Right Hon. ARTHUR MF.IGHEN (Leader of the Opposition): I regret being under the necessity of calling the attention of the House to an occurrence in this Chamber last evening at six o'clock. A special order, being a motion by the hon. member for Rimouski (Sir Eugene Fiset), was under debate. The speaker was the hon. member for South York (Mr. Maclean). The whips had arranged that the debate be continued by one of the hon. members to my left, I believe the hon. member for Lennox and Addington (Mr, Sexsmith). At six o'clock, during the speech of the hon. member for South York, the Deputy Speaker who was in the chair declared it six o'clock, but did not pursue the matter further. Having so declared it the hon. member for Vancouver Centre (Mr. Stevens) who, at my request was leading this side of the House, rose and left the chamber. The hon. member for South York continued with a very few word's, two or three sentences and closed his address. The Deputy Speaker thereupon asked him if he was through, and on receiving a reply in the affirmative, put the motion. I parenthetically add that the words of the Deputy Speaker declaring it six o'clock do not appear in the Hansard record. This is the more strange because I am in a position
to state that the Hansard reporters heard the words. I do not understand why they are not in the records. However, that difficulty does not arise, because the Deputy Speaker has very frankly stated that he did just as I have said, and as many hon. members heard. This ended the debate on the Address irregularly. When the matter came to my attention and the facts were fully disclosed to me, I of course realized that no default whatever had occurred from our side of the House. I am not ascribing fault to any side of the House; certainly there was none here on the part of any officer or any member. I called the matter to the attention of the Deputy Speaker, and, having done so. suggested to him that he lay the facts Defore the Prime Minister and express to him my view that it was the duty of the Prime Minister under the circumstances to move that the order be restored. I am glad to say that the reply of the Prime Minister, which the Deputy Speaker brought to me, was in the affirmative -that he would feel it his duty so to act. I do not go further at the moment, save to say that I have no doubt the Deputy Speaker should not, under the circumstances, have put the motion. That seems very manifest indeed. I do desire to comment on the fairness with which he received the subject since and his disposition to have the error corrected. I simply make this statement of the facts preparatory to the motion which I believe the Prime Minister intends to make.