1. Exports to United States of cattle:

Year Number

1950

1951

1952

2. Cattle, except purebred, are not recorded separately in import trade statistics but are included in one category reading "Livestock, n.o.p.:-cattle, goats, hogs, sheep and lambs".

Imports of purebred cattle from the United

States were as follows:

Year Number

1950

1951

1952

Imports of "Livestock, n.o.p.: :-cattle, goats,

hogs, sheep and lambs" from the United States

were as follows:

Year Number

1950

1951 127

1952 4,433

Separate figures for cattle are not available.

Mr. Hansell:

Was Canada consulted in respect to the recent visit to the United Kingdom of Marshal Tito of Yugoslavia? If so, in what manner?

Mr. Martin:

I can give an oral reply to this question immediately, Mr. Speaker. While the Canadian government was informed by the United Kingdom government of the arrangements for the visit of Marshal Tito to the United Kingdom there was never any question of consultation in this matter, since any decisions regarding the visit were strictly the responsibility of the governments of the United Kingdom and Yugoslavia.

Mr. Speaker:

Answered.

1. How many construction contracts has the Booth Construction Company Limited had at Camp Borden, during the past four years?

2. What was the total amount of such contracts?

3. How much has been paid to the said company on account of each of the said contracts?

4. Did the said company complete each of the said contracts?

5. If not, which of the said contracts have not been completed?

6. Were the subcontractors of the said company, or suppliers of goods, wares or merchandise or services, in connection with the said contract or contracts duly paid?

7. If not, what is the total amount of the unpaid indebtedness of the said company to each of the subcontractors or suppliers, giving the amounts owing and the names and addresses of each of them?

Mr. Solon E. Low (Peace River):

I have

a question for the Minister of Justice. Has the attention of the Minister of Justice been called to the unjustified abuse meted out by Mr. Justice Manson to Raymond Sims in a Vancouver court, as reported in the Vancouver Sun of Wednesday, May 6? Has the minister any comment to make on this reported unseemly conduct by Mr. Justice Manson?

Hon. Stuart S. Garson (Minister of Justice):

I wish to thank my hon. friend for having given me notice of his question. I have seen the newspaper report to which his question refers. I do not wish to offer any comment upon it, because I prefer not to interfere in matters which come under provincial jurisdiction. The remarks which were attributed to Mr. Justice Manson in the newspaper report which was attached to my hon. friend's question were allegedly made in a civil matter in a British Columbia provincial court, and of course the administration of justice in provincial courts is wholly the responsibility of the attorney general of British Columbia and his colleagues in the British Columbia cabinet.

Mr. Low:

May I ask a supplementary

question? Is it not understood that the justices of these courts are supposed to be impartial?

Mr. Garson:

Yes, my hon. friend is quite

right; justices are supposed to be impartial.

Mr. Low:

Is it not also true that these

justices are appointed and paid by the federal government?

Mr. Garson:

Well, Mr. Speaker, I do not want to engage here in a discussion of constitutional practice, but in reply to my hon. friend's question I might point out that the judges of these courts are appointed and paid by the federal government, but once they are sworn in and engage upon their duties they are then under the direction, in so far as the executive directs the judiciary body at all, of the attorney general of the province and his colleagues, under heading 14 of section 92 of the British North America Act.

Under this heading the provinces have the exclusive responsibility for the administration of justice. If, as in the case that my hon. friend is discussing here, a judge has allegedly committed some impropriety which is serious enough to warrant an attorney general in bringing it to the attention of the Department of Justice, then in a sufficiently serious case, which I suggest the one that my hon. friend has in mind is certainly not, we would appoint a court of inquiry, and the judge could be removed by an address of the House of Commons, but not until the provincial attorney general had thought that it was sufficiently serious to bring it to our attention.

A joint address.

Mr. Garson:

Yes, a joint address of the Senate and House of Commons.

Mr. Graydon:

There must be many hon. members who have no background at all with respect to this matter. Perhaps the hon. member for Peace River felt that he could not give the background when he asked the question. Will the Minister of Justice indicate what the point is that is involved?

Mr. Abbott:

Curiosity killed the cat.