January 24, 1935

QUESTIONS


(Questions answered orally are indicated by an asterisk).


SEIZTTBE OF VESSEL PAUL T.


Mr. YENIOT; 1. Were instructions issued by the Department of National Revenue in connection with the disposal of the vessel Paul T seized for infraction of customs regulations; if so, what were such instructions? 2. Were instructions issued by the said department for the disposal of liquors seized on board such vessel; if so, what were such instructions? 3. Were instructions issued by the Department of National Revenue for the disposal of the stores found on board' the Paul T; if so, what were the instructions?


CON

Mr. MATTHEWS: (Minister of National Revenue)

Conservative (1867-1942)

1. Yes, to destroy the vessel.

2. Yes, to destroy the liquor.

3. Vessel, cargo and stores had been forfeited to crown in right of the province and merely transferred to Department of National Revenue for disposal. Instructions were given for destruction of vessel and cargo without particularly mentioning stores.

Empire Defence Plan

Topic:   QUESTIONS
Subtopic:   SEIZTTBE OF VESSEL PAUL T.
Permalink

CANADIAN FARM LOAN ACT APPLICATIONS

LIB

Mr. GIROUARD:

Liberal

1. How many applications for loans, under tlie Farm Loan Act, were made by farmers in the province of Quebec during the years 1932, 1933, and' 1934?

2. How many of such applications were granted during each of the said years?

3. How many applications were refused during each of the said years?

4. What was the total amount of the loans asked during each of the years 1932, 1933, and 1934?

5. What was the total amount of loans granted during each of the said years?

Topic:   QUESTIONS
Subtopic:   CANADIAN FARM LOAN ACT APPLICATIONS
Permalink
CON

Edgar Nelson Rhodes (Minister of Finance and Receiver General)

Conservative (1867-1942)

Mr. RHODES:

Answers 1, 2, 3, 4, 5.

Number of

Applica-

(*) tions

Amount of Number with- AmountApplications Loans of drawn or offor Loan Applied Loans Rejected LoansReceived for Granted (*) GrantedFiscal year ended March 31, 1932.. 2,703 87,829,933 425 2,507 $855,000Fiscal year ended March 31, 1933.. 1,018 2,413,935 237 865 438,200Fiscal year ended March 31, 1934.. 779 1,541,711 140 645 222,900

(*)Figures for each year under this heading include applications carried over from previous fiscal year and dealt with during the fiscal year.

Topic:   QUESTIONS
Subtopic:   CANADIAN FARM LOAN ACT APPLICATIONS
Permalink

QUESTIONS PASSED AS ORDERS FOR RETURNS

ELECTORAL LISTS

LIB

Charles Gavan Power

Liberal

Mr. POWER:

How many names were inscribed on the electoral lists of each of the constituencies in the province of Quebec as a result of the recent general registration under the provisions of the Dominion Franchise Act, 1934?

Topic:   QUESTIONS PASSED AS ORDERS FOR RETURNS
Subtopic:   ELECTORAL LISTS
Permalink
CON

Charles Hazlitt Cahan (Secretary of State of Canada)

Conservative (1867-1942)

Mr. CAHAN:

Return tabled herewith.

Topic:   QUESTIONS PASSED AS ORDERS FOR RETURNS
Subtopic:   ELECTORAL LISTS
Permalink

SILVER AND GOLD PRODUCTION

LIB

Mr. REID:

Liberal

1. What amounts of silver have been purchased by the government of Canada since April 1. 1934, and (a) what price per ounce was paid for the silver purchased; (b) from whom were the various quantities, it any, purchased?

2. What was the total output of gold in 1934?

3. What was the total revenue received by the government in 1934 under the gold tax of 1934?

4. What was the average value per ounce of gold produced in Canada during 1934?

5. Were any licences issued for the exportation of gold?

6. If so: (a) to whom; (b) what was the total amount exported; (c) to what countries were the various amounts exported?

7. Did the dominion government purchase any gold in 1934: if so. what quantities were purchased and what was the price per ounce paid?

Topic:   QUESTIONS PASSED AS ORDERS FOR RETURNS
Subtopic:   SILVER AND GOLD PRODUCTION
Permalink

EMPIRE DEFENCE PLAN


On the orders of the day:


LIB

William Lyon Mackenzie King (Leader of the Official Opposition)

Liberal

Right Hon. W. L. MACKENZIE KING (Leader of the Opposition):

On Monday

I asked the Prime Minister a question with regard to an article that had appeared in an English newspaper in reference to an empire defence plan and the right hon. gentleman replied to the effect that it was a question that ordinarily ought to have been placed on the order paper in order that time might be given to look into it. He gave a definite answer with regard to the article itself but did not answer at the time, and] I imagine was not in a position to. do so, the specific question I asked, which was:

Was the recent visit of Sir Maurice Hankey to Canada made the occasion of a discussion or consideration of any plan of empire defence by any member of the government, or by any official or officials of the government, acting under the authority of any minister of the crown ?

