March 11, 1910

NAVAL SERVICE OF CANADA.


Sir WILFRID LAURIER moved that the House go into committee on Monday next to consider the following proposed resolution : Resolved, that it is expedient, in connection with Bill No. 95, now under consideration by this House, respecting the naval service i f Canada, to provide for the establishment, under regulations in that behalf, to be made by the Governor General in Council, of pensions and gratuities for the permanent naval service; such pensions or gratuities not to be larger in amount or granted upon more favourable terms than the pensions and gratuities authorized under the Militia Act. Motion agreed to.


QUESTION OF PRIVILEGE.

LIB

Henry Robert Emmerson

Liberal

Hon. H. R. EMMERSON.

Before the orders of the day are called, I desire to rise to a question of privilege. In the Votes and Proceedings of yesterday, while my name appears as having voted against the amendment of the hon. member for Hastings (Mr. Northrup), it is omitted in the record of the vote on the main motion. This omission occurs both in the Votes and Proceedings and ' Hansard.' It is obvious that some error has been made, because it will be remembered distinctly that the vote on the main motion was exactly as was the vote on the amendment, but the total in the main motion, as recorded in the Votes and Proceedings and ' Hansard,' is put down at 118, whereas it was announced by the clerk of the House as 119. I think all hon. members will recollect the fact that I was present at both divisions, that I voted against the amendment to the main motion and in favour of the main motion, and I would ask that both ' Hansard ' and Votes and Proceedings be corrected in that regard, so as to conform with what actually took place.

Topic:   QUESTION OF PRIVILEGE.
Permalink
CON

THE LUMSDEN INVESTIGATION.

CON

Robert Laird Borden (Leader of the Official Opposition)

Conservative (1867-1942)

Mr. R. L. BORDEN.

Before the orders of the day are called, I would like to direct the attention of the right hon. the Prime Minister to an extraordinary mistake which seems to have been made by the chairman of the committee now engaged in making an investigation into the charges preferred by Mr. Lumsden. On looking at the proceedings of the committee, it will be seen, at page 3, that the following resolution was passed:

Mr. Lennox moved that the committee recommend that the proceedings and evidence taken by them be printed and reported to the House from day to day.

This was agreed to, but for some reason which I cannot understand, the chaiiman of the committee, in reporting that to the House,'left out the very important words and reported to the House so that the committee is represented to have recom-. mended only that the proceedings and evidence taken by them should be printed. That seems to be an extraordinary step for the chairman of the committee to have taken, and I think we should have an explanation from him why such an omission was made, and have that omission immediately rectified.

Topic:   THE LUMSDEN INVESTIGATION.
Permalink
LIB

Victor Geoffrion

Liberal

Mr. GEOFFRION.

The report was prepared by the clerk of the committee and submitted to the committee, and nobody objected. I do not know what the hon. gentleman means by saying that the chairman omitted any words at all. I submitted the report which was prepared by the clerk, according to the order of the House, which says that the committee shall report to the House frpm time to time.

Topic:   THE LUMSDEN INVESTIGATION.
Permalink
CON

Robert Laird Borden (Leader of the Official Opposition)

Conservative (1867-1942)

Mr. R. L. BORDEN.

I regret that either I seem to have a very imperiect realization of what took place, or else the hon. gentleman has. I am not talking about the order of the House, but about the recommendation of the committee, which it was the duty of the hon. gentleman to report to this House in the terms in which it passed the committee. The motion which passed the committee was as follows:

Mr. Lennox moved that the committee recommend that their proceedings and the evidence taken by them be printed and reported to the House from day to day, which wag

agreed to.

That is plain, is it not? But here is the way in which the chairman of the committee reported that resolution:

Your committee recommends that their proceedings and any evidence taken by them be printed from day to day.

Carefully leaving out the important words ' and reported to the House.' What has the order of this House to do with the matter? The hon. gentleman had nothing

to do with the order of this House, but only with the recommendation of the committee, words which were essential to it, omit from the recommendation of the com-mitee, words which were essential to it, and he has given no explanation for that omission which can be regarded as satisfactory.

Topic:   THE LUMSDEN INVESTIGATION.
Permalink
LIB

Wilfrid Laurier (Prime Minister; President of the Privy Council)

Liberal

Sir WILFRID LAURIER.

Has my hon. friend taken the trouble to compare the printed report with the printed record of the motion?

Topic:   THE LUMSDEN INVESTIGATION.
Permalink
CON

Robert Laird Borden (Leader of the Official Opposition)

Conservative (1867-1942)

Mr. R. L. BORDEN.

I have taken the trouble to ask members of the committee who were present when that motion passed. I asked the hon. gentleman who moved that motion, and moved it in writing, and he tells me that the printed report is exactly in the terms in which he put his motion.

Topic:   THE LUMSDEN INVESTIGATION.
Permalink
LIB

Wilfrid Laurier (Prime Minister; President of the Privy Council)

Liberal

Sir WILFRID LAURIER.

