I think the statement was that if it was not in the form of a confidence motion, which would imply that if it did not interfere with the government he would vote for it.
Mr. NEILL. He deliberately twisted my language. I said I would vote for ft if it were not attached to a straight vote of confidence or combined with a motion in regard to higher protection on other goods in such a way as to make it entirely nugatory.
I will pass over the remarks of the hon. member for Pa-rkdale (Mr. Spence). He says it was all nonsense. My resolution has been vindicated by the hon. member for Fraser Valley. I am pleased to see the stand he took. .
One other point as regards the question that it would be far better to put on protection.
Electoral District oj Athabaska
Here is the language the Oowiehan Creamery Association used:
The board of directors and management of this association are of the opinion, and (Very strongly of the opinion at that, that the Eggs Marks Act is a mudh better form of protection than 5 cent extra duty, at the same time we believe that if the act was a federal measure instead of a .provincial one, it would have a better chance.
And so on.
The hon. member for Frontenac-Addington accused me of being a near free trader or a has-been free trader. As soon as you propose to go half way to meet hon. gentlemen opposite, they are never satisfied. Here is a measure of protection. I am not ashamed to say that I favour it as protection, but they are not satisfied. It does not go far enough for them. But only two members on the other side have the courage of their convictions and sav, "Here is protection; we will support it."
I hope the House will unite in passing the resolution.
Topic: MARKING OF EGGS
Subtopic: PROPOSED APPLICATION TO DOMINION OF BRITISH COLUMBIA ACT