whom I had in mind and whom I still have in mind. This had the effect of causing some alarm amongst the staff of that department. I must, in all justice, state in this House that my remarks were not directed against the chief of the Naturalization Branch who, I acknowledge, is very competent to fill the post which he now holds; I must further add that the staff of that branch must in no way cast doubt upon the honour of some of their comrades, because I must admit and assert that I received my information from an entirely outside source, and not from any one connected with the Department of the Secretary of State.
I had no intention nor have I at present-I am speaking for the future, as I intend to again bring up this subject-to attack persons whom I think are very lucky to be recommended by the Civil Service Commission. What I have proved by my argument is that the commission is incompetent and unjust in the classification of employees. You will find further proof of this by looking over the Official Gazette of Canada, of June 3, 1922; you will note that the commission recommends a maximum salary of $3,600 per year for an ordinary shipping agent, while a little further it recommends a maximum salary of $2,100 for an expert in irrigation. . . .
Mr. SPEAKER. (Translation): I would request the hon. member to kindly confine himself to the question of privilege. Dn a question of privilege a member may not enlarge upon a speech already made. The hon. member has stated that what he said the other day in no way reflects upon the character of two or three employees of the Department of the Secretary of State. That does not come under questions of privilege, but rather under personal explanation. This having been clearly stated I would ask the hon. member to desist and not further transgress the Rules of the House.