§ COLONEL TOMLINEasked Mr. Chancellor of the Exchequer, Whether he is still of the opinion recently given by him to the effect that the Government had 398 nothing to do with the contract for the coinage of silver for Canada entered into with a firm at Birmingham; whether he is aware that under such circumstances the said coinage at Birmingham was an infringement of the prerogative of the Crown, and a violation of the Coinage Act of 1870; and, if so, whether he has taken any steps to enforce payment of the penalties imposed by the fifth section of that Act; and, whether it is not the case that all the Colonial coinages, as well as the coinage of Canada, have hitherto been executed at the Royal Mint, which derived an income in aid of its expenses from such coinages?
§ THE CHANCELLOR OF THE EXCHEQUER, in reply, said, he must still adhere to his opinion that the Government had nothing to do with the contract which was entered into between Canada and a firm at Birmingham. The Government had sent down, as it always did in the case of colonial coinage, an officer of the Mint to overlook the coinage, and see that it was properly conducted on the part of the Crown. He was not aware that any infraction of the Prerogative of the Crown or any violation of the Act of Parliament had occurred. The hon. Gentleman probably alluded to the 5th section of the Mint Act, where it was provided that no person should be permitted to coin money except at the Mint itself; but he had omitted to read the 19th section of the same Act, by which colonies were entirely exempted from the operation of the Act. As to the third Question of the hon. Gentleman, it was a very common circumstance for Colonial coinage to be executed otherwise than at the Mint.