Mr. Speaker:

I trust hon. members will allow me to make a few brief remarks on the tragedy we are commemorating today.

Today marks the fiftieth anniversary of the destruction by fire of the original parliament buildings of Canada. The blaze broke out in the reading room at 8.55 p.m. and spread swiftly throughout the building. At the time the house was debating problems concerning the fishing industry.

Hon. members may be interested in the following extract from Hansard of February 3, 1916, as reported at page 578:

9 p.m.

At this time Mr. C. R. Stewart, Chief Doorkeeper of the House of Commons, came hurriedly into the Chamber and called out: "There is a big fire in the reading room; everybody get out quickly." The sitting was immediately suspended without formality, and members, officials, and visitors in the galleries, fled from the Chamber. Some of them were almost overcome by the rapidly-advancing smoke and flames before reaching a place of safety. The fire, which had originated in the reading room, gained momentum with extreme rapidity and was soon beyond control. It continued till the following day, resulting in the almost total destruction of the parliament buildings, together with the loss of several lives.

As hon. members know, the only part of the original building remaining virtually intact was the library. Following the disaster, parliament met in the lecture theatre of the Victoria Memorial Museum and sessions continued there until February 2, 1920, when parliament met in the present building for the first time. Yesterday marked our 46th year in this chamber of our parliament.

Among the casualties of the fire was the mace. A temporary replacement was hastily constructed and was used for several months after the fire, and it is this mace which is in use today.

Mr. Speaker:

Under my direction an annotated provisional copy of the standing orders of the house has been prepared to incorporate certain changes in procedure and practice which are in effect for this session. If it is the wish of the house, arrangements can be made to have this copy appended to Friday's Votes and Proceedings so that it will be available in both languages on Monday next. Is it agreed?

Agreed.

Right Hon. J. G. Diefenbaker (Leader of the Opposition):

Mr. Speaker, I wish to direct a question to the Minister of Justice and ask him whether consideration has now been given to the setting up of a judicial inquiry into the Spencer case. When replying to that question would he also let the house know whether investigation has been made by the mounted police into the potential threat made by Spencer to the effect that if any prosecution were made of him, heads would roll?

Right Hon. L. B. Pearson (Prime Minister):

Mr. Speaker, I was asked the other day whether I would consider the possibility of establishing an inquiry of this kind, and I said I would give consideration to it. Mr. Speaker, I am doing that. I am reviewing the complete record in this case. I have already studied it, and when I have finished my review I will make a statement in this connection.

Mr. Diefenbaker:

Mr. Speaker, would the Minister of Justice answer the second portion of my question, which does not come under the purview of the Prime Minister? Because that threat is one which carries with it certain implications that ought not to be ignored.

Hon. Lucien Cardin (Minister of Justice):

Mr. Speaker, I presume that aspect of the question will be included in the statement.

February 3, 1666

Inquiries of the Ministry

Mr. Diefenbaker:

This comes exclusively under the Minister of Justice. If he cannot answer, of course that is perfectly all right.

Mr. Cardin:

Whether I can answer is not the question. The matter will be considered by the Prime Minister as he mentioned in his statement.

Mr. T. C. Douglas (Burnaby-Goquiilam):

have a question which could be directed either to the Minister of National Defence or the Minister of Defence Production. I wish to ask whether any request has been received from Saint John, New Brunswick regarding the multimillion dollar contract for repairing

H.M.C.S. Bonaventure on the ground that economic conditions in the area would be greatly helped if Saint John got this contract. I should like to know whether such a request has been received and whether favourable consideration is being given to it.

Hon. C. M. Drury (Minister of Industry):

Mr. Speaker, a number of representations have been received both by myself and by the Department of Defence Production advocating the award Of the contract for the repair of the Bonaventure, a substantial job, to the Saint John Drydock Company on the ground that this is a competent, efficient and skilful yard which is now faced with some problem of unemployment.

Some time ago tenders were invited from shipyards in a position to carry out this refit, tenders containing price proposals. These were received two days ago and publicly opened yesterday with the following disclosure. The bids, three in number, were from the Davie Shipbuilding Company for $5,768,689; from Vickers for $5,863,341 and from the Saint John Drydock Company for $8,572,928.

In accordance with our normal practice we would expect to award this contract to the low bidder.