The following text may have been generated by Optical Character Recognition, with varying degrees of accuracy. Reader beware!

THURSDAY, APRIL 27, SAYSMR.SMITH USED 1922 FUNDS W. E. N. Sinclair Intimates Last Year’s Credit Bal- ance Is Secured by Col- lecting in 1921 Succession Dues Payable This Year —Minister Claims Fig- ures Not Available for House “ADDING MACHINE,” SUGGESTS DEWART Though the Budget debate proper was not reached in the Legislature vesterday until evening, a ‘‘minor”’ Budget debate occupied most of the afternoon, on a notice of motion of W. E. N. Sinclair, Liberal member for South Ontario, calling for the production of particulars of receipts and expenditures of the Government for the three months, August, Sep- tember and October, in each of the three years, 1919, 1920 and 1921. ‘ Mr. Sinclair, in speaking to his motion, subjected’ the Government to a financial criticism. Hon. Peter Smith said the Government could not get the whole return down this session. H. H. Dewart, Southwest Toronto, added to Mr. Sinclair's criticism some of his own, while Hon. G. Howard Ferguson read the’ correspondence concerning the delay in tabling the return of the Hurdman scale, Premier Pours Oil. Premier Drury, on more than one occasion, sought, by deft suggestions, to bring the debate to a close. He said once that speakers, chiefly on the Opposition side, took a good deal of time in the House in debate, even when speaking in order, and this brought indignant declarations of the rights of members from Lib- eral members. He also sought to have Mr. Ferguson's reading of the correspondence ruled out of order, and this brought some cross-fire be- tween the two. Mr. Sinclair, in his reply, resented particularly what he termed “a lec- ture from the Prime Minister,” and refused to accede to the reyuest of the Provincial Treasurer that he drop part of his notice of rmotion. Eventually, the motion carried, but it was well on to 6 o'clock before the debate terminated. eee , Collected in Advance? Mr. Sinclair, speaking to his motion, said that he understood letters had been sent out by the Succession Duties Department. ask- ing for payment of duties before October 381, 1921, though these duties were not then due. He him- ‘self had received such a letter, he said, and the day before he had seen in the Press that the Provincial |Treasurer was foreshadowing 4 ‘surplus, “and I, not being born yes- ‘'terday, drew my own conclusions.’ A question had been placed on the order paper, and the answer show- ‘ed that 51 such letters had been sent out. There was no difficulty in making out a surplus if the Govern- ment borrowed from the oncoming year, as apparently the Government did, Mr. Sinclair contended. The figures he asked for, said Mr. Sinclair, ought to be easily avail- able, and from them members could figure out how the surplus had been shown. They would then see if the Government had borrowed on 1922 by calling in money not due and had held back payments until | 1922 due to be made in 1921. Has Nothing to Hide. Hon. Peter Smith said the motion | had been called on several occasions hen the member for South On- tario had been absent from. the House. The Treasury Department had nothing to hide. “We are the. servants of the people, and are ready to give any information they de-. sire,” said Mr. Smith, amid applause | from Government benches. He said | he was willing to grant the informa- | tion in the last two clauses of the! motion, but thought Mr. Sinelair! should not press for the first part: of it. It would entail enormous labor, and it would be impossible to get it out this session. Mr. Dewart thought that the in- formation could be got readily. If there were not competent adders in _ the Provincial Treasurer’s Depart- ment perhaps they could get adding machines. Mr. Smith had already answered a question as to the pay- ments of the first fifteen days of the present fiscal year. If he could get the details for that question, he | could for this’ one. Another Budget Debate. After sharp criticism from Dr. H. A. Stevenson (London) to the effect | that Opposition members’ tales of woe regarding finances were li- able to hurt the credit of the Province, Mr. Ferguson rose to speak, and said he could not under- stand why the motion had not been called long before. The public ac- counts had showed something new this year, in capital and extraordi- nary expenditures. After a clash with the Premier about taking the time of the House on what seemed to be another , Budget debate, the Conservative | Leader read the correspondence re- garding his attempts to get the in- formation contained in the Hurdman scale. Again the Premier objected, but Mr. Ferguson said he was show- ing what was involved when they were told a return could not come down that session. J. C. Tolmie (Windsor) said that the notice of motion simply asked for information so the members, might know what was the situation regarding finances. If it took time to make the return, it struck him as} peculiar that the question was on. the order paper since February 14, and called only twice. For Campaign Purposes? Mr. Drury said that the Govern- ment had no objection to granting the request, but it would involve a great deal of work. If the informa- tion were to be used for campaign material it would serve its purpose quite as well if brought down next. year. Undoubtedly, he said, referring | to Mr. Sinclair, his honorable friend drew his indemnity, but-if he wags! not in his place attending to his | business when his motion was called that was his own fault. Mr. Sinclair said he did not pro- pose to take any iecture from. the Prime Minister or any other member as to his attendance. He maintain- ed that his record in this regard was as good as that of any member in the House. He did not propose, | either, to take any lectures regarding | his right to place motic’s on the order paper. He said he »7ould not withdraw any part of his motion. The Speaker then put the ques- tion, and the motion carried. LS