Mr. MACKENZIE KING:
Mr. Brockington's name was not mentioned on the question at all. I did not assume it had reference to Mr. Brockington; I assumed it had reference to some appointment similar to the appointment made by a former government in the last war, of someone to write a history of the war. It is true that my hon. friend has said nothing in the way of an attack to-day, but he has brought Mr. Brockington's name up on one or two previous occasions. He has been kind enough to say to me that he did not mean anything he said as any attack on Mr. Brockington; quite clearly then he meant what he said as a reflection on myself. At any rate I have taken it as such, and I am replying to what he said in a way which I think will justify before the country the position in which I have been placed.
In addition I would point out that while my hon. friend has been reflecting upon me in the house in this matter, some of his supporting journals on the outside have been making their attack from an opposite point of view; they have been saying it was part of my business to stand up and defend Mr. Brockington. My hon. friend said he was not attacking Mr. Brockington, so that no defence of him was needed; yet by his press on the outside I am being attacked on the score that I have attached to my office a gentleman who is being attacked and I am not defending him.
So far as Mr. Brockington is concerned, I think his abilities speak for themselves, I do not think he needs any defence. So far as I
am concerned I am prepared to abide by such attack as has been made and the explanation I have given.