August 3, 1903

?

The MINISTER OF JUSTICE.

There must be somewhere in the Act of incorporation authority for the Grand Trunk Pacific to transfer these over to the Grand Trunk Railway or otherwise the Grand Trunk Railway could not take the stock. I do not think they could do it under this clause.

On section 26,

Mr. MCCARTHY moved that section 26 be struck out and the following substituted therefor :

The company may construct, acquire and operate ropeways for the transportation of ores and other freight, and also tramways, not exceeding ten miles in length in any one case, to or from any point on its railway or any branch thereof, in the province of British Col-

umbia. and shall have all such powers lor the expropriation of land requisite for the convenient construction and operation of such works as are given by the Railway Act to railway companies for railway purposes, but the powers conferred upon the company hy this section shall not be exercised until a plan showing the route of the ropeways or tramways proposed to be constructed have been duly filed with the Department of Railways and Canals, and approved by the Railway Committee of tho Privy Council, or such authority, tribunal or commission as is designated or constituted under any Act of the parliament of Canada, for the regulation or control of railways, and no such tramway or other way shall be constructed upon or along any street, highway or other public place within the limits of any municipality until the company shall have first obtained the consent of such municipality, within which such street, highway or other public place is situate.

2. Before such approval is given, notice of the application therefor shall be given in writing to every other railway company operating a railway in the said locality, and such notice shall be published in the ' Canada Gazette ' for at least one month previous to the time named in the notice for the making of such application. and such notice shall state that all persons interested may appear and be heard on such application.

Topic:   GRAND TRUNK PACIFIC RAILWAY COMPANY.
Permalink
CON

Edward Frederick Clarke

Conservative (1867-1942)

Mr. CLARKE.

As this amendment covers mine, X beg to withdraw the amendment of which X gave notice.

Topic:   GRAND TRUNK PACIFIC RAILWAY COMPANY.
Permalink
L-C

Andrew B. Ingram

Liberal-Conservative

Mr. INGRAM.

Does this amendment

affect a tramway which runs outside a municipality 7

Topic:   GRAND TRUNK PACIFIC RAILWAY COMPANY.
Permalink
IND

Leighton Goldie McCarthy

Independent

Mr. MCCARTHY.

It applies to any municipality affected.

Topic:   GRAND TRUNK PACIFIC RAILWAY COMPANY.
Permalink
L-C

Andrew B. Ingram

Liberal-Conservative

Mr. INGRAM.

The consent of every

muncipality must be obtained. But suppose a road runs between two municipalities, and one of them refuses to give consent, to whom is there an appeal for a redress ?

Topic:   GRAND TRUNK PACIFIC RAILWAY COMPANY.
Permalink
IND
L-C

Andrew B. Ingram

Liberal-Conservative

Mr. INGRAM.

It is a remarkable piece of legislation to put a railway company in such a position that if a municipality objects to giving permission, the railway company has no alternative.

Topic:   GRAND TRUNK PACIFIC RAILWAY COMPANY.
Permalink
?

The MINISTER OF JUSTICE.

This only applies to the branches.

Topic:   GRAND TRUNK PACIFIC RAILWAY COMPANY.
Permalink
L-C

Andrew B. Ingram

Liberal-Conservative

Mr. INGRAM.

Will the general law in Canada be affected ?

Topic:   GRAND TRUNK PACIFIC RAILWAY COMPANY.
Permalink
IND

Leighton Goldie McCarthy

Independent

Mr. MCCARTHY.

The hon. gentleman will remember that we had quite a long discussion when the Bill'was in committee before, and it was explained that these ropeways and tramways only applied to the province of British Columbia. That is the intention of the promoters of the Bill, and I stated to the committee that that provision was thus confined. The hon. member for Victoria and the hon. member for West Toronto gave notice of amendments, and these amendments were considered, and the power which is sought to be embodied in Mr. McCarthy.

this clause was understood hy them. I see the point made by the hon. member for Elgin (Mr. Ingram). In the more thickly or densely populated section of the country it would be proper not to accept the amendment which I moved, but inasmuch as it applies to British Columbia, and the intention being only to run tramways or ropeways to or from a mine, for instance, I do not see that there would be any difficulty on our part. I quite see it might be a precedent that may do harm in the future.

Topic:   GRAND TRUNK PACIFIC RAILWAY COMPANY.
Permalink
L-C

Andrew B. Ingram

Liberal-Conservative

Mr. INGRAM.

I am not objecting so far as the present Bill is concerned, but in view of the future; I am speaking of this parliament laying down a principle covering the General Railway Act of Canada.

