I wish to point out that at the beginning of this discussion the Minister of Railways intimated that he would allow this Bill to stand over, and in pursuance of that I moved that the committee rise, report progress, and ask leave to sit again, and that is what is before the Chair at the present time. The minister, like the rest of us, seems to have obtained some light on this subject during the discussion, assuming that the Minister of the Interior is correct in his interpretation of the question as it stands. I do not think it will do any of us any harm to refresh our memories on that matter. I for one would be willing to plead my ignorance to the utmost extent in order that I might look into this legislation and see if the result would be as the Minister of the Interior states. Hon. gentlemen who object to this Bill standing over seem to think that we want to hit this Bill in particular. My understanding is that we shall not necessarily deny the promoters of this Bill the legislation that they ask, but we wish to take time to consider whether or not the matter can be put in better shape while we are considering the other Bills in the Railway Committee, so that all these Bills can be dealt with together, and so that we shall not be handicapped in considering the'
other Bills. With regard to the argument that because we have allowed some other Bills to go through, either inadvertently or improperly, therefore we should allow this Bill to go through, I entirely dissent from that proposition. Even if we had allowed nine out of ten Bills to go through, that ought not to go through, I would fight against the passage of the tenth. My position is that however often we may have made a mistake, it is always better to remedy the wrong, even at a late day, than not ta remedy it at all.
Subtopic: NELSON RIVER RAILWAY COMPANY.