1. How many demonstration farms were being operated prior to 1930 in the province of Quebec?

2. How many of these demonstration farms are being operated at the present time?

1. Demonstration farms are operated by the provincial government but the dominion Department of Agriculture operated forty-two illustration stations prior to 1930 in the prov-of Quebec.

2. Fifty-three illustration stations.

1. Was a survey made in the year 1936 by a representative of the Department of Mines and Resources of prospective sites for a national park in New Brunswick?

2. If so, what sites were surveyed, and where located in New Brunswick?

3. Was a report made to the commissioner of national parks, and, if so, in what order were the proposed sites recommended: (a) first choice; (b) second choice; (c) third choice, etc.?

1. Yes. A number of sites submitted by the province were examined in the year 1936.

2. Mount Carleton site in Northumberland and Victoria counties, a site in Albert county, and a site in Kings and Queens counties.

3. A report was made recommending the Mount Champlain site in Kings and Queens counties as first choice; the Lepreau site in Charlotte county (previously examined and reported upon) as second choice, and the Albert county site as third choice. This report, without being considered by the dominion government, was forwarded to the provincial government, as the latter must furnish free of charge the property covered by the site finally selected.

Sockeye Salmon Fisheries

Mr. DENTON MASSEY (Greenwood):

I rise to a question of privilege. At page 2096 of Hansard I read the following:

Only the other day the hon. member for Greenwood (Mr. Massey) referred to the bonus given to the farmers as a dole. If the hon. member did not hear that, I can assure him it was said.

That statement was made by the hon. member for Marquette (Mr. Glen). I was not present in the house at the time, and immediately following that statement my right hon. leader (Mr. Bennett) and the hon. member for Mount Royal (Mr. Walsh) endeavoured to convince the hon. member for Marquette that he was in error. At no time within this house or outside of it have I said anything that could possibly be construed as even insinuating what that remark suggests, and if the hon. member were in his seat I am sure he would be pleased to withdraw his statement.

Mr. MACKENZIE KING:

Mr. Chairman,

as the committee is aware the sockeye salmon fisheries convention between Canada and the United States for the protection, preservation and extension of the sockeye salmon fisheries in the Fraser river system was signed at Washington on the 26th May, 1930. The convention was subsequently confirmed and sanctioned by an act of this parliament, chapter 10 of 20-21 George V, during the session of 1930. Agreement, however, has not been reached to exchange ratifications, and the convention therefore has lain or in other words been inoperative for some seven years. At the moment we are faced with the necessity of considering whether or not the convention should be accepted subject to certain understandings which the senate of the United States desired to have declared in connection with the exchange of ratifications. The senate of the United States approved of the convention by the requisite two-thirds majority on June 16 of last year, subject, as I have said, to these understandings.

Mr. BENNETT:

Did they not call them reservations when they made them?