Mr. FORTIN (Translation):

. .or Lotbiniere to Arthabaska.

Mr. VERVILLE (Translation):

In the first place, you should address the Chair when you speak in this house- You have made a statement on your honour. Perhaps my word is worth that of the member for Levis.

A MEMBER (Translation): Hear, hear.

Mr. VERVILLE (Translation):

I maintain that there was no reference in these conversations to the Chaudiere river and that St-Nicholas, St-Etienne and St-Lambert were alone mentioned.

Mr. FORTIN (Translation):

You admit

that the parishes of St-Etienne, St-Nicholas and St-Lambert were mentioned, but not St-Redempteur. Well, is it possible to annex these three parishes without including St-Redempteur, which is bounded on the west by St-Nicholas, on the south by St-Etienne, on the north by St-Nicholas and on the east by the Chaudiere river. . . .

Mr. BARRETTE (Translation):

It is

bounded all around.

Mr. FORTIN (Translation):

Would there

be any means of communication between St-Redempteur and the county of Levis? There could be none. How, then could you annex these three parishes from Levis county without taking in St-Redempteur, which is surrounded by the parishes you yourself have requested?

Mr. POULIOT (Translation):

Mr. Chairman. would you kindly render a Solomonic judgment in order to determine which of the two hon. members is telling the truth.

Mr. MERCIER (Translation):

It is a most involved matter.

Mr. VERVILLE (Translation):

I must say that I never, under any circumstances, asked for these parishes. I simply told you, when I met you, that if Lotbiniere county had to be enlarged, it would be rational to add to it the parishes of St-Nicholas, St-Etienne and St-Lambert. St-Redempteur was never mentioned and I never asked for those parishes which form part of Levis county. I demand a retraction.

Mr. FORTIN (Translation):

I beg your

pardon, you did ask for them; I call to witness the deputy-speaker of the house.

The CHAIRMAN (Translation):

Order.

Hon. members must not address each other; they must address the Chair.

Mr. POULIOT (Translation):

He is the

judge; he cannot be a witness.

Mr. VERVILLE (Translation):

I maintain that I never asked for any parish from Levis and that I never signed any arrangement in that connection. Furthermore, I never agreed that the four parishes from Levis county that are presently being transferred to Lotbiniere form part of the latter without my consent. I told the hon. member for Levis that if it were desired to enlarge the county of Lotbiniere the natural way would be to annex to it the parishes of St-Nicholas, St-Etienne and St-Lambert- There was no mention of St-Redempteur. No reference was ever made to the river, nor to the removal of the boundaries in order to form an enclosed territory as the hon. member for Levis has just said.

Mr. POULIOT (Translation):

That is

true.

Mr. BARRETTE (Translation):

It is not a river, it is a brook.

Mr. MERCIER:

(Translation): Let us

dump all that into the Chaudiere and get on with the bill.

Mr. FORTIN (Translation):

Mr. Chairman, I call you to witness; you were there.

I hope that when you leave the Chair you will kindly bear testimony.

Mr. POULIOT (Translation):

The hon.

member for St-Henri and I were present at all the conversations and it is the member for Lotbiniere who is right.

Mr- MERCIER (St-Henri) (Translation):

I do not recall the matter exactly, but it is highly involved. Let us dump it all into the Chaudiere and get on with our business.

Mr. VERVILLE (Translation):

I hold

the hon. member for Levis in high esteem; I am aware of all the annoyances he has suffered since his election. . .

Mr. LAPOINTE (Translation):

He has

suffered annoyances?