April 19, 1909

LIB

Allen Bristol Aylesworth (Minister of Justice and Attorney General of Canada)

Liberal

Hon. A. B. AYLESWORTH (Minister of Justice).

Mr. Chairman, I do not know that I am authorized to speak for anybody but myself in reference to this measure; nor do I understand exactly what it is that the hon. member for South Simcoe (Mr. Lennox) or any other hon. member of this House would desire from me in regard to this Bill. As far as the question of the power of this parliament to pass a measure of this sort is concerned, I do not suppose any one will have any question. I do not have any idea that in that respect, or upon what may be called the constitutional aspect of this question, I can say anything which will be an enlightenment, or will add in any way to the knowledge, of any hon. member of this House, whether or no that member happens to be of the legal profession or happens to be an ordinary business man. I think our constitution, the British North America Act, is very plain in its intention and in its expression of that intention in regard to the incorporation of companies. What are the provisions of that Act, that we are concerned about? I take it that they are, the distribution of legislative powers in regard to the incorporation of companies, the assigning to the provinces of the power to incorporate companies of a certain class and the assigning to the Domniion of a like power to incorporate companies of another class. I think it is reasonably clear, upon the language of the British North America Act, what the line of demarcation between the two jurisdictions was and is. The incorporation of a company by Act of Parliament, or by the issue of letters patent under the authority of some general Act, is simply the creation, by the proper authority in that behalf, of a new artiflcal, legal being with power to transact business of the character specified in the articles of incorporation. If here was but one legislative authority in Canada no question could

arise. That legislative authority would have the power to create such an artificial, legal being for any and all 'legitimate purposes. But there being throughout Canada a dual legislative authority the British North America Act sought to define the limits of the authority with respect to the incorporation of companies which each of these legislative bodies had. Certain subjects are declared to be within the exclusive legislative power of the Dominion parliament. Certain other subjects are similarly declared to be within the exclusive legislative power of the provinces. No one would imagine-I have not heard any one suggest-that either of these legislative jurisdictions could encroach upon the authority of the other as to the class of subjects in regard to which or for the purposes of which companies may be incorporated. For instance, no one would suggest that the provincial legislature had any power to incorporate a company for the purpose of transacting business with regard to navigation or shipping, or with regard to banking or any of the other subjects which by the 91st section of the British North America Act are assigned to the legislative jurisdiction of parliament. In a similar way exactly no one would suggest that this parliament had power to incorporate a company whose business was limited to the purposes mentioned in the 92nd section as assigned exclusively to the control of the provinces. But the business which a company desires, when it comes into being, to carry on may be of a general character and may not deal exclusively with regard to banking, navigation, shipping, or any other subject which is assigned exclusively to the jurisdiction of the one parliament or the other, and accordingly there is another line of demarcation pointed out under the statute in the most distinct manner as the one that is to govern, and a boundary line laid down over which neither jurisdiction ought to step in the way of encroaching upon the authority of the other. That boundary line is very clearly and distinctly expressed. In the 91st section it is declared that the parliament of Canada has exclusive jurisdiction to legislate in regard to subjects which are, by the British North America Act itself, taken out of the jurisdiction of the provinces. We look at section 92 to find, with regard to companies, what those subjects are which are excluded from the jurisdiction of the provinces and we find in article 10, paragraph a, of the 92nd section, a provision that the provinces may legislate with regard to local works and undertakings other than such as are of the following classes. Then are mentioned works and undertakings extending beyond the limits of the province. So that, the constitution has very plainly stated that with regard to any work or undertaking which is to extend beyond the limits

447t>

of the province, not the province, but the Dominion, has the exclusive power to legislate. With regard to the incorporation of companies that is a line of demarcation between the two jurisdictions which is certainly very clearly expressed in the statute and I think ought not to be -difficult to follow. I am sorry to sav that in practice it seems to have been difficult to adhere to that line of demarcation. In the three years during which I have had charge of the Department of Justice it has been an annual occurrence, and I think the same is true of the past, that legislation of different provincial legislatures has required to be noticed in which by special Act some company has been incorporated with the apparent intention that its business operations should not be limited to the province which had incorporated it. It has been and is not an uncommon thing to see in a special Act of a provincial legislature a provision with regard to a company that its head office is to be within the province, but that it is to "have authority to establish offices and agencies at its pleasure outside the limits of the province. It has been a not infrequent thing that a railway company, for instance, would be incorporated by a provincial legislature with power to build its line of railway from some point in the province to a point mentioned upon the boundary line of the province, nothing being said as to what was to happen to the line of railway when it reached the boundary line, the inference plainly to be drawn being that it was to carry that line farther either into an adjoining province or across the international boundary and that the same company, or the same individuals under a separate incorporation elsewhere, were to carry on their works and undertakings beyond the limits of the province. Indeed so far has this practice gone in provincial legislation or in the operation of provincial general Acts that I am aware of at least one case where a company has been incorporated in one of our provinces with the exclusive and sole object of doing business in another province altogether, and I think that in the forty years of confederation the idea has grown up in the minds of business men, possibly in the minds of lawyers as well, and in the minds of our provincial legislatures, that the authority of the provinces, in the matter of incorporating companies, is practically, if not absolutely, co-equal with the authority of the Dominion parliament, and that a company once incorporated bv a provincial legislature has the power, if it pleases, to do business at its will the wide world over. Lawyers frequently refer to the principle spoken of as the comity of nations, and it is argued that by the comity of nations, by the good fellowship or the neighbourliness of other jurisdictions, a company once incorporated by any competent jurisdiction Mr. AYLESWORTH.

