Hon. C. H. CAHAN (St. Lawrence-St. George):

Pringle. He also is a United States author. Pringle says of the Alaskan boundary dispute, at page 290:

The question was allowed to drift until 1902. Relations between the two countries had in the past been made none the happier by the extraordinary hostility toward Canada exhibited by American politicians. In 1867, Seward had urged the annexation of the dominion in payment for the damages caused by Great Britain's violations of neutrality during the civil war. Roosevelt himself had once made violent speeches urging that North America should be inhabited exclusively by citizens of the United States.

If Lodge and Hay were opposed to arbitration in the Alaska matter, Roosevelt was even more emphatic in insisting that the United States, alone, would settle it. Characteristically, although he must have known that the possibility of conflict was grotesque, he made secret preparations for war. In March, 1902, instructions went to secretary of war Root to have "additional troops sent as quietly and unostentatiously as possible to Southern Alaska." Root transmitted to the White House copies of the order dispatched to Brigadier General G. M. Randall, in command in the Northwest territory. In July, 1902, Roosevelt told Hay that arbitration was out of the question, that the Canadian claim was "an outrage, pure and simple . . . to pay them anything . . . would come dangerously near blackmail." A few days later the president said that he appreciated "the possibility of trouble . . . (but) Root had been quietly strengthening the garrison. ... In a spirit of bumptious truculence, which for years England had resisted . . . the Canadians put in this . . . false claim. They now say that trouble may come if it is not acted on. I feel like telling them that if trouble comes it will be purely . . . their own fault; and although it would not be pleasant for us, it would be death for them."

The biographer proceeds:

This treaty, and Roosevelt's conduct under it, placed the United States in a bad light throughout the world. If arbitration was out of the question, no reason for the treaty existed.

And at page 292:

In truth, Roosevelt's "impartial jurists" ill became a nation affecting to believe in arbitration. The president's attitude was similarly ungracious later in 1903. To reports that Great Britain might ask for postponement, he said that she "must be kept right up to the mark." He disliked "making any kind of a threat," but if England played "fast and loose" he would break off negotiations, send a special message to congress, and "run the boundary as we deem it should be run"; in other words, offer an insult to British prestige which might have meant war had the issues been less absurd.

There are also a number of other references. In the collated correspondence between Theodore Roosevelt and Henry Cabot Lodge, contained in volume 2 at page 37, is a letter written by Roosevelt to Cabot Lodge.

Mr. LACROIX (Beauce):

But Roosevelt is dead.

Mr. DOUGLAS (Weyburn)-: Has the hon. member just found that out?

Mr. CAHAN:

Roosevelt says:

Now about the Alaska business. I have written Hay at once that England must be kept right up to the mark. I am by no means certain that I would acquiesce in deferring the matter until next summer. I do not want it hanging on during the presidential campaign. I dislike making any kind of threat, but my present judgment is that if the British play fast and loose the thing to do is to declare the negotiations off, recite our case in the message to congress, and ask for an appropriation to run the boundary as we deem it should be run.

I could make other references to historical works citing even some of the prominent members of the administration of the late Sir Wilfrid Laurier, some of his legal counsel, and others eminent in this country at the time. But I refrain from doing so. I have simply cited these-and the library has a number of other books containing similar ' historical evidence-in support of the truth of every statement which I have made.

' I therefore claim that the statements made by the hon. member for Parry Sound that I "insulted the United States", and that the statement I made with respect to the boundary line was an untruth and mere "fishwives' gossip in London", and that it was "a vile slander against the then president of the United States"; and that it was "a type of vile traducing of the head of a neighbouring friendly country", were not only insults such as should not have been permitted if objection had been taken, but were words which should be retracted by the hon. member and should be eliminated from the records of this house as a very serious breach of privilege.

I submit this therefore to you, Mr. Speaker, and ask you to take into your consideration in due time, as to whether, in view of the records which I have cited, these charges should not be eliminated from the record. In other days, years ago, perhaps I would have been tempted to reply in undignified and more severe language to the charges made. But as I grow older I am not so disposed to be vituperative as perhaps I once was, and therefore I submit the matter, sir, for your consideration.

1. How many rebates have been made to the Canadian Atlas Diesel Engines, Limited, Vancouver, under tariff item 400-K, during the last six months, in respect of marine engines sold to fishermen?

2. What was the amount of rebate in each instance?

3. To what extent was the purchaser given the advantage of the rebate in each instance?

1. Five, (under tariff item 440k).

2. $90.90; $90.91; 1181.81; $86.78; $173.58.

3. No information.

1. What is the total number of those who served overseas with the Canadian Expeditionary Forces during the great war, and how many of them were born: (a) in Canada; (b) outside of Canada?

2. What is the total number of pensioners

who were in receipt of a pension under the Pension Act as at December 31, 1938, and how many of those were born: (a) in Canada;

(b) outside of Canada?

Mr. RINFRET:

The information sought in this question is not on record and is not in the possession of the government. The cost of obtaining it would be prohibitive, and I therefore suggest that the question be dropped.

1. How much was paid for medical services in Prince Edward Island for the fiscal year ending March 31, 1935, by the following departments: Pensions and National Health, Royal Canadian Mounted Police, Indian Affairs, and Marine ?

2. What are the names of the recipients, and what amount was received by each from each department?