Mr. BARKER:

I wish you to conclude that an officer of the British army came out here to buy certain horses. He had orders from home not to buy, and Ihe went home. I cannot say any more than that.

Mr. BARKER:

Does the hon. gentleman not see that he has overlooked what I have said? Because of what happened in the United States, this officer got instructions from home not to buy horses in Canada. Having received those instructions his duty as an officer of the British army was to go home, and he did so.

Mr. BARKER:

I wish to say a few words on this subject, because the various gentlemen who have spoken have confused four or five different episodes or occasions. It happens that I was here when a general officer of the British Empire was sent out first in connection with the purchase of horses. I know him very well, he has been many years in the British army, but he is a Canadian born, and I fancy there are thousands of people in this country who know him. The gentleman who opened this argument charged the Government here with some neglect in connection with his visit. The gentleman to whom I refer did

not come out to act for the Canadian Government; he was sent out by the British Government to see how far horses could be procured here for the British army. He went to Toronto, and, as he is a Canadian, he knows all about our part of the country.

I was asked by a member of the Government if I would go to Toronto and see this general officer and offer him any assistance I could afford him in the way of directing him to people he should see, or anything of that kind. I did see him. He had opened an office in Toronto, and had a small staff of junior officers with him, and was getting ready to buy horses. He was not asking this Government what he should pay for horses or anything of that kind; he knew all about that, I fancy, a great deal better than this Government or any member of this House. He is a thorough soldier, acquainted with his business. I had an interview with him. He was very thankful to the Government for having asked me to go to him and give him any assistance I could in the way of directions about seeing people, and I had a talk with him. He asked me to come and see him again. I saw him a few days afterwards, but I found that his orders had been countermanded.

They did not ask permission from this Government to countermand the orders, they simply changed their directions, and very much because of some change in the sale of horses in the United States, with which this Government had nothing to do and nothing to say. The gentleman at once found that his object in coming was cancelled, and he went home. If any one wants to know his name I can give it. It is a well-known name in Canada. The gentleman is not in any sense a Canadian officer or a Canadian official, but an officer in the British army. That is all there is to that part of the story, and all the rest of the story has been built on that. The horses that have been spoken of were not the horses that that officer of the British army was sent out to buy. All that came long after he went home.

Mr. BARKER:

I quite agree with,' what the hon. gentleman (Mr. Carvell) says that it may perhaps be well to have some remedy other' than that of coming to Parliament. But that is not the law yet. This man is a foreigner, a Belgian, he had people acting for him here and he had no notion that he was risking everything. The moment he found out the position of affairs he acted very promptly in coming here. The original patent was issued in 1910. If you can have any excuse under the present law I

think this is a reasonable excuse * in this case.

Mr. BARKER:

This Bill is on behalf of a Belgian, who invented an explosive, and who employed people here to get a patent for it. In ignorance of our laws-I do not put that forward as a genuine excuse for the Rill-he did not realize the necessity of renewing it, and allowed the time to expire. When he found out the true situation he at once tendered the money. The patent was granted only three years ago, and the bill protects anybody who may have begun to manufacture the explosive in the interval, so that there can be no harm done. The patentee is paying everything that he would have paid if he had known what was expected of him. The Bill passed the Senate, and they thought it was a proper Bill. It also passed our committee, and, subject to what the hon. gentleman (Mr. Carvell) says as to these cases being dealt with in this way,_ I cannot imagine a better case for reinstatement than this. This Belgian had no knowledge of the fact that he was risking anything; he thought he had his patent Mr. MACLEAN (Halifax).

secured, and he offered to pay the money, whenever he found it was necessary^ In the Bill there is an express clause providing that any person who has begun to manufacture the explosive is protected, and that he may continue to manufacture.