anywhere in the world may transact its business at pleasure anywhere else on the face of the globe. While I think it of the utmost importance that this parliament should not overstep the limits which in the matter of incorporating companies, as in other matters, have been assigned to it by the British North America Act, it is of at least equal importance to the body politic that the provincial legislatures should not on their part overstep those limits either. But no question of course arises, so far as this measure is concerned, of the character I have been adverting to, where provinces for any reason have seen fit to incorporate companies and have conferred upon the companies so incorporated powers apparently to transact business beyond the limits of the province. That is a large question, about which lawyers might differ and it does not arise for consideration here.

The practical question for consideration upon tnis measure is whether or not thi3 parliament ought to exercise the power, which in my humble submission it undoubtedly possesses, to constitute these gentlemen named in the Bill, and others who may associate themselves with them, a new legal being, entitled to do the business which this Bill sets out. This measure, in essence, proposes that a company shall be incorporated which shall have the power, as set out in section 8 of the Bill, to carry on, among other things, the business of manufacturing electricity or electric power, heat and light, and transmitting the same for use in any manner at any place in Canada and the United States. I think it goes without saying that no provincial legislature would have power to incorporate a company with the right to do the business defined in the Bill. I do not think any one would contend that a provincial legislature had that power. If any one does so contend, I can only say that it is entirely contrary to my opinion of what the British North America Act, in plain words, states.

I think that under the British North America Act no provincial legislature has any power to incorporate a company whose works and undertakings are intended to extend beyond the limits of the province. No provincial legislature has the power to incorporate a railway company whose line, is to be laid down in more than one province, nor any railway company or telegraph company or any other company' of like character whose works and undertakings are intended to extend beyond and across the provincial boundary line. The works of this company, as stated on the face of the Bill, are proposed to be carried across the international boundary and into the United States. If that is so, it is from this parliament, and this parliament alone, that such a company can seek and obtain valid incorporation in Canada, and the question reduces itself, I submit, to a simple ques-

tion of the propriety of this parliament taking the action which the supporters of this Bill desire. That is a question of policy in regard to which I do not suppose that my opinion is desired by anybody. 1 think that we ought, in considering a measure of this kind, unless there is some evidence to the contrary, to attribute honesty of intention to those who propose the legislation. If any number of men come to this parliament and declare that they wish to be incorporated for a certain legitimate business purpose, it is perfectly competent for any one who suspects the honesty of the statement which they make as to their business intentions to question that statement and to investigate and to demonstrate if it is possible that the statement is not made in good faith. But unless there is some evidence to the contrary, I think one ordinarily, in common business affairs, takes the statement of intention which any one makes to him in a matter of business as being correct. But, having regard to the stage which this Bill has reached, it would seem to me that this committee ought to consider that any question of the honesty of the intention of the promoters of this Bill had been disposed of by the committee which has considered this measure and reported it to the House. That was the place, when this measure was before the special committee to which it was referred, when inquiry into the bona fides of the applicants for incorporation could have readily been made. I do not know whether that inquiry was made or not, but I have no doubt that this Bill was not reported by the special committee which had it in charge without such questions being there discussed. The necessary inference from the action of the committee in reporting the Bill is that the committee was satisfied that this measure was being put forward in good faith, and that it was the honest intention of the promoters of the Bill to use their power to transmit their product across the international boundary for sale in the United States. Not many years ago there was a precisely similar enterprise at Niagara Falls, a company desiring incorporation for the purpose' of manufacturing electric power upon Canadian soil, but with the intention to export that power to the United States to sell it to United States consumers. That company obtained its incorporation at the hands of this parliament; that company is doing business to-day under that incorporation; and the validity of that incorporation has been authoritatively passed upon by our Supreme Court in the course of litigation, declaring that this parliament had undoubted power to give the incorporation which that company obtained. That decision of the Supreme Court would undoubtedly settle any question, if there were such a question, of the power of this parliament to pass the Bill

