Mr. MANION:

If anyone had taken your advice he would have lost a great deal of money.

Mr. SLAGHT:

You may be a gambler looking for advice; you may bet and lose, but you did not lose on any advice that I gave. I should not address the hon. member directly.

Mr. SPEAKER:

The hon. member should address the chair.

Mr. MANION:

I was too wise to take the advice.

The Budget-Mr. Slaght

Mr. SLAGHT:

I gave no advice of any kind. I repeat the advice that the hon. member for Vancouver-Burrard (Mr. McGeer) offered on one occasion, and if my hon. friend had followed it perhaps he would not have found himself in a great deal of trouble. The leader of the opposition treated the house to an allegory to-night when he likened the government to a bird. Since he has introduced bird life into the house, perhaps he will not complain if I refer to a rather famous bird known as the mugwump. The political definition of a mugwump is a man who owes allegiance to one political party, but when it suits him he deserts his political friends to go over to the enemy. I suppose my hon. friend would have justification for his remark. I see a similarity to the mugwump, he having once been a Liberal.

Mr. CASSELMAN:

Cheap.

Mr. SLAGHT:

He will probably listen to the school boy's definition of a mugwump, which has been put forth in Canada on previous occasions. I do not think my hon. friend can complain if I give this house and the country at large the yardstick which he has laid down in his little red book in connection with the tactics to be followed by an opposition when they desire to oppose a trade treaty or in connection with tariff matters. We all know that in the debate on the trade agreement my hon. friend led his little band, and thirty-two of them recorded their votes against the trade agreements made with Great Britain and the United States at the express request of both countries.

No.

Mr. SLAGHT:

The hon. members of the two other groups voted with the government, which is to their credit. They refused to follow the cheap party politics which were played in an endeavour to defeat that agreement. My hon. friend has laid down for himself and for the Conservative party which he leads, a rule of conduct in connection with trade and tariff matters. I should like to refer to page 266. This has not been revealed before, but here is what he says:

Conditions generally were somewhat depressed through 1924 and 1925, and the tariff question became a very prominent one in the discussions in and out of parliament.

And again:

But in 1924 and 1925 it particularly affected the relations between Canada and the United States, giving rise to exceedingly antagonistic feelings on the part of the Canadians toward their neighbours. We who composed the opposition-

That includes some of his illustrious front-bench friends. I take it that is their confession of faith.

Mr. MANION:

No; I take all the responsibility.

Mr. SLAGHT:

I have not heard them repudiate this doctrine. If ever it has been exemplified, it is in this present budget debate. I quote again:

We who composed the opposition took full advantage of the irritation, working day and night, in and out of parliament, advocating retaliatory treatment toward the United States.

Picture my hon. friend with his coat off at night along with the hon. member for St. Lawrence-St. George (Mr. Cahan) fanning the flame of the antagonism of the Canadian people toward their neighbours.

Mr. MANION:

Just nonsense.

Mr. SLAGHT:

My hon. friend says it is nonsense. Now he will have to get a third light, a yellow one. One time he is telling the truth; another time, on his own statement, he is romancing and telling what he knows to be untrue, and then, when he solemnly puts something in a book, we are to have a third classification, that it is nonsense. Let me tell my hon. friend that it is a dangerous kind of nonsense to put in a book to be read by the youth of Canada.

Mr. MANION:

Are you sure you bought it? Most members of the house borrowed it from the library.

Mr. SLAGHT:

The hon. gentleman will not draw me off my text with any such jocular remark as that. Is it just a joke with him when he says that they, as an opposition, finding antagonism in Canada to certain conditions, worked day and night, in and out of parliament, advocating retaliatory treatment and took full advantage of the irritation?

Mr. MANION:

Where are the cheers?

Mr. SLAGHT:

It is onty in keeping with the political training my hon. friend has had. He is a member of a party which in the old days said, "No truck or trade with the Yankee.'' He sat cheek-by-jowl for five years with his distinguished leader in the Manion-Bennett government and preached that goodwill doctrine of blasting Canada's way into the markets of the world. Is it any wonder that we find him exposing in the printed words the standards that he sets up and in which he apparently believes? As he says now, they are nonsense.

The Budget-Mr. Slaght

Mr. MANION:

What I said was nonsense was the suggestion that I had preached any antagonism to the United States when I was talking about trade. My hon. friend knows that. He is just using some of his usual lawyer tactics; that is all.

Mr. SLAGHT:

That is refreshing. I made it abundantly clear that my hon. friend was dealing with trade irritation and trade antagonism, and w'hen you tie him up with "No truck or trade with the Yankee"-

Mr. MANION:

I never said that either.