May 26, 1905 (10th Parliament, 1st Session)

CON

Arthur Cyril Boyce

Conservative (1867-1942)

Mr. A. C. BOYCE.

Mr. Speaker, I was desirous of further discussing this matter with the hon. gentleman before the House, and this morning gave him notice of my intention to mention the matter in the House this afternoon. But it stood over, and I had not any idea that the hon. gentleman would bring the matter up at this late hour of the night. I would ask whether it would be possible to leave the matter open for discussion at some subsequent time ? I cannot reconcile, so far as I have heard them, the remarks which the hon. gentleman has made and the explanations which he has tendered, with the facts as they exist to my knowledge out of the reports on tile and in the reports on file; and the hon. gentleman's former statements and some of the statements he has made to-night are absolutely irreconcilable. If what remarks I have to offer to the House have to be made now, it will be at some considerable inconvenience ; and I would ask, Mr. Speaker, that an arrangement be made so that this matter, which I am anxious indeed to lay before the House, can be fully discussed later on upon the papers which are brought down. While on my feet, I wish to draw the attention of the hon. gentleman to the fact that he has not brought down all the papers on the file. I have looked over the papers which he has brought down, and there are a number of very important letters which are not among them. There are memoranda having a very important bearing upon the financial transactions involved, which are on the file and in respect of which no privilege can be claimed, but which the hon. gentleman lias not brought down ; and there are specific documents which I asked for in the House, and of which I gave the Prime Minister a memorandum, none of which are included in the return. I refer to the very imiiortant documents called salary warrants, which must show, and I think do show, that no excuse can be made such as is offered now, that the postmaster thought he was dealing with funds due to him out of salary warrants. The statement also, for which I asked, and of which I gave a memorandum to the Prime Minister, as to the amount paid to the postmaster for six months preceding the 19th of May, 1904, is not brought down. Then I would ask that an opportunity be afforded me of further mentioning this matter when all the papers are down and when the hon. the Postmaster General is in his place ?
Sir WILLIAM MtlLOCK. The hon. gentleman wilt have every opportunity to discuss any question affecting the public service on any day that a motion is made to go into Committee of Supply. He cannot be deprived of that right. As to the hon. gentleman's statement that I have made some statements which vary from the papers produced, if he will be good enough to state what he refers to, I might address myself to that point.
Mr. BOYCE, i' was hoping that the hon. gentleman would have brought down all the papers, so that the discussion could have been directed to the subject with all the papers before the House. It will be futile for me to continue the discussion now, with only probably one-half the papers before the House. I am quite ready to discuss the matter with the papers that have been brought down. I think possibly I can point out to the hon. gentleman some defects or inconsistencies in the statements which he has made now as contrasted with those which he made when the matter was first mentioned in the House. But I should like to have an opportunity of mentioning the matter later on when the hon. gentleman is in his place in the House.

Topic:   SUPPLY.
Subtopic:   THESSALON, ONT., POSTMASTER.
Full View