I have not the slightest wish to reflect on my hon. friend, but errors sometimes do occur in the printing. He may recollect that some days ago the hon. member for Qu'Appelle (Mr. Lake) put a question on the paper containing an extract from a speech delivered by me in Toronto. It happened that the printed extract was not a -correct printing of the hon. gentleman's question, and I thought that possibly a similar error might have taken place in this instance. The chairman of the committee, taken by surprise, does not know that there was a discrepancy, but his attention being drawn to it, he will see that it is rectified

Topic:   THE LUMSDEN INVESTIGATION.
Permalink
L-C

Andrew Archibald MacDonald

Liberal-Conservative

Mr. MACDONALD.

The hon. the leader of the opposition knows very well that the chairman of a committee usually presents to the House the report prepared by the clerk of that committee and does not himself draft that report. I would suggest that the supporters of my hon. friend, who were appointed to that committee, should go there and settle these matters before hand.

Topic:   THE LUMSDEN INVESTIGATION.
Permalink
CON

Robert Laird Borden (Leader of the Official Opposition)

Conservative (1867-1942)

Mr. R. L. BORDEN.

It is not a matter to be dealt with in the committee at all, but in this House, which has the right to have the recommendation of a committee reported to it in the terms in which the motion passed that committee.

Topic:   THE LUMSDEN INVESTIGATION.
Permalink
L-C

Andrew Archibald MacDonald

Liberal-Conservative

Mr. MACDONALD.

My hon. friend's remarks are out of order because they relate to a proceeding before a com mittee which that committee has not re ported to this House. He has not taken the trouble to ascertain whether the printed record agrees with his version.

Topic:   THE LUMSDEN INVESTIGATION.
Permalink
CON

Robert Laird Borden (Leader of the Official Opposition)

Conservative (1867-1942)

Mr. R. L. BORDEN.

I have done so. I have gone to the hon. gentleman who moved the motion and he says the printed document is exactly as he moved it. He

is as certain of that as any one can be of any fact. The hon. member for Pictou has a very extraordinary idea of what we should do. First, he suggests that when the recommendation of a committee is brought before this House in terms other than those in which they passed, the matter cannot be raised in this House. In other words when a committee recommends that its proceedings shall be reported to the House from aay to day, and when that recommendation has been omitted from the report without a word, of explanation, we cannot raise the question in this House because the committee has not reported, and it has not so reported because that recommendation has been omitted for some mysterious reason. Is that my hon. friend's argument? If so, I do not think it would commend itself to any one.

Topic:   THE LUMSDEN INVESTIGATION.
Permalink
LIB

Wilfrid Laurier (Prime Minister; President of the Privy Council)

Liberal

Sir WILFRID LAURIER.

My hon. friend is too hasty in presuming that there is something mysterious in this. What is much more likely is that an error has occurred, as often happens. There is a disparity between the report as moved in the House and the resolution of the committee. But, my hon. friend knows that the chairman does not draw the report, That is drawn by the clerk, and it is very likely that the chairman signed it without looking at it carefully. Now that his attention is drawn to the matter, he will look into it.

Topic:   THE LUMSDEN INVESTIGATION.
Permalink
CON

Robert Laird Borden (Leader of the Official Opposition)

Conservative (1867-1942)

Mr. R. L. BORDEN.

The proceedings of the committee, as recommeneded by the committee should have been reported to the House day by day. But the fact that- that recommendation has been altered by some person-I do not say who is responsible-before being brought to the House, and that the report has been confirmed by this House should prove that any explanation of that alteration-

Topic:   THE LUMSDEN INVESTIGATION.
Permalink
LIB

Wilfrid Laurier (Prime Minister; President of the Privy Council)

Liberal

Sir WILFRID LAURIER.

No person noticed the alteration.

Topic:   THE LUMSDEN INVESTIGATION.
Permalink
CON

Robert Laird Borden (Leader of the Official Opposition)

Conservative (1867-1942)

Mr. R. L. BORDEN.

That is what I was about to remark. The House had no explanation; the House was misled. The matter should have been corrected at once, and, for the reason suggested by my hon. friend from Pictou (Mr. E. M. Macdonald), the fact of these proceedings not having been reported day bv day, prevented hon. members from making reference to the proceedings of the committee. One might think there was a certain connection between the alteration and the result of the alteration as argued by my hon. friend from Pictou. That hon. gentleman took the point at once: there is no report of the proceedings of this committee, and, therefore, the matter cannot be referred to. Why is there no report of the proceedings of the committee? Because the recommen-

dation of the committee was altered. The hon. member tor Pictdu is very quick to take the point, and gives us a clue, perhaps as to why the alteration was made. It is a very astute point, but rather an obvious one; I think it must have occurred to almost every member of the House before my hon. friend (Mr. Macdonald) had the remarkable candour and frankness to raise it.

Topic:   THE LUMSDEN INVESTIGATION.
Permalink

March 11, 1910