were not given by me as a quotation at all, and the Hansard reporter so dealt with them. Those words were never meant to be a literal representation of what the hon. gentleman said. They appear in Hansard, not in quotation marks, but in the same type as the rest of my speech, which makes it abundantly clear that I was giving my interpretation of what he said. So I do not think the hon. gentleman has any real occasion to rise up on his high horse of offended virtue.

Mr. A. A. HEAPS (North Winnipeg):

Mr. Speaker, I rise to a question of privilege and in the cause of accuracy of statement. I would point out that the hon. member for Nelson (Mr. Bird) did not second the resolution of my hon. friend from North Centre Winnipeg (Mr. Woodsworth) in connection with the disposition of natural resources.

Mr. SPEAKER:

Order.

Mr. HEAPS:

But, Mr. Speaker-

Mr. SPEAKER:

Order. There is no question of privilege.

Mr. HEAPS:

Then I rise to a point of

order. The hon. member for Marquette (Mr. Questions of Privilege

Glen) said that the hon. member for Nelson seconded the motion of my hon. friend from Winnipeg North Centre. He did not do so. The votes and proceedings will show that I was the one who seconded the motion.