February 1, 1917

LIB

Mr. DELISLE:

Liberal

1. Did the Department of Militia bring any deserters before the Court of Sessions at Quebec last summer?

2. If so, how many of such cases brought before the court were dismissed?

3. Did the Judge recommend that costs for some of the dismissed cases be paid by the Crown?

4. Has the Government declined to pay said costs?

5. If so, for what reasons?

Topic:   QUESTIONS.
Subtopic:   ENLISTMENT OF NOEL GAZELLE.
Permalink
CON

Mr. KEMP: (Minister of Militia and Defence)

Conservative (1867-1942)

1. Yes.

2. Eight acquittals during whole of 1916.

3. Yes, in four cases.

4. Yes.

5. On the ground that the prosecution was on behalf of the Crown, and no costs are collectable against the Crown as a matter of right. The Crown may, in its discretion, pay costs. It was not considered advisable in these cases that costs should be paid.

Topic:   QUESTIONS.
Subtopic:   ENLISTMENT OF NOEL GAZELLE.
Permalink

ARTHUR STEELE.

LIB

Mr. SINCLAIR:

Liberal

1. Was Arthur Steele, of Boylston, preventive officer of the Department of Customs, dismissed?

2. If so, why, and on what date?

3. Was there an investigation?

4. If so, by whom, what was the charge, and who laid the complaint?

5. What was the salary of said officer?

6. Who was appointed as his successor, on whose recommendation, and at what salary?

Topic:   QUESTIONS.
Subtopic:   ARTHUR STEELE.
Permalink
CON

WAR SUPPLIES-HAY.


v Mr. PROULX: 1 How many tons of hay has the Department of Militia or the War Purchasing Commission purchased during the month of December last, to be delivered at the sheds of the wharf or harbour of Montreal? 2. What was the price paid per ton? 3. How many tons were purchased since the first of January, 1917, and what was the price paid per ton?


CON

Martin Burrell (Minister of Agriculture)

Conservative (1867-1942)

Mr. BURRELL:

1, 2 and 3. The hay referred to was not purchased by either the Department of Militia or the War Purchasing Commission, but by the Department of Agriculture acting for the British War Office. It is undesirable in the public interest to give information on such matters at the present time.

UNOPPOSED MOTIONS FOR PAPER*3

Mr. Buchanan.-For a copy of all communications, reports and documents concerning the alleged treatment of Thos. Kelly, a prisoner in the Stony Mountain Penitentiary.

Mr. Sinclair.-For a copy of all letters, petitions and other documents in the possession of the Department of Customs relating to the dismissal of Arthur Steele of Boylston, N.S., a preventive officer of said department.

Mr. Sinclair.-For a copy of all correspondence in the possession of the Department of Public Works bearing date after September, 1911, relating to the expenditure of money voted last session for harbour improvements at Tracadie, in the County of Antigonish, including copies of all letters relating to the

same written by Mr. G. A. R. Rollings to the said Minister of Public Works or to any other member of the Government.

Mr. Sinclair.-For a copy of all correspondence in the possession of the Department of Public Works bearing date after September, 1911, relating to the extension of a breakwater at Breen's Point, in the County of Antigonish.

Topic:   QUESTIONS.
Subtopic:   WAR SUPPLIES-HAY.
Permalink

QUESTION PASSED AS ORDERS FOR RETURN.


Mr. Turriff.-1. What are the names and present rank of all appointees as chief recruiting officers or as district or special recruiting officers, not local or regimental, made since the beginning of the war? 2. What were the dates of their respective appointments? 3. What were the ages and vocations of respective appointees? i. What is the name of military organization, if any, in which appointees had previously served? 5. What was the rank of appointees while serving in any military organization? 6. Have the services of any of these appointees been dispensed with? 7. If so, what were their names, and on what dates were they retired?


QUESTION OF PRIVILEGE.

STATEMENT BY HON. P. E. BLONDIN.


On the Orders of the Day:


CON

Pierre Édouard Blondin (Postmaster General)

Conservative (1867-1942)

Hon. P. E. BLONDIN (Postmaster General) :

Mr. Speaker, I saw yesterday for

the first time, in the Ottawa Evening Journal of Friday last, January 26, a report of the Canadian Press, which I will read:

Montreal, Jan. 26.-Hon. P. E. Blondin, through his lieutenant, Felix Durocher, has issued a reply to an affidavit, which purported to give a report of his remarks at St. Rose during a Dorchester county by-election speech on Wednesday night. The affidavit credited Mr. Blondin with contending that the Allison scandal was of no importance to St. Rose because it is English money that was stolen, while those who desired to escape conscription could do so by crossing the United States border. Mr. Blondin's explanation follows:

The statement which has been sworn to by certain Liberals with regard to my utterances are a distortion of my words. I never by any means intended to convey the meaning which they have attached to my speech. Mr. Cannon had been stating in his speeches that the Conservative party had been grafting from the Canadian treasury in connection with munition contracts.