Topic:   GRAND TRUNK PACIFIC RAILWAY COMPANY.
Permalink
CON

Edward Frederick Clarke

Conservative (1867-1942)

Mr. CLARKE.

This matter has been discussed again and again in committee. The municipalities must have protection against these insidious attempts to promote legislation in this parliament to override provincial and municipal rights. The hon. gentleman who has charge of this Bill understands the situation exactly. He has consented to an amendment to meet the views I have presented. We must guard against any action, under the guise of general legislation, that will give power to run tramways through the streets of a municipality without its consent. What this company desired was power to construct tramways on the streets and highways of a municipality without its consent. AVill it he contended that the company should have power to run tramways through the streets of any municipality in Canada, if the municipality does not consent ? It strikes me that the power to authorize the operation of tramways belongs to the provincial legislatures, and not to this parliament.

Topic:   GRAND TRUNK PACIFIC RAILWAY COMPANY.
Permalink
CON

John Graham Haggart

Conservative (1867-1942)

Hon. Mr. HAGGART.

It does not interfere with the main line at all, or their branches. The principle which my hon. friend from West Toronto is advocating so firmly only applies to rope lines to and from the main line of the road.

Topic:   GRAND TRUNK PACIFIC RAILWAY COMPANY.
Permalink
CON
CON

John Graham Haggart

Conservative (1867-1942)

Hon. Mr. HAGGART.

It only applies to lines of road in British Columbia. As amended it only applies now to those in British Columbia for the purpose of reaching mines of ore.

Topic:   GRAND TRUNK PACIFIC RAILWAY COMPANY.
Permalink
CON

David Henderson

Conservative (1867-1942)

Mr. HENDERSON.

Before the amendment to section 26 is carried, I desire to move an amendment to that amendment, of which I gave notice. The object of my amendment is to prevent this company from exercising a power which I do not think has been granted to any other railway company, that is a power to build branch lines from branch lines, and thus extend their operations all over the country. As I read section 11 of the Act, I understand that the Grand Trunk Pacific Rail-

way includes tlie main line and the branches named therein. Now when we read section 2G we find that the company takes power ' to construct, acquire and 'operate tramways or other ways for the transportation of ore and other freight to or from any point on its railway or any branch thereof.''

Topic:   GRAND TRUNK PACIFIC RAILWAY COMPANY.
Permalink
IND

Leighton Goldie McCarthy

Independent

Mr. MCCARTHY.

The hon. gentleman is not reading from my amendment, but he is reading from the original Bill. His point is well taken as to the original Bill, but not as to my amendment.

Topic:   GRAND TRUNK PACIFIC RAILWAY COMPANY.
Permalink
CON

David Henderson

Conservative (1867-1942)

Mr. HENDERSON.

I will now read the amendment:

The company may construct, acquire and operate ropeways for the transportation of ores and other freight, and also tramways, not exceeding ten miles in length in any one case, to or from any point on its railway or anabranch thereof.

Now it is quite clear to my mind that power is here taken to construct a brand) line ten miles in length and then throw out another branch line ten miles from the first one, and so continuously ; so that practically it is a charter that covers the whole country. Now I think there should be some limitation to bring it within the general scope of what parliament has allowed, simply branch lines ten miles in length from its main line.

Topic:   GRAND TRUNK PACIFIC RAILWAY COMPANY.
Permalink
IND

Leighton Goldie McCarthy

Independent

Mr. MCCARTHY.

The proposed amendment to this section only applies to ropeways or tramways, and they are to be limited to ten miles in length. Such ropeway or ti-amway may start from the main line or from a branch line. Nothing more is asked for, it goes no further. The objection the hon. gentleman now makes is well founded as concerns the original clause, but not as concerns the suggested amendment.

Topic:   GRAND TRUNK PACIFIC RAILWAY COMPANY.
Permalink
CON

Frederick Debartzch Monk

Conservative (1867-1942)

Mr. MONK.

It seems to me this section simply consecrates a principle which has been accepted in the Railway Committee, that tramways should not circulate through streets without permission of the municipality. The objection raised is that this does not give sufficient power to the municipality in case of conflict arising between the municipality and the railway company. I do not think that objection ought to be sustained, because if the municipality lias a decided objection to the circulation of tramways upon its streets, I do not see that we have any power to interfere with the power of the municipality which, as I understand, we want tql establish. Moreover if it only applies to British Columbia for the conveyance of ore, I do not see what objection there can be.

Topic:   GRAND TRUNK PACIFIC RAILWAY COMPANY.
Permalink

August 3, 1903