now under consideration; and giving credit as I do to the promoters of this Bill for honesty of intention, in stating that the powers which they wish and which they consider to be of vital consequence to their enterprise, should go the length of authorizing them to transmit their electric energy across the line into the United States, and that they should have power to construct and operate lines of telegraph and telephone along with their lines for the transmission of electric energy beyond the limits of the province, it seems to me that all questions fall to the ground as ito whether or not this parliament has the power to pass the Bill which it is desired to enact, and as to whether or not this parliament is the proper place to which the promoters of this measure ought to come. With regard to the special provisions of the Bill, no doubt other considerations arise. I do not suppose at this stage of the discussion it is necessary or would be appropriate for me to go into the details of the measure. As to those details, opinions may differ. This House in its wisdom may not see fit, even though the Bill itself is passed, to grant the company all the powers which it asks here. That is a question simply of policy, upon which every member of the committee will make up his own mind and vote according to his views. I might mention one feature of the Bill which stares one in the face the moment he looks at it-the second section, which declares that the works authorized by this Act shall be for the general advantage of Canada. That is a declaration which no other body than this parliament has power to pronounce. It is a declaration which probably we all think has in the past been too freely made, a declaration which it would be well in the general interests of Canada should not be made unless clear reason was shown for it in any individual case. I must say, so far as my individual opinion goes, that I cannot see any reason on the face of this measure, or in considering its provisions and details, for making that declaration in this case. It would not seem to me to be the truth. I cannot see how this undertaking, which appears to be entirely local in its character, so far as its area of operation is concerned, can be truthfully said to be for the general advantage of Canada. It is no doubt for the advantage of all Canada in the same sense that any new undertaking or enterprise, no matter where in the Dominion it may be situate, is for the general advantage. But I cannot see anything special about the undertakings described in this measure which would make those undertakings any more for the general advantage of Canada than the establishment of any manufactory in any town or city between the Atlantic and the Pacific. It, is primarily at any rate

for the advantage of the immediate locality in which it exists, and it can only be, I think, in the most remote degree that these works can be said to be for the general advantage of the whole of Canada. I am not able to see, I must say, any advantage there is to anybody in making the declaration in question. Of course, we all know its effect. Once this parliament sees fit to declare that any undertaking, no matter what its character, is one for the general advantage of Canada, thenceforward this parliament, and this parliament alone, has power to legislate in regard1 to that undertaking. That undoubtedly is the jurisdiction which was conferred upon this parliament of Canada by the imperial parliament in the British North America Act. But the question whether or not in any given case we ought to make that declaration is for us to consider, and in my humble opinion is a question which we ought always to consider with the utmost care. This Bill proposes an undertaking which in my opinion this parliament alone has the power to sanction, because the proposition is to extend its operations beyond the limits of the country. If this parliament agrees in that view and passes this Bill without the declaration that the works are for the general advantage of Canada, the undertaking will remain one in regard to which this parliament and this parliament alone can legislate hereafter.

Topic:   ONTARIO AND MICHIGAN POWER COMPANY.
Permalink
CON

Thomas Simpson Sproule

Conservative (1867-1942)

Mr. SPROULE.

That only applies to onei of the rivers. It does not apply to the Nipigon river, which is not a boundary river.

Topic:   ONTARIO AND MICHIGAN POWER COMPANY.
Permalink
LIB

Allen Bristol Aylesworth (Minister of Justice and Attorney General of Canada)

Liberal

Mr. AYLESWORTH.

I have not made my meaning clear to my hon. friend if he thinks my remarks do not apply to the Nipigon river. This Bill proposes, as I have pointed out, to incorporate a company to manufacture electric energy by waterpower on the Pigeon river and on the Nipigon river, and the electric energy so manufactured, no matter whether on the Nipigon or on the Pigeon, this Bill proposes that the company shall have the power to transmit and sell for use at any place in the United States. There is no distinction, on the face of the Bill, between the power to be manufactured by the water of Pigeon river and that which is to be manufactured by the water of the Nipigon river. I speak without knowledge but my supposition is that the company do not intend to distinguish at all, in their operation, between the power manufactured at the one place and that manufactured at the other. The Nipigon is some 60 miles to the eastward of the cities of Port Arthur and Fort William, the Pigeon river is some 40 or 50 miles on the other side, and my supposition was that the corporators named in this Bill intend to manufacture electric power on Mr. AYLESWORTH.

