I have already stated that tlie minister absolutely denies this, and I say that I do not propose to judge between him and Mr. Williams. I merely say tills. Let us look at the question of interest. On the one hand, Mr. Williams' evidence perhaps should be taken with a grain of salt, from the fact that he is a disappointed applicant for these very subventions and subsidies, while on the other hand should not a certain amount of doubt gather about the statement of the Minister of Militia from the fact that he is as intensely interested in denying that any such conversation ever took place ? So that when we come to take the statements of these two gentlemen, equally worthy of credence from the positions they occupy, they are equally clouded with suspicion, and it is difficult to judge between them.
I am sure my hon. friend (Mr. Fowler) does not wish to take an unfair advantage. I think his statement is altogether out of order. Mr. Williams is not a member of this House. But, whether my hon. friend believes me or not, or whether he believes Mr. Williams or not, I think he is bound to accept my statement.
The hon. gentleman (Mr. A. Martin) should not say that. The other was the case of a dispute between two members of the House about a matter of common knowledge, which was an entirely different proposition.
The Minister of Militia has entirely misunderstood me, and I was trying hard to make myself plain. I do not refuse to accept the word of the Minister of Militia, but I was pointing out how difficult it was to decide between these two gentlemen, they being equally respectable and each having an interest.
I did not draw any inference. But the Minister of Militia is so accustomed to drawing inferences in order to make charges against the hon. member for North Toronto (Mr. Foster) that he cannot cease even in his own case. Now, the peace-pipe was smoked, and on August 17 there had been an amalgamation of the interests of these conflicting parties. On that date Mr. R. J. Graham notified the department of the amalgamation of interests of the Canada Lands Produce and Cold Storage Company and the New Brunswick Cold
Storage Company and asked that all the interests should be transferred-that is correct, I think-to the New Brunswick Cold Storage Company.
As I understand it, Mr. Graham had applied in his own name and had actually made a contract with the Department of Agriculture, but later he asked to have his own contract transferred to the New Brunswick Cold Storage Company.
I think the Minister of Militia is misinformed with respect to that. He must admit that up to the time of the amalgamation, Mr. Graham was acting for himself and the other promoters of the Canada Lands Produce and Cold Storage Company, and that when he made his application on June 11, it was not for himself, although it might be in his own name. Surely the minister will not say that it was for himself solely, absolutely and independent of the other gentlemen, Mr. Macoun and the minister himself? There never was an intimation that Mr. Graham was acting for himself, although the application was made by him. Mr. Graham himself does not claim that he was acting for himself.
Take the case of a man who holds timber licenses, for instances. Why, I myself hold timber licenses that do not belong to me individually; I hold them for others. My name does not appear as trustee, but appears as if I were the individual owner. But I am not the owner. That is the way it is always done.
Now, on August 17 Mr. Graham gives notice that the interests are amalgamated. On September 1 the New Brunswick Cold Storage Company is organized, with R. J. Graham as president, L. S. Macoun as secretary-treasurer. What stronger evidence could you require that the Canada Lands Produce and Cold Storage Company had been absorbed? Because it was not a case of amalgamation, but of absorption. This company had absorbed the New Brunswick Cold Storage Company which is the fact-