Mr. DEPUTY SPEAKER.

The point of order having been raised, perhaps I should rule of .it. I do not understand the hon. member to be charging dishonour to any hon. member of the House, and in that case I do not rule him out of order.

Mr. HUGHES.

The hon. gentleman who now misrepresents South Ontario

Mr. DEPUTY SPEAKER.

That I think is not in order.

Mr. HUGHES.

The hon. gentleman who now represents South Ontario in this House induced this government to purchase the Oshawa harbour, and the charge was made upon every platform in the riding, and was not successfully contradicted, that he had done it by misrepresenting the tolls of the harbour which he controlled, and thereby induced them to pay a large price for it. As soon as he unloaded, instead of bringing his coal in through the harbour, he brought it in by rail to the town, and dumped the harbour on the government. That is the charge that is made by the electors of Oshawa, and throughout that riding. That is the charge, and the hon. member came up

and went through the town of Whitby

Mr. DEPUTY SPEAKER.

I think the

hon. gentleman is wandering away from the subject, which is the Whitby public building.

Mr. HUGHES.

I am speaking of that building. The hon. member came up to the town of Whitby 'and passed around from person to person, and everybody was naturally delighted to get a post office. But the board of trade have not stated that they endorsed the price paid for the site, the town council have not stated that they endorsed the price, nor has any public man in the town of Whitby. All of them look on it as a rake-off from start to finish.

Mr. LALOR.

I would ask the Minister of Public Works who it was that constituted the member for South Ontario (Mr. Fowke) a commissioner to purchase a lot for this government in the town of Whitby. He was not then a member of this House, he was not representing the county; the county was represented by an enirely different individual. How came it that the present member for South Ontario went through that county picking out lots for this government? This post office was not the only one the member for South Ontario promised to the electors of that county, and did this government appoint him as a commissioner to make those promises? Why should he take it upon himself to buy a lot in the town of Whitby for this government, if this government had not appointed him for that purpose?

Mr. PUGSLEY.

My hon. friend from South Ontario, I presume, as a public man and as a candidate, had a right to do what he did. When it was contemplated by the government to purchase a lot in the town of Whitby for a public building, he had a perfect right to inform himself with regard to the value of the different sites which were spoken of, he had a perfect right, for the protection of his own interest as a candidate of the Liberal party, to inform himself as to whether the price for this lot was fair and reasonable, and I commend my hon. friend for having taken the trouble to ascertain if the price was fair and reasonable. It is all very well for hon. gentlemen opposite to deal with rumours; it is all very well for people who are dissatisfied because they did not succeed in selling their property, to disparage the property that was sold. But we have the word of the hon. member for South Ontario, whose judgment, I for one am prepared to place great reliance upon; more than that, we have the report of our own inspector, a man of large experience. He went there, as I am informed, and examined the various sites, questioned people who had lots to sell as to what they would take for their property, and after carefully considering the relative values of the different sites, he recommended that this property should be purchased.

Mr. HUGHES.

Would the minister kindly give the price recommended by the other inspector, and who was the inspector?

_ Mr. PUGSLEY. My deputy informs me it was Mr. C. H. Hunter, a man of large experience in these matters. In the department rwe always adopt the course of requiring the most careful examination to be made into all the properties available. We asked our agent to find out at what prices properties had been recently changing hands for two or three years back, to get the assessed values of the properties, to furnish all the particulars which would enable the chief architect and the minister to form a correct judgment as to the propriety of purchasing a property which is recommended to the department.

Mr. LALOR.

Do I understand the minister to say that he sent two inspectors there to value the property?

Mr. PUGSLEY.

An inspector, Mr. C. H. Hunter.

Mr. LALOR.

I think this is a serious matter that the minister has brought up. He says he upholds the member for South Ontario, that he had a perfect right to pick out this lot. The member for South Ontario states that he was the man who selected the lot. As I understand, it was he who interviewed the different parties; he was, so to speak, the whole push in connection with the selection of this particular site. The minister lays down the princinle that it is proper to place in the hands of a candidate for parliament the power to select lots for post offices. If that is the case, we should know it. That seems to have been the policy followed by the government throughout the country. They authorize their candidates to give promises of post offices wherever they like, and the member for South Ontario seems to have been favoured in that respect also. The principle is entirely wrong. If the member for South Ontario had any authority frcm this govern-men we should know what that authority is.

Mr. HUGHES.

Has the minister the report of the inspector on that site?

Mr. PUGSLEY.

I have not.

Mr. HUGHES.

Nobody in Whitby condemned the site, the only thing they condemned was the rake-off in the extra price that was paid for this lot over and above the fair market value.

Mr. BLAIN.

I would like to know from the minister who was the owner of the property when the transfer was made to the government.

Mr. PUGSLEY.

I may say to my hon. friend that this item passed some days ago, and as I did not suppose it would come up Mr. PUGSLEY.

again to-night I did not bring with me the papers in connection with the site. But I could get the papers and bring them down for the information of my hon. friend. The real owner, I presume, would be the Sons of Scotland. Possibly Mr. Barkley had a mortgage, but the Department of Justice would attend to the title, that would not come under my supervision. When we decide to purchase a property we transfer the papers to the Department of Justice, and if the title is found good, the cheque is made out to the agent of the Minister of Justice to pay the owner. In this case I presume the Sons of Scotland were the owners of the property.

Mr. HUGHES.

Who was the agent of the Minister of Justice ?

Mr. PUGSLEY.

I do not know.

Mr. A. K. MACLEAN.

Would the member for North Ontario tell us who was the owner of this lot?