Hon. H. H. STEVENS (VancouverCentre):

Mr. Speaker, just before the house closed last night, I made a brief explanation as to an error in the recording of the vote, and I have found since that it will be necessary for me to make a motion in order to correct the record.

Mr. McliNTOSH: A complicated situation.

Mr. STEVENS:

Very complicated. I desire to move:

That the Clerk of the House be instructed to strike out the name of Mr. Chaplin and that of Mr. Stevens from the "yeas" in the vote taken on the 25th March, instant, as recorded in the votes and proceedings, on the motion of Mr. McMillan in amendment to the second reading of Bill No. 20, an act to provide in the province of Ontario for the dissolution and annulment of marriage.

I do not suppose any further word of explanation is required. This occurred through a lack of proper attention to the vote being taken.

Mr. SPEAKER:

We have no standing

order covering this particular situation. But the following appears in Bourinot at page 382: If a member who has heard the question put in the Commons should vote inadvertently, contrary to his intention, he cannot be allowed to correct the mistake, but his vote must remain as first recorded.

By our standing order 1 the rales of the British House of Commons are followed when there is no special standing order of this house to govern a particular case. The British parliament has allowed the correction of a vote, and this point is covered by Campion, the latest authority, at page 156, who says:

It also occasionally happens that a member in the course of a division finds himself voting in the wrong lobby. If he defers raising the matter until after the division, the inference from the precedents is that his request for the correction of his error will be refused. If, on the other hand, he proceeds to vote in the other lobby as well, there are precedents in favour of the rectification of the division list at his request, made at a later opportunity on the same day or even on a subsequent day.

Therefore, the motion would appear to be in order. Is it the pleasure of the house to adopt the motion?

1. How many horses were owned by the Dominion government at the Sorel shipyards in the calendar years 1926, 1927, 1928 and 1929?

2. How many horses were actually owned by the Dominion government at the Sorel shipyards on the first of February, 1930?

3. How many tons of bay and how many bushels of oats were bought yearly for the government shipyards at Sorel. in the calendar years 1926, 1927, 1928 and 1929?

4. What is the total amount paid for hay and oats by the government, for the Sorel shipyards, during the calendar years 1926, 1927, 1928 and 1929?

1. 1926, five owned and five hired; 1927, five owned and five hired; 1928, four owned and five hired; 1929, three owned and five hired.

2. Three.

Hay Oats

tons lbs. bushels

1926.. .. .. 42 1358 1349-14/361927.. .. .. 32 605 596-13/361928.. .. .. 99 98 1936-29/361929.. .. .. 46 320 1381-16/36Hay Oats1926.. .. .. ..$ 568 97 $ 858 131927..* .. .... 407 70 409 131928.. .. .... 1,322 74 1.604 361929.. .. .. .. 630 17 1,054 35$2,929 58 $3,925 97

Mr. CANTLEY:

From what country in Europe and from what port in said country was the foreign coal shipped which was stored on pier 9, Halifax, during calendar year 1929?

Mr. LAPOINTE (for Mr. Cardin):

I regret that the fourth part of the answer given to the hon. gentleman's question on page 544 of unrevised Hansard is not correct. I am now informed by the Halifax hahbour commissioners that the countries of origin of the coal should be "Canada and United States", and that the coal which came from the United States was shipped from Norfolk, Virginia.

1. Is there a night watchman employed at the marine agency in Victoria, B.C?

2. If so, what is his name, date of employment, and salary?

3. How many hours a day does he w;ork in the twenty-four?

4. How many nights a week does he work?

5. Is he on duty on Sunday night of each week? If so, what is the necessity therefor?

Questions