On the Orders of the Day:
Mr; KYTE: I desire to say a word or two on a question of privilege. I notice in the Montreal Gazette of to-day's date the following despatch:
A feature of the testimony to he taken by the Royal Commission investigating- the Kyte fuse contract charges which is being awaited with interest in Ottawa is that which will show from what source the member for Richmond obtained the information on which he based his series of allegations as to million dollar commissions. There has been considerable speculation ever since Mr. Kyte's speech, in which he read an alleged contract for the division of huge commissions among Messrs. Yoakum, Cadwell and Bassick, as to the source from which the contract came. It has already been. stated, and has not been denied by the Opposition, that no such contract has ever been executed. It is now understood, however, that information was obtained from a firm of German-American lawyers in New York, and how Mr. Kyte obtained possession of it is the mystery to he solved. That statement is being freely made in the corridors that it was the Arm in question which was the source of his information, and if this is the case it is of interest that the same firm has never had any hesitation in acknowledging its strong pro-German sympathies. If this is brought out in evidence there will be little sympathy for Mr. Kyte in Canada.
That article contains two- statements which I desire to contradict in the most
emphatic terms. The first is as to whether or not a contract actually existed between Yoakum, Cadwell and Bassick for the division of the 51,000,000. I state most emphatically that ,my information is that a contract signed, sealed and delivered between these parties does exist. As a matter of fact, its existence was not denied by the hon. Minister of Militia and Defence when he made his speech in this House in reply to me. As to the second statement, with respect to the source of my information, I desire to say that my information came from sources as loyal to British interests as those which are associated with the Montreal Gazette. I do not make the statement with any desire to be offensive towards or to impugn the loyalty of any person associated with that newspaper. I think it is important that this denial be placed upon record at the earliest possible moment, and, as the evidence comes before the Royal Commission from day to day, it will be time enough for the Montreal Gazette, or any other newspaper, to comment upon the value of it.