Mr. MACKENZIE KING:

In a matter of this kind the rights and privileges of every hon. member are at stake. Surely the Prime Minister, who is custodian of the honour of the house, ought to be prepared to set the example that is necessary in a matter of this kind.

Mr. GUTHRIE:

Had my right hon. friend the leader of the opposition been present during the earlier part of the discussion-

Mr. MACKENZIE KING:

I know what took place.

Mr. GUTHRIE:

-I think he would agree that a full withdrawal of any improper imputation against the hon. member for Shel-burne-Yarmouth was made.

Mr. RALSTON:

There cannot be anything but an improper imputation.

Mr. GUTHRIE:

Now the new suggestion comes from the hon. member for Shelburne-Yarmouth-

Mr. RALSTON:

No, from the Prime Minister.

Mr. GUTHRIE:

-that it is a breach of the privileges of this house to say that an hon. member has received a brief on a discussion. I have never heard of that being taken as a breach of privilege on any occasion. The imputation that he has accepted a fee I grant is improper; that has been fully withdrawn. In my judgment the matter ought to be dropped.

Mr. MACKENZIE KING:

Surely an hon. member cannot at one and the same time act as an independent member of parliament and one who supports a brief which he has received.

Mr. GUTHRIE:

Can my hon. friend cite any case where that has been called a breach of privilege?

Mr. RALSTON:

No one has ever been

accused of it.

Question.

Mr. RALSTON:

I have made an emphatic denial of the statement made by my right hon. friend, and I submit that under the rules of this house my right hon. friend must accept my statement. Does my right hon. friendspeaking to my right hon. friend through you, Mr. Speaker-does he decline to accept my statement as a member of this house?

Some hon. MEMBERS : Answer.

Mr. CAHAN:

There are two sides to this. The Prime Minister stated that he withdrew any imputation upon the honour of the hon. gentleman. The hon. gentleman is bound to accept that. But he does not accept it; he is now striving to find some other statement to which he can take exception. If he accepts the statement of the Prime Minister, then this debate should certainly close.

Mr. RALSTON:

Apparently my hon. friend has not heard the debate.

Mr. MACKENZIE (Vancouver):

He has

been asleep.

Privilege-Mr. Ralston

Mr. RALSTON:

I am not talking about

the imputation which the Prime Minister withdrew or stated! he did not make. I am referring to another imputation altogether. I say my right bon. friend has no right to insinuate in this house or suggest that any hon. member is speaking other than as a member of this house, or that he is speaking in a professional capacity. I denied that I was speaking other than as a member of this house and denied that I accepted any brief. I ask my right hon. friend! to accept my statement.

Mr. BENNETT:

Question.

Some hon. MEMBERS': Question.

Mr. RALSTON:

I submit, Mr. Speaker,

you should ask my right hon. friend to accept my statement.

Mr. SPEAKER:

I do not think we are

getting any further with the matter beyond the point at which we had arrived some time ago. I can quite understand the matter from the point of view of the hon. member who raised the question of privilege, but I have already stated, and I state again, that the Prime Minister emphatically stated that there was no such meaning in the words which were quoted by the hon. member for Shelburne-Yarmouth as he gives to them. As to what subsequently happened, the exact words used by the Prime Minister I do not know. That is on the second point.