Mr. MACDONALD (Kingston City):

The minister always has power to reduce a sentence, yes.

Mr. KNOWLES:

May I ask a question

about another section that has been passed?

Should there not be a qualifying phrase in section 2 (b) similar to that found in paragraphs (c) and (g)? My point in asking that question will be obvious. Provision is made in paragraphs (c) and (g) for the occasion when under the Department of National Defence Act there is a minister and deputy minister of national defence for naval services. I wonder whether paragraph (b) should not have a similar qualifying phrase, so that the department under that same circumstance would mean, not the Department of National Defence but the Department of National Defence for Naval Services?

Mr. MACDONALD (Kingston City):

The hon. member raises an interesting point; but I am advised, and I think my advice is correct that the draftsmanship is right. By looking at the National Defence Act itself and the amending act of July 12, 1940, I conclude that the paragraph is in proper form.

370S

Naval Service Act

Strictly speaking, there is only one Department of National Defence. My colleague, the Minister for Air and I are merely named as ministers of national defence for air and national defence for naval services. No special department is named. Consequently I think it is better that we should be correct and have the word "department" defined as it is now, to mean only the Department of National Defence. It is a good point; I am glad my hon. friend raised it, but on reflection I think the paragraph is correctly worded.

Mr. KNOWLES:

I just wanted to be sure it was not an error.

Mr. BLACK (Cumberland):

Mr. Chairman, the leader of the opposition has made reference to you, with your very distinguished service in the air, taking part in the passing of this naval bill, and also to my colleague the hon. member for Yale, a former Minister of National Defence. I should like to complete this record of distinguished personages who have played a part in drawing up and dealing with this bill by mentioning my fellow townsman, Commander Horace Read, R.C.N.V.R., of Amherst, Nova Scotia, who has had a distinguished career in the legal profession; who was a professor at Dalhousie college and who, because of his high qualifications, was secured to head the department of legislation in the law school at the university of Minnesota. He returned to Canada in order to contribute his services to- the naval department, and I believe was largely responsible for the drafting of this bill as well as other very important work. He also had a distinguished career in the last war, first enlisting in (he 219th battalion and later transferring to the air force. Those were early, pioneering days in the air, as compared with the period through which we are now passing.

I might also mention, as among the distinguished personages to take part in our

proceedings to-night, my fellow townsman the Minister of National Defence. As we all know, he distinguished himself in the last war. Now he is carrying a very great burden in administering the Department of National Defence during this struggle and has assumed the additional responsibility of leading this house during the absence of the Prime Minister in Great Britain and, at times, since his return. It gives me very great gratification, Mr. Chairman, to make these additions to the record of which you were reminded by the leader of the opposition.

Mr. KNOWLES:

I do not know whether or not I am in order, but I should like to draw

attention to the presence in the gallery of a naval rating. I do not know who he is, but he has been here throughout the discussion.