I believe, Sir, you are quite right. I fully agree that we have no right to discuss the report, but what I am proving is that the opposition are not open to the charge made by the hon. member for Alberta and I am substantiating the statement made by my hon. friend from King's and am quite in order in doing that.
I have in my hand an article which perhaps the hon. member for Alberta may have read. The Toronto ' News ' had the hardihood to express an opinion about that hon. gentleman, and I find in the Edmonton ' Bulletin ' language of this kind. I do not say that the hon. member penned the article, but after I read it, perhaps hon. members will come to a conclusion as to who is responsible. Speaking of the 'News' the ' Bulletin ' says :
Its reputation based on its short and not over brilliant career under its present management Is that of a cross between an attempted bandit and a would-be thug. That is one who-speaking in a literary sense would rob for profit and murder from principle-always providing the opportunity were favourable.
I do not say that the ' Bulletin ' is the hon. gentleman's paper. If it is not, he is in a position to deny that it is.
All I have to say Is this, that the editor of that paper is in my judgment as competent to edit a paper as the hon. gentleman is. I can tell him more, that the leader of the great party he is supporting will corroborate my statement.
I thought I was answering fully and fairly. I think that the management of the Toronto 'News ' is quite capable of answering any editorials that appear in this paper. In respect to the immigration litei'ature-or campaign literature, for it seems to me to be about the same thing nowadays-I find that the Department of Immigration has paid the Winnipeg ' Free Press ' $7,000 for a paper issued by that concern. Now, if the Department of the Interior were doing its duty.
It would not allow any literature intended to be used for immigration purposes to be sent out without scanning every line to see whether the circulation of it is in the interest of this country. So, I say that when the hon. member for Alberta (Mr. Oliver) allows the government to circulate at the public expense a newspaper which states as a mere rumour something derogatory to his constituency, he is not doing his duty to those who sent him here, nor is he displaying the energy which he displays when Mi\ Macouh. a government officer made a report about his part of the country. Is that lack of energy due to the fact that there are a couple more senatorships being' given to the Northwest, or is it because there is an edition of 5,000 immigration pamphlets being published by the Edmonton ' Bulletin ? ' This pamphlet, the newspapers tell us, comprises 80 pages profusely illustrated with scenes from the. district and business places of Edmonton and with portraits of many of the leading men of the town. I wonder if the hon. gentleman himself would be included. These pamphlets, I understand, are to be distributed in the United States and Great Britain. So we have $7,000 for this edition of the Winnipeg ' Free Press ' and we have an edition of 5.000 copies coming from the Edmonton ' Bulletin ' Office. Is there anything for the Regina ' Leader ? ' Would the hon. gentleman (Mr. Scott) say that there is any of this patronage for the ' Leader ? ' Now, is this system in the interest of the people ? Is it in accordance with sound policy to dole out payments for immigration literature as patronage to favoured people in the Northwest Territories ? The government has its printing bureau here. If they would furnish that printing bureau with better facilities why could not all that work be done there ?
I do not know, but I do know what would become of some of the
independent men of this House. Instead of their submitting to the discipline mentioned by the hon. member for Halton (Mr. Henderson) we should find them with the old frankness and outspokenness of the hon. member for Alberta, not moved by considerations of immigration pamphlets or senator-ships.
I do not know whether hon. gentlemen opposite think they can (lo in this House as they thought to do in the Agricultural Committee, prevent me from expressing myself and defending my position bv bullying and interruptions They were not successful there, nor will they be here Nor will they succeed by piling up misstatements in regard to myself or throwing out vile insinuations, a thing ot which we find them to be very capable. Though they may judge other people by their own standards we have to consider where these things come from. In regard to the state meats made deliberately by the hon. member for East Elgin that in the Agricultuial Committee I threatened Mr. James M. Ma-coun with horse-whipping I wish to say that that statement is absolutely untrue.
That is a sample of the argument placed before the Agricultural Committee, during sitting after sitting, in support of Mr. James M. Maeoun in discrediting a large and important section of the Northwest Territories. I am glad these hon gentlemen have brought the discussion into this House, so that the country may be well informed of the position.
I would draw the attention of the hon. member (Mr. Oliver) to the fact that I have ruled that the discussion that took place in the committee cannot be referred to here. We have to deal with the items before us. What took place in the committee is past and gone and we have nothing to do with it.
I will observe your ruling, Mr. Chairman. Now, I may refer to the insinuations of the hon. gentleman as to the pamphlets printed in the ' Bulletin Office. I am connected with the Edmonton * Bulletin.' This is a matter not worthy the consideration of this committee, but seeing that an hon. member has brought it forward, I suppose it is only fair that the facts should be known. The connection of the Edmonton ' Bulletin ' with the pamphlet is this : Mr. Sutter, who is the Immigration agent at Edmonton has seen fit to get up an immigration pamphlet as a speculation
of his own. That pamphlet, I understand, is being paid for by the merchants of Edmonton who are taking advertising space in it. The 'Bulletin' was successful in getting the contract for the printing of the pamphlet from Mr. Sutter. The 'Bulletin' does not know the government in the transaction in any way, shape or manner, and I am not aware that Mr. Sutter knows the government in the transaction in any [DOT]way, shape or manner.