May 10, 1902

FIRST READING.


Bill (No. 1G7) respecting the Royal Marine Insurance Company.-Mr. Marcil (Bonaven-ture).


BUSINESS OF THE HOUSE.

?

The PRIME MINISTER (Rt. Hon. Sir Wilfrid Laurier).

Mr. Speaker, I have been appealed to by members on both sides of the House to have the order for private Bills called up now. I therefore move that the House do forthwith proceed with the Orders of the Day for private Bills.

Topic:   BUSINESS OF THE HOUSE.
Permalink
CON

Robert Laird Borden (Leader of the Official Opposition)

Conservative (1867-1942)

Mr. BORDEN (Halifax).

I think it is very desirable that these Bills be given an opportunity of being passed, and possibly it might be expedient to take first the Bills which stand for a second reading, upon which there is not likely to be any controversy. There are twenty-six private Bills on the Order paper, of which eight stand for a second reading ; and if these are allowed to pass their second reading, they can go at once to Committee.

Topic:   BUSINESS OF THE HOUSE.
Permalink
CON

Charles Eusèbe Casgrain

Conservative (1867-1942)

Mr. CASGRAIN.

There is a Bill on the Order paper in which I am interested, and to which I gave notice that I would move some amendments when the motion was made to refer the Bill to the Committee of the Whole House ; and if private Bills are taken up now, it will of course be on the understanding that I .am allowed to move these amendments now.

Topic:   BUSINESS OF THE HOUSE.
Permalink
?

The PRIME MINISTER.

I have no objection personally, but it may be that these amendments are material ; and as the object of this motion is to enable parties who may have adverse interests to any of these Bills to receive notice of them, I think it would be more prudent to allow any Bill to which amendments are to be moved to stand over until Monday.

Topic:   BUSINESS OF THE HOUSE.
Permalink

Motion agreed to.


PRIVATE BILLS.

MONTREAL SUBWAY COMPANY.


House again in Committee on Bill (No. 98) to incorporate the Montreal Subway Company.-Mr. McCarthy. On section 20, subsection b,


CON

David Henderson

Conservative (1867-1942)

Mr. HENDERSON.

When this Bill was up for discussion before, I took occasion to refer to the fact that the words ' for actual construction ' were not read by the Chairman, and in that way I was led to the misapprehension that these words had not been included in the amendment. I desire i to say that I did not intend to cast any

reflection upon the examiner of private Bills or to hold him responsible for the omission.

Topic:   PRIVATE BILLS.
Subtopic:   MONTREAL SUBWAY COMPANY.
Permalink
LIB

Peter Macdonald (Deputy Speaker and Chair of Committees of the Whole of the House of Commons)

Liberal

Mr. DEPUTY SPEAKER.

This is the first time they appeared.

Topic:   PRIVATE BILLS.
Subtopic:   MONTREAL SUBWAY COMPANY.
Permalink
CON

David Henderson

Conservative (1867-1942)

Mr. HENDERSON.

In the Railway Committee it was understood that those words should be inserted, and when you read the clause and the words did not appear, that was the cause of my remarks.

Topic:   PRIVATE BILLS.
Subtopic:   MONTREAL SUBWAY COMPANY.
Permalink

Amendment agreed to, and section as amended agreed to. On section 21,


LIB

Lawrence Geoffrey Power (Speaker of the Senate)

Liberal

Mr. SPEAKER.

Notice of motion has been given by my hon. friend Mr. Geoffrion to provide that the two subways shall be constructed simultaneously ; and therefore I move that the following words be added to subsection a :

And both the said subways for railway and highway purposes shall be laid out and constructed simultaneously.

Topic:   PRIVATE BILLS.
Subtopic:   MONTREAL SUBWAY COMPANY.
Permalink

Amendment agreed to, and section as amended agreed to. Bill reported, read the third time, and passed.


THE SOUTH SHORE RAILWAY COMPANY.


House In Committee on Bill (No. 85) respecting the South Shore Railway Company.-Mr. Geoffrion.


CON

Robert Laird Borden (Leader of the Official Opposition)

Conservative (1867-1942)

Mr. BORDEN (Halifax).

Is this the same Bill we had up last year ? It seems to be practically of the same nature.

Topic:   THE SOUTH SHORE RAILWAY COMPANY.
Permalink

May 10, 1902