§ MR. O'DONNELLI wish, Sir, to make a personal explanation with reference to your calling me to Order on Friday last. I was arguing, Sir, on the general question of the evidence to be supplied to Mr. Speaker with regard to the Business of the House, and I was pointing out the difference between the weighty and valuable evidence that would be supplied by a body of reporters or officials appointed and directed by this House, and that, on the other hand, the evidence supplied by officials or reporters not appointed by this House would, be valueless and worthless evidence. At this point, Sir, an hon. Gentleman opposite rose and declared that I had used un-Parliamentary language. I did not notice the point; but you, Sir, immediately replied that I had used un-Parliamentary language, and that the gentlemen in question were gentlemen 314 as well as ourselves. I did not understand the point of your censure either, Sir, until I read it in the newspapers containing the report of the discussions. Then I found that the hon. Gentleman opposite had understood me to use the words "worthless agents," while I used the words "worthless evidence." There may be some similarity between the sounds of the different words; but I wish to explain that I did not use the words imputed to me. My objections were in no way directed towards the individuals you employed, Sir, whose characters I have nothing to say against; and, therefore, I beg to state most respectfully that you were quite mistaken by thinking that I used the words "worthless agents." I spoke entirely of worthless evidence, Sir, and I wish it to be understood that I am not to be judged of being guilty of bringing anything against the character of these gentlemen, whom I must conclude are honourable and respectable men.