May 18, 1903

LIB

Rodolphe Lemieux

Liberal

Mr. LEMIEUX.

As the clause read at first, they had all these powers, but these were restricted by the amendment.

On section 4,

Topic:   PRIVATE BILLS.
Subtopic:   NEW CANADIAN COMPANY, LIMITED.
Permalink
CON

John Graham Haggart

Conservative (1867-1942)

Hon. Mr. HAGGART.

The company seems to have two different entities-one in Great Britain, under which it has powers to issue bonds and debentures, and we are now giving it another set of powers in this Act. Under which entity is it to have existence here ? In this Bill we do not do away with the power of the English corporation and give it entirely a new set.

Topic:   PRIVATE BILLS.
Subtopic:   NEW CANADIAN COMPANY, LIMITED.
Permalink
LIB

Rodolphe Lemieux

Liberal

Mr. LEMIEUX.

If the hon. gentleman will read the second clause as it originally was, he will see that they would have special powers and also all the powers they had under their charter in England. But, under these amendments their powers are restricted and they have only the special powers which are enumerated in the Bill. And. of course, they cannot go beyond what they have in this charter.

Topic:   PRIVATE BILLS.
Subtopic:   NEW CANADIAN COMPANY, LIMITED.
Permalink
CON

John Graham Haggart

Conservative (1867-1942)

Hon. Mr. HAGGART.

Under this Bill the company is ' declared a body politic and corporate within the legislative authority of the parliament of Canada ; and that this Act and the Company's Clauses Act shall apply to the company and its undertaking instead of said Company's Acts of Great Britain.' It is an entirely different entity in Great Britain. The law of Great Britain applies to it over there as to the issuing of bonds, debentures. &c. The company in Canada has its powers and the company in Great Britain has its powers. That is what I say.

Bill reported, read the third time, and passed.

Topic:   PRIVATE BILLS.
Subtopic:   NEW CANADIAN COMPANY, LIMITED.
Permalink

CONSOLIDATED TRUST CORPORATION.


House in committee oil Bill (No. 121) to incorporate the Consolidated Trust Corporation.-Mr. McColl. On section 12,


CON

Frederick Debartzch Monk

Conservative (1867-1942)

Mr. MONK.

There is something strange about this clause. It enacts that the :

Honeys, properties and securities received or held by the corporations upon trust or as agent shall not be liable for the debts or obligations of the corporation.

Still,- it would seem that one of the debts or obligations of the corporation is receiving money on trust. The clause worded in this way seems to be anomalous. We ought to add, at any rate, that the moneys received on trust by the corporation shall be liable for the payment of the trust.

Topic:   CONSOLIDATED TRUST CORPORATION.
Permalink
?

The MINISTER OF FINANCE.

The purpose is, whether it is clearly expressed or not, that these trust funds shall be liable to the trustees and not for the general purposes of the corporation. If they have not expressed that, I have no doubt that is what they intended.

On section 18,

Topic:   CONSOLIDATED TRUST CORPORATION.
Permalink
CON

Frederick Debartzch Monk

Conservative (1867-1942)

Mr. MONK.

Does the minister think that this is a very wise provision ? We provide in section 18 :

The powers and authority hereby granted to the corporation shall not have any force or effect in any province in any respect in which they are inconsistent with the laws of such province.

1 am afraid there are a great many provisions in this Bill which are at variance with the ordinary law respecting trusts in our own province, but still, when we have a trustee I do not think we should put that limitation upon the company's powers.

Topic:   CONSOLIDATED TRUST CORPORATION.
Permalink
?

The MINISTER OF FINANCE.

I think it will probably be understood to mean that inasmuch as the management of trusts is a matter coming under the authority of the provincial law this Act can affect only them in so far as the provincial law will permit it. We cannot regulate ordinary trustees. This happens to belong to the class of subjects in which there is both provincial and Dominion authority-provincial authority as to the regulation of the trust, and Dominion authority as to the regulation of the company. A trustee is only permitted under provincial authority to invest his money in certain directions, and this Bill could not change that authority'. I think that is what they are particularly aiming at.

Bill reported, read the third time, and passed.

Topic:   CONSOLIDATED TRUST CORPORATION.
Permalink

RELIEF OF WILLIAM FRANCIS SCHOOLEY.


