The article applies to the hon. minister an unparliamentary epithet which cannot be allowed.
Withdraw and apologize.
(Translation): M. Louis Philippe Brodeur, public liar.
The qualification is hard; but, alas! the proceeding is still worse.
Mr. Louis Philippe Brodeur, a member, a minister of the Crown, has made a mistake
when speaking from his seat at the House of Commons on the 22nd of November, 1910. He has made a report which is not truthful and the proof of this is to be found in the official report of the Debates (pages 159 and 160 of the French unrevised edition).
I rise to a point of order. This is very serious.
Some lion. MEMBERS. Oh, oh.
I want to maintain the dignity of the House.
Mr. TAYLOR (Leeds).
The House lost its dignity this afternoon.
I appeal to the hon. gentleman to state whether he is reading the article as it is or leaving out some words which are contained in it and which are offensive.
I am ordered by the Chair to leave out the offensive words.
Je vais 6tre oblige de passer des alineas com-plets:
(Translation). Mr. Brodeur has made a mistake and he has deceived the House as to the importance of the election which has taken place in Drummond and Arthabaska. He has make a mistake with a view to bringing shame upon one of his colleagues and to making the electors in the English provinces believe that the farmers of Drummond and Arthabaska, when rejecting the governments candidate, had yielded to anti-British appeals. Mr. Brodeur was mistaken in the course of statements carefully prepared and under such circumstances that it is morally impossible to give him the benefit of the doubt.
This is not what the article says.
(Translation). Mr. Brodeur read before the House a certain number of statements which he claimed to have made in the county of Drummond and Arthabaska, and he added: ' I may say, by the way, that all those extracts have been taken in the newspaper ' Le Devoir/ their organ. . . (page 159, line 13 and following.
He also said (line 40 and following):
Hon. Mr. BRODEUR.
The same honourable member, speaking at Saint-Louis-de-Blandford-and this extract also has been taken in ' Le Devoir '-said:-
The English have never done anything for the French Canadians. We owe them nothing. The French Canadians have not to care about the opinion of the other provinces on the naval question. They are able to settle, themselves, the questions in which they are concerned, without going abroad for an advice. The same men who ripped our grandfathers open on the plains of Abraham are asking you to-day to sacrifice yourselves in order to serve them.
The member to whom Mr. Brodeur referred, having denied those so-called statements, Mr. Brodeur went on (page 16i
159, line 61 and following: page 160, line 1 and following).
Hon. Mr. BRODEUR.
Well, we shall take another one in ' Le Devoir of Octoiber, 30tli -. England has gone so far as to crush her colonies as did the imperial Rome of old.
This is absolutely false.
Hon. Mr. BRODEUR (Reading):
snatched them from the English. England did not conquer Canada through love or with a view of planting the cross of Christ as France did, but in order to establish commercial posts and to make money. She has sown germs of hatred the world over, germs of quarrel and of war. We have enough of the English and of England.
So then, for three times; first, in a general way, then in a particular way and specifying the texts which he alluded to, Mr. Brodeur declared that he relied upon the authority of the newspaper ' Le Devoir/ For three times, Mr. Brodeur, a member and a minister of the Crown, grand admiral of the Canadian fleet and future knight of the Order of St. Michael and St. George, was mistaken. We challenge anybody to find in any report of a speech of Mr. Blondin which may have been published by ' Le Devoir ' in the course of the electoral campaign of Drummond and Arthabaska, the two texts quoted by Mr. Brodeur and which we have just reported.
Mr. Brodeur has claimed to read extracts of ' Le Devoir ' in its edition of October, 30th. We could simply answer him that the 30th of October being a Sunday, there was no issue of ' Le Devoir ' on that date and the edition of October 30th exists nowhere else than in his imagination.
But some who do not know what degree the audacity and cynicism of Mr. Louis Philippe Brodeur may reach might believe that the question is one of mere lapsus and that the text incriminated has been published in another issue of the paper. But such is not the case at all.
Frigidly and deliberately, anticipating the almost absolute impossibility of a denegation being brought forward on the spot with respect to his statements, resting assured that none of his colleagues could think he was capable of such an attempt, Mr. Brodeur asserted that we had attributed to Mr. Blondin words which we never did ascribe to his account.
Sir WILFRID LAURIER:
Order, order. Mr. BLONDIN:-
(Translation). Is that sufficient, and what do you now think of the Gentleman? In England a minister who should he caught in such a trap would be ordered by his chieftain to tender his resignation at one. He would not dare to appear in a public meeting and he would run and hide his shame and his dishonour in a distant refuge.
Order, order. Mr. BLONDIN:-
(Translation). What shall Mr. Brodeur do? And shall Mi. Laurier suffer for a long time yet one of his colleagues to publicly deceive the House and the country?
I have quoted this article to show, before the House and the country, that all the words attributed to me by the hon. minister as being reported by ' Le Devoir,' that all the words which he has attributed to me before the House while he was gathering them from other newspapers, are absolutely false. I now ask the hon. minister if he will deposit on the table of the House, the article which he claims to have quoted; and if he does not, I shall tell him that he made a mistake and that he has been most unjust towards me.
I was quoting this article to show to the House and the country that all these words attributed to me by the hon. minister and which the newspapers reported as having been said by me were not said by me at all, and the statement is absolutely false; and I ask the hon. minister to lay on the table the article he pretends to have cited. If not, I would ask him to say that he was not justified and withdraw his statement.
Hon. Mr. BRODEUR.
I rise to a point of order. My hon. friend has no right to reproach the hon. member for Champlain (Mr. Blon-din) with having quoted certain words and then call on you, Mr. Speaker, for protection.