, In my speech at St. Rose I explained that it was not true that the Allison scandal had to do with Canadian money pointing out that the money^ paid for the shells was the money of the British Government. I did not imply that Allison had done a worthy act, but'simply corrected Mr. Cannon's mis-statement. In regard to. the conscription matter I told the people of St. Rose that I did not believe conscription would be necessary because so many Canadians were eager to go and fight for the cause of liberty and humanity. I added that if any of them were afraid of conscription, if conscription should be passed and they did not want to go to the war, they had a remedy left. They could go across the United States line which is near St. Rose and escape military service.

First of all, as for Mr. Desrochers, I beg to state that he did not act as my secretary or lieutenant, and that during the whole election I had no connection with him whatever. I never spoke to him concerning the matter referred to in the report which I have just read. I never authorized him to make any statement for me, and I never was informed by him or anybody else of the statement reported to have been made by him on my behalf. I have inquired from Mr. Desrochers about the correctness of the statement, and he denies, and authorizes me to deny in this House, the laet part of that report, namely, that part which relates to conscription.

As to the statement itself, to wit, that I advised people to cross the boundary, which I am informed, was freely commented oi\ by the hon. member for Aseiniboia (Mr. Turriff), the hon. member for St. John (Mr. Pugsley), and the hou. member for Westmorland (Mr. Copp), I must say that there is not a single particle of truth in that report. The facts concerning the matter are very plain. I was replying to a speech in which my opponent had strongly endeavoured to show that conscription was coming by means of the National Service cards, which, he said, meant nothing but conscription, and that very soon coercion would be used by the Borden English-Protestant Government against the Catholic French-Canadians, and that very soon armed soldiers would come and force their husbands and sons to go to war.

These are the very notes that are still fresh on the paper on which I wrote them when preparing my answer.

Topic:   QUESTION OF PRIVILEGE.
Subtopic:   STATEMENT BY HON. P. E. BLONDIN.
Permalink
LIB

Charles Arthur Gauvreau

Liberal

Mr. GAUVREAU:

Can you isweaT to

that?

Topic:   QUESTION OF PRIVILEGE.
Subtopic:   STATEMENT BY HON. P. E. BLONDIN.
Permalink
CON

Pierre Édouard Blondin (Postmaster General)

Conservative (1867-1942)

Mr. BLONDIN:

I can swear to it. I can bring into this House the affidavits of a hundred and fifty men worthy of confidence, Which, I am afraid, will make the whole Liberal party blush.

My answer to these arguments was that the National Service cards did not mean anything of the kind and were only an appeal to the patriotism and good-will of every citizen whose duty it was to sign them; that if conscription had to come it would come openly; that this Government could not promise or declare that conscription would never come, as it would be coward-

ice on the part Of the Government to make such a declaration oir promise; that it might have to come; but that for the present there was no question of conscription, and the 'Government did not by the National Service cards intend any coercion of the people, and that the best proof of this v as that the stretch of 4,000 miles of frontier had been left unguarded and open. And this I said in order to dhow the stupidity of the contentions of my opponent. I may add, Mr. Speaker, that any other construction o' my words is purely and simply gross misrepresentation.

Topic:   QUESTION OF PRIVILEGE.
Subtopic:   STATEMENT BY HON. P. E. BLONDIN.
Permalink
LIB

Wilfrid Laurier (Leader of the Official Opposition)

Liberal

Sir WILFRID LAURIER:

I would ask

the hon. gentleman to supplement his explanation- by giving us the name of the Liberal gentleman "Who spoke as he did.

Topic:   QUESTION OF PRIVILEGE.
Subtopic:   STATEMENT BY HON. P. E. BLONDIN.
Permalink
CON

Pierre Édouard Blondin (Postmaster General)

Conservative (1867-1942)

Mr. BLONDIN:

In Ste. Rose, Mr. D'Anjou, who presented himself as a lawyer from Rimouski, and I can give some of the other names.

Topic:   QUESTION OF PRIVILEGE.
Subtopic:   STATEMENT BY HON. P. E. BLONDIN.
Permalink
LIB

Wilfrid Laurier (Leader of the Official Opposition)

Liberal

Sir WILFRID LAURIER:

Who is Mr. Desrochers?

Topic:   QUESTION OF PRIVILEGE.
Subtopic:   STATEMENT BY HON. P. E. BLONDIN.
Permalink
CON

Pierre Édouard Blondin (Postmaster General)

Conservative (1867-1942)

Mr. BLONDIN:

He is a lawyer of Montreal.

-GRAIN CONGESTION IN THE WEST.

On the Orders of the Day:

Topic:   QUESTION OF PRIVILEGE.
Subtopic:   STATEMENT BY HON. P. E. BLONDIN.
Permalink

February 1, 1917