Mr. J. A. DENIES (St. Denis):

Mr. Speaker, some weeks ago I asked the Prime Minister to lay on the table of the house correspondence between him and Mr. George C. Vaudrin. I should like to know if tihe right hon. gentleman has that information.

Right Hon. R. B. BENNETT (Prime Minister) :

I understand they did not find any

correspondence in the office, but I shall have it looked into again. I personally have no recollection of it, but there is a very large body of correspondence and I shall have another search made for it.

CAIRO POSTAL CONGRESS On the orders of the day:

Mr. JEAN-FRANCOIB POULIOT (Temis-oouata): Whereas, on February 27, at page

C.N.R.-Branch Lines

979 of Hansard in answer to a question about the Cairo postal congress the Prime Minister said:

Wherever the Postmaster General may be I am sure that upon his return he will satisfy the very laudable curiosity of the hon. gentleman.

and whereas on March 8, at page 1434 of Hansard, under the heading "Adjournment- Business of the House " the Prime Minister said:

Mines and immigration were opened' and agriculture was opened. There are post office, interior and fisheries. Whichever is most acceptable and best suited to the convenience of the opposition we shall take.

therefore may I ask, sir, if it is the intention of the government to have the post office estimates passed before the return of the Postmaster General, and if that is the reason why the Postmaster General has been playing hide and seek in three continents, namely, Asia, Africa and Europe?

Mr. THOMAS REID (New Westminster):

Mr. Speaker, I should like to ask a question *of the Minister of Railways and Canals. A report has reached me from British Columbia to the effect that abandonment of the main line of the Canadian National railway from Hope west to Vancouver has been under consideration. I should like to ask if the minister has any information in that connection, or if the statement is correct?

Hon. R. J. MANION (Minister of Railways and Canals):

I have never heard of it before, so I really know nothing about it.

Oh, oh.

Mr. McINTOSH:

Surely you do not wish me to modify my question, do you? May I say I have a letter from a leading business man in North Battleford to the effect that a statement was current throughout the district that the railway from Frenchman's Butte to Elk Point in Alberta, and from St. Walburg north to Edmonton, will be

[Mr. Pouliot.l

completed this summer. May I ask the minister if he is in a position to make a statement to parliament in connection with these two important northwestern lines?

Hon. R. J. MANION (Minister of Railways and Canals):

We will not know anything about the plans of the Canadian National railways until their estimates are before the house. In the near future their estimates will be before us and we will know more about it then. Up to the present, however, I know nothing about their suggested plans concerning the completion of lines in the west.

Mr. J. S. WOODSWORTH (Winnipeg North Centre):

"Are we in danger of

Fascism in Canada?" is a question sometimes asked among the workers. Thinking in terms of brown shirts, parades and salutes I would say no, but when I come to a measure of this kind I am rather doubtful. In the days of the Romans we are told it was their practice to erect two upright spears, then place one transversely upon them and force their conquered enemies to pass under the spears, sub jugum-under the yoke-and usually a heavy tribute was exacted from the conquered enemies. It would seem to me that in the bill now before us we are arranging for the people of Canada to pass under the yoke, and if the bill is passed they must expect to pay a heavy tribute in the years to come.

For years we have had in this country a financial dictatorship but it has been somewhat concealed. By this legislation, instead of challenging that dictatorship, we are in reality legalizing and stabilizing it. The Finance minister warns us against any possible delay in giving the people the benefits of a central bank. I would say that the people have waited for some years for a central bank, and I think they can afford to wait a little longer rather than that we should saddle this country with what I regard as a private tyranny.

The bill provides for the creation of a private central bank. The amendment which we moved from this corner would seek to alter that so as to make the bank a public bank, but that amendment has been ruled out of order. Under those circumstances I think I must join with my hon. friend from Bow River (Mr. Garland) and take the position that the only course for us is to vote against

Bank of Canada-Mr. Woodsworth

this bill. I cannot see how we can possibly separate the bill from its contents. The main principle of the bill is that the bank shall be a privately owned institution. That is the proposal which comes before us. Could we have altered that to a publicy owned bank I would gladly have voted for the bill.

Let me point out that we do not object to a commission or board with wide powers, but we do object to the setting up of a body independent of and superior to the authority of parliament. I must quote again the statement of the Finance minister in reply to a question by my colleague from Wetaskiwin (Mr. Irvine) because I do not think it can be broadcast too widely. He asked:

Supposing the central bank was endeavouring to regulate the control of credit in Canada, and supposing the policy it adopted in order to do so was contrary to the policy of the government of the day and they clashed, which official would make the decision?

The answer of the Finance minister was: Unquestionably the authority of the governor and the board of directors of the bank would prevail.

Here we have the unequivocal statement that we are at the moment being asked to erect a body whose decision would be superior to that of the government, It is an abdication of the powers of parliament. The Finance minister in order to try to justify his position is driven to the most specious reasoning. He refers to the board of railway commissioners. I submit that there is no such sovereign power given to the board of railway commissioners. It is true that they are free from everyday interference in the carrying on of their work, as undoubtedly this bank should be,, but still the great railway policies of this country are decided, not by the board of railway commissioners, but by this parliament. I recall that a few years ago, even with regard to a specific matter, that of the Crowsnest pass agreement, this parliament overrode the decision of the railway commission, and last year the special railway legislation which was passed surely indicated the supreme power of this parliament.

The Finance minister also referred to the tariff board, but again I point out that there is no sovereign authority in the tariff board. The tariff board does not override the decisions of this house. It may perform a valuable function, but still its reports go to the government. The government assumes responsibility, and we ratify or reject the measures that are in consequence brought down.

Mr. BENNETT:

Would it interfere with

the hon. gentleman if I asked him a question?

Mr. WOODSWORTH:

Certainly not.