The Prime Minister said that he would examine the situation in detail to see whether any further reply should be made than that which he gave. May I say to him that I shall be glad to put the inquiry in the form of a question on the order paper if he prefers to have further time for consideration before giving an answer. If, however, he is prepared to give a definite reply with respect to my question, and the implications conveyed by the article to which I referred that would be more satisfactory.

Topic:   QUESTIONS PASSED AS ORDERS FOR RETURNS
Subtopic:   EMPIRE DEFENCE PLAN
Sub-subtopic:   INQUIRY BY MR. MACKENZIE KING AS TO ACCURACY OR OTHERWISE OF PRESS REPORT
Permalink
CON

Richard Bedford Bennett (Prime Minister; President of the Privy Council; Secretary of State for External Affairs)

Conservative (1867-1942)

Right Hon. R. B. BENNETT (Prime Minister):

As I indicated, I had no notice

of the question, but I felt that it was one that should be answered immediately in order that no wrong impressions might be given to the people of Canada. The answer to the question as put is, no. I know of no conversations with respect to empire defence,

Empire Defence Plan

in the sense in which I assume that term is used, which were carried on by Sir Maurice Hankey with any officer or officers of any of the departments, with the authority of the government, or with anyone else, so far as I know, except, as I found on inquiry, that Sir Maurice Hankey did see the chief of the general staff, saw the camps at Roekcliffe, and matters of that sort. I think he called on the Under-Secretary of State for External Affairs and sat with him for an hour, and I believe he accepted the hospitality of the right hon. gentleman opposite. He had many conversations with friends whom he had met in previous years, and I had a few words of conversation with him-not an extensive conversation-and certainly there was no discussion of empire defence in any sense, as far as I know. Nor was any such discussion authorized by the government on the part of any official or officials of the departments in Canada.

Topic:   QUESTIONS PASSED AS ORDERS FOR RETURNS
Subtopic:   EMPIRE DEFENCE PLAN
Sub-subtopic:   INQUIRY BY MR. MACKENZIE KING AS TO ACCURACY OR OTHERWISE OF PRESS REPORT
Permalink
LIB

William Lyon Mackenzie King (Leader of the Official Opposition)

Liberal

Mr. MACKENZIE KING:

I notice that

the Prime Minister in his reply says, "So far as I know." Perhaps he will not object if I put on the order paper a question which would specifically cover the knowledge of other ministers. It is quite true that when Sir Maurice Hankey was here some of us had the pleasure of renewing old friendships with him and conversing with him, and I am happy to have been one of the number; but apart from these personal relationships, there is a general impression that matters pertaining to defence were discussed by officials of the department of National Defence with Sir Maurice when he was here. On that point I should like to get exact information.

Topic:   QUESTIONS PASSED AS ORDERS FOR RETURNS
Subtopic:   EMPIRE DEFENCE PLAN
Sub-subtopic:   INQUIRY BY MR. MACKENZIE KING AS TO ACCURACY OR OTHERWISE OF PRESS REPORT
Permalink
CON

Richard Bedford Bennett (Prime Minister; President of the Privy Council; Secretary of State for External Affairs)

Conservative (1867-1942)

Mr. BENNETT:

I think that is the proper course and the one which the right hon. gentleman should have followed at the beginning instead of asking without notice a question of that character. I think he will agree that if he were Prime Minister he would not care to have a question of that kind asked without notice, with the obvious implications which it carries and in view of the effect it is calculated to have on certain people in the community who have strong views. Now, I did make inquiries, and I repeat that while Sir Maurice Hankey did discuss everything connected with our own country, asked questions, and carried on a general conversation that had no official character, so far as I know, with various people whom he met, he did not discuss with nor was any official authorized to carry on with him any conversation other than the ordinary conversation which one would expect to take place between

a man of Sir Maurice Hankey's experience and attainments and any person whom he might meet in any of the services of Canada and whom he had previously known.

Topic:   QUESTIONS PASSED AS ORDERS FOR RETURNS
Subtopic:   EMPIRE DEFENCE PLAN
Sub-subtopic:   INQUIRY BY MR. MACKENZIE KING AS TO ACCURACY OR OTHERWISE OF PRESS REPORT
Permalink

January 24, 1935