both these rivers to supply any market there might be in Port Arthur and Fort William, which lie between, and to export the surplus power across the Pigeon river into the state of Minnesota or from the Nipigon river, through Lake Superior, across the international boundary, and to the discontinued mines of Isle Royale. _ I have seen it stated that one of the principal markets this company expects to obtain for its electric power is the copper mines on Isle Royale, now shut down, and that that market would probably be of equal value to them with the home consumption in Canada. At all events that is the proposition on the face of the Bill, and the observations I have made apply as much to the water-power of the Nipigon as to that of the Pigeon river. I cannot understand how water-power could be utilized on the Pigeon river otherwise than by the construction of a dam across that river, which would have one end necessarily on United States' soil, and this parliament alone would have the power to incorporate a company for that purpose.

The question here resolves itself simply into this. You have a body of gentlemen before you who say: 'We have the financial means necessary to carry on this undertaking, we ask power to carry it on, and we ask power to transmit our product by wire laid across the international boundary, whether across the boundary between Ontario and Minnesota or between Ontario and Isle Royale'. In either case that is something with regard to which the Dominion parliament has already acted and in regard to which no local legislature has the power to act, and in regard to which unless we are satisfied-and I have not been able to satisfy myself-that these promoters are not honest in stating their intentions, it seems to me this parliament alone has the power and ought to act.

As respects the details of the Bill, apart from the actual incorporation of the cpm-pany, that is entirely another question. Powers may be asked incidentally which this House may not see fit to grant. As regards the declaration that these works are for the general advantage of Canada, I cannot see any benefit it will be to the promoters to have these words included, and as that declaration has in the past been far too freely granted, my view would be against including it in this Bill.

Topic:   ONTARIO AND MICHIGAN POWER COMPANY.
Permalink
CON

Arthur Cyril Boyce

Conservative (1867-1942)

Mr. BOYCE.

I have sent a question over to the hon. minister. Would he kindly answer it ?

Topic:   ONTARIO AND MICHIGAN POWER COMPANY.
Permalink
LIB

Allen Bristol Aylesworth (Minister of Justice and Attorney General of Canada)

Liberal

Mr. AYLESWORTH.

The hon. member for West Algoma (Mr. Boyce) asks me if in my opinion the fact that this Bill empowers the company to sell its products beyond the boundaries of the province

gives this parliament exclusive jurisdiction over it. If I am to answer that question exactly as it is put, I would say yes. At the same time it is a legal question by no means free from doubt and one which has been recently under consideration, indirectly rather than directly, by the Supreme court. There was a division of opinion on the point among the judges of that court, and substantially an equal division, so that we shall require no doubt the views of the judicial committee of the Privy Council before that point can be said to be settled. But in my opinion the British North America Act by the words 'extending beyond the limits of the province' intended that any company incorporated for the express purpose of transmitting its products into a foreign country should be incorporated by this Dominion parliament alone. _

Topic:   ONTARIO AND MICHIGAN POWER COMPANY.
Permalink
CON

William Sora Middlebro

Conservative (1867-1942)

Mr. MIDDLEBRO.

While personally I do not like to disagree with the hon. the Minister of Justice, at the same time I am forced to an opposite conclusion on the point last referred to. He says that the only reason why jurisdiction is given this parliament is because this company is given by this Bill power to export its products. It occurs to me that this parliament has no jurisdiction to authorize the construction of any work in a foreign country, so that no matter what we do here to-day our authority only extends to the boundary line. In that respect, therefore, the operation of the company will be exclusively confined to the province of Ontario. Let me point to a case on this very point, in which a company in the province of New Brunswick was proposing to build a railway 'in that province and also to carry on its operations into the State of Maine. It was held that the fact that the legislature of a foreign country had authorized the construction of a line of railway in that country for the purpose of connecting with the provincial railway does not in any way affect the authority of the provincial legislature to legislate with respect to the railway within the boundary of the province. (European and North American Railway Company vs. Thomas, 2 Cartwright, page 439). The point in that case is that, notwithstanding that the railway company in the province of New Brunswick applied for and obtained a charter from the provincial legislature for the purpose of constructing a railway which was to extend not only through a part of the province but into the State of Maine, it w$.s held that the local legislature of the province of New Brunswick had exclusive jurisdiction to pass that charter, I submit that, this being the case, the mere fact that a company, wholly local in its character, is going to export some of its products into a foreign country is no

justification for our assuming jurisdiction. We might as well say that because a sawmill company in the province of Ontario is going to export some of its product to the United States and because that this fact is stated in the Bill, