Mr. CLARK (Red Deer) :

I should be

very glad of an assurance from my right hon. friend that he will look into the matter?

Mr. MICHAEL CLARK (Red Deer) :

I would like to ask the Government if it is the case that the district engineer's office in the Department of Public Works at Edmonton has been closed, while three similar offices are being kept open in British Columbia. The closing of the Edmonton office would mean that all works of that nature would have to be referred to Winnipeg. If it is the case, does not the Government think that is rather a discrimination against the province of Alberta?

Mr. CLARK (Red Deer):

Will my

right hon. friend give me the assurance that he will look into the matter of discrimination by reason of there being three offices in British Columbia?

Mr. CLARK (Red Deer):

May I be permitted, in a sentence, to fortify the very moderate appeal of the hon. member for Fort William and Rainy River (Mr. Manion) ? It would be a matter of poignant regret to me to see any division in this House based upon religious views, or that might be suspected to be a division based upon such views. As for my personal regret, that is a small matter; but I hold, further, that such a division is to be avoided by every well wisher of. this country if it can be avoided by any reasonable means. I would appeal to my friends, if I may call them so, the mover and the seconder of this amendment, to weigh well what fell from the hon. member for Fort William and Rainy River. Might I add my personal confession to his appeal, that this question has been sprung so suddenly that, sitting at this end of the chamber, I cannot give an intelligent vote on it at this moment? I have the greatest objection to running away from any vote. I think our friends on both sides of the House will do me the credit of saying that, as .a rule, I have the courage of my convictions. There is tremendous force, in the mind of one who has been brought up as a British Liberal, in what has been pointed out by the hon. member for Shelburne and Queen's (Mr. Fielding), that if you begin to give statutory recognition to sects, it is impossible to resist the claim that more than one sect has directed. As a matter of fact,

one of the fights of British Liberalism, as I learned it-and I am not putting this forward as an argument so much as a request for light on this question-was to relieve the State as soon as possible of even the most distant connection with any given church in the State. I should like to put that to my hon. friends, and if we are to vote on this amendment, I should like to have enlightenment upon how, as Liberals, they reconcile themselves with the history of Liberalism, not only in Britain, but in this country. There was a time when the Anglican church was an established institution in Canada, but it was dug up. I should like to have an explanation which would disabuse my mind of what I am sure will be recognized as legitimate fears upon this point.

But I rose merely to reinforce, if I could, in a single word, the very moderate and tolerant appeal that was made in the speech of my hon. friend from Fort William and Rainy River. Why not accept the -assurance of the Prime Minister and give time, if such be thought necessary, to get together the best minds on both sides of this House and discuss this matter calmly and quietly, and let the Government deal with it when they have something like a mature opinion upon the subject? I appeal to my hon. friends to relieve some of their friends and some friends who sympathise with their position, from a difficult position and not to throw an apple of religious dissension into the last hours of this session which may spread to a very great extent in this country. I make that appeal on the grounds of broad Liberalism of thought, and I trust they will give earnest heed to the words which I have ventured to utter.

Amendment (Mr. Trahan) negatived.

Mr. MICHAEL CLARK (Red Deer) :

I rise with some reluctance to present a view which is presented on my own account only and which differs from that of my hon. friend from Shelburne and Queen's (Mr. Fielding). I do this with the more reluctance because on many subjects I have admired the position taken and the ability displayed by my hon. friend and have been more than pleased to support him. Indeed, some of us in this part of the House have suffered, I think, misunderstanding along that line because we have been put under his wing by a very august personage in this Chamber for good and all. However, that personage, I am sure, will forgive me for breaking out from under the wing on this particular occasion.

It is true, Mr. Speaker, that we have been only three months and two-thirds in session and that there has been a good deal of business done in the last two weeks. But I imagine, as the Prime Minister has said, that that has been quite usual in all the sessions of Parliament, at least that I have participated in. I personally have not been able to impress my views upon the majority of the Chamber, but it has not been because I have not had the opportunity of presenting those views on almost every topic, and especially upon the trade question, in which I take a vital interest. I think the whole House will admit that I have at least been able to keep up my end and to keep my views before the public and before the House of Commons. That my views have not impressed more members is a matter of very deep regret to me, but it is because of the perversity of the human understanding and of the human heart. As I look back over this session, having missed but two days of its sittings, on each of which two days I was delivering a speech outside the House, I am bound to say, Mr. Speaker, that it ir my deliberate opinion-speaking, as I say, purely for myself-that no public interest of any moment has suffered during this session from want of reasonable discussion. That being my impression, I feel bound to state it. I am exceptionally placed in regard to leisure-my little business interests do not call me away; I am in yery good health, and I could stand another month in Ottawa. But I very much question if the public interest would gain anything compared with what it might conceivably lose by the Prime Minister of this Dominion having to fail to keep arrange-

ments which he has entered into with the concensus of the majority of hon. members of this Chamber. I hold this view strongly, and I am almost certain that it will impress the majority of the members of the House. We hear a great deal about members of Parliament not earning their indemnity, and about "generous indemnities,!' and that sort of thing. Well, I can only say that when my hon. friend from East Peterborough (Mr. Sexsmith) was talking this morning of milking being work of very great drudgery, I had the honest feeling in my breast that to milk six or eight cows before breakfast and again in the evening and to do a good deal of farm work between times was, on the whole, play for the body and the mind compared to the drudgery of public service in this House, and more especially in the administration of the country at this time. I have not been, I think, in the course of my career in Canada too prone to pay attention to passing waves of opinion anywhere in the country, and I want to say on behalf of hon. members of this House of all varieties of opinion that they are just as good as the rest of the people of Canada; they are fair representatives of Canadian manhood and Canadian opinion; they do their work honestly and well, and I resent any opinions that are presented to the contrary, whether in this Chamber or out of it. I repeat, Mr. Speaker, that in my judgment my hon. friend from Shelburne and Queen's has not been well advised to make this protest and that in my opinion no public interest has suffered from want of discussion during this session.