House in committee on Bill (No. 128) for the relief of William Francis Schooley.- Mr. Boyd.


CON
LIB

John Charlton

Liberal

Mr. CHARLTON.

Mr. Chairman, I do not rise for the purpose of opposing the reporting of this Bill. I notice that according to the allegations of the Bill the former wife of Mr. Schooley abandoned him fourteen years ago, that she obtained a decree of divorce in one of the American states eleven years ago and that she married in the state of Michigan five years ago. These statements, assuming them to be facts, and as such they appear upon the record, would entitle Mr. Schooley to a divorce beyond question, but I rise to point out the imperfection of our law in regard to the granting of decrees of divorce. Mr. Schooley lives in Manitoba. The business of prosecuting this suit in Ottawa is one that would involve very serious expense. If Mr. Schooley was entitled to relief under our laws he has been subjected to a hardship, and to a cost in this matter that would seem to be unjustifiable, and I rise to point out that in cases where the law provides a remedy, in cases where the circumstances warrant the granting of divorce some more speedy and less expensive method should be adopted. If Mr. Schooley had been permitted to appeal in this case to a judge in Manitoba near at hand, if this case had been tried before a divorce judge, and a court could be established without additional cost by merely putting that additional duty upon the judges there, he could have obtained his relief speedily and he could have obtained it at small cost. He lias been debarred for five years from making this attempt which he is now making to get justice to which he is entitled. In all of these proceedings we are pursuing a course which is entirely unjustifiable, a course which is expensive and one which in many cases, I have no doubt, prevents people who are entitled to relief from obtaining that relief because of the difficulties attending this course of procedure, because of the expense of coming from a distant province to the capital of the country and of the attendant expense and worry of prosecuting this appeal.

Bill reported, read the third time, and passed.

Topic:   RELIEF OF WILLIAM FRANCIS SCHOOLEY.
Permalink
CON

Nathaniel Boyd

Conservative (1867-1942)

Mr. BOYD moved :

That a message be sent to the Senate to return to that House the evidence, &c., taken before the Standing Committee of the Senate,- to whom was referred the Bill No. 12S (letter B of the Senate), intituled : 'An Act for the relief of William Francis Schooley.'

Topic:   RELIEF OF WILLIAM FRANCIS SCHOOLEY.
Permalink
L-C

Andrew B. Ingram

Liberal-Conservative

Mr. INGRAM.

Mr. Speaker, I think, before that motion is put, the hon. member for North Norfolk (Mr. Charlton) having made some reference to the subject of divorce, it does seem to me that the law as it now stands is a rich man's law as against the poor man. I think where the case is such as the hon. gentleman has described, and as the evidence bears out a more rea-

sonable method ought to be adopted whereby a man might be placed in a position to secure a divorce at less cost than the applicant now before the House has been subjected to. I think the government ought lo be in a position to make some kind of statement in reply to the speech of the hon. member for North Norfolk. This is a very important question. I, for one, do not wish to encourage the granting of divorces, but at the same time a circumstance of this kind is one that should be considered and no undue hardship should be placed upon a man who has been so unfortunate as this man has been.

Topic:   RELIEF OF WILLIAM FRANCIS SCHOOLEY.
Permalink
LIB

William Ross

Liberal

Hon. Mr. ROSS (Victoria, N.S.).

Mr. Speaker, I think this is a case that ought to appeal to the sense of the House. The very fact of a man having to come down to the Senate here all the way from Manitoba is evidence to the House that there should be some better way of dealing with divorces than exists in the Dominion at the present time. This case would be settled in about half a day by a judge of the Supreme Court of Nova Scotia. I think that public opinion will in time compel the government to do something so that people will not be put to this expense. If this were a poor man he would have been obliged to exist without any redress all his lifetime,' but because he is in good circumstances he is enabled to come down and seek redress through this-I was going to say-inhuman channel of obtaining it. In all cases if any British subject is aggrieved there should be some way of obtaining redress and that as quickly as possible.

Topic:   RELIEF OF WILLIAM FRANCIS SCHOOLEY.
Permalink

Motion agreed to.


SAULT ST. LOUIS LIGHT AND POWER COMPANY.


House in committee on Bill (No. 113) to incorporate the Sault St. Louis Light and Power Company.-Mr. Blckerdike. On section 7,


May 18, 1903