Mr. SLAGHT:

Your party said it over

and over again, and it appeared on all the billboards of Canada, much to your shame.

Mr. MANION:

No, they did not.

Mr. STEWART:

They did not say it.

Mr. ROWE (Dufferin-Simcoe):

Your

party put it on the billboards.

Mr. SLAGHT:

Perhaps he will now tell

me that he dissociates himself from the language of his chief lieutenant, the hon. member for St. Lawrence-St. George, who to my mind insulted the United States beyond measure on the floor of this house on February 21. My hon. friend, the leader of the opposition, sat with his hand over his face on that occasion. I would expect him to repudiate that language and to do all he could with me to cure the evil effect upon the people of Canada of any such declaration in this day and date in connection with that great republic, with those friends of ours for whom we cherish the closest and greatest friendship. I am indicting not only the leader but his front benchers as a whole, because no word of protest came from them against the statement made by the hon. member for St. Lawrence-St. George.

Mr: WALSH: And no protest was necessary.

Mr. SLAGHT:

It was not only necessary but it was made from this side of the house. I refer the hon. member to page 1187 of Hansard where the word "shame" was uttered, and no one on the other side dared to rise in his place and say that the statement was shameful.

Mr. WALSH:

If the hon. member for

Parry Sound conducts himself as well as the hon. member for St. Lawrence-St. George all will be well.

Mr. SLAGHT:

Let me put the statement to the judgment of the house here and now, and then let my interrupting friend rise and say that he endorses this kind of talk. At a time when declarations towards Great

Britain and towards Canada and in the cause of world peace, such as were made by the great leader of that country to the south of us, were ringing in the hearts of British men and women and Canadian men and women, with all the relief and sense of friendliness that human emotions can evince, this is what was said by the hon. member for St. Lawrence-St. George, and I give it for my hon. friend's benefit. I am sorry the hon. member for St. Lawrence-St. George is not in his seat to-night, but it is so necessary to tie this up with the whole campaign adopted by the opposition throughout this whole session, and it will throw a light on the type of tactics they adopt that will enable the people of Canada to say, when the election comes round, whether they propose to entrust the government of this country for [DOT]the next five years to men who have no better regard for the decencies of international life and of debate than to use the language I am going to read. Here it is at page 1187 of Hansard.

Mr. MacINNIS:

On a point of order, Mr. Speaker-

Mr. SPEAKER:

The hon. member cannot quote from a previous debate this session.

Mr. SLAGHT:

I shall quote only the effect of it.

Miss MACPHAIL:

It is all right when the Liberals do it.

Mr. SLAGHT:

There is another voice in the wilderness.

Mr. WALSH:

A voice directed towards the wilderness.

Mr. SLAGHT:

What the hon. member said in effect was that when he was in London, England, in 1903-mark you, thirty-six years ago-it was alleged that President Roosevelt, then Theodore Roosevelt, had notified the British government through the United States ambassador that if the boundary line which the boundary tribunal might thereafter establish were not in accord with his personal views he would send into Canada a sufficient military force to draw the line as he saw fit. That was the statement made by the hon. member. In fishwives' gossip in London, England, thirty-six years ago, someone had told him an untruth of that kind, and he sees fit to bring it into a debate in this House of Commons in the year 1939 under the conditions that are facing us to-day.

Mr. WALSH:

On what authority does the hon. member suggest it is an untruth?

The Budget-Mr. Slaght

Mr. SLAGHT:

In the first place there is no truth in the suggestion that the hon. gentleman said that someone had told him so in London thirty-six years ago. It was a vile slander against the then president of the United States, a man whose memory is revered in Canada, a man who before his country went into the great war raised a regiment and desired to take it overseas himself, a man whom all Britishers have reason to regard as one of their greatest friends and a great leader of a great neighbouring country.

Mr. WALSH:

I rise to a point of order, Mr. Speaker. Has any hon. member a right, under the rules of this house, deliberately to suggest that another hon. member in a previous debate uttered an untruth? Those were the words used by the hon. member for Parry Sound.

Mr. SPEAKER:

I do not know to which rule the hon. gentleman refers. The hon. member for Parry Sound has made a statement, and if some other member knows it is not true he may rise and deny it.

Mr. WALSH:

Still on the point of order, Mr. Speaker, the hon. member for Parry Sound quoted certain words that were used in debate by another hon. member, and under the rules of this house I submit that no member has the right to suggest that the words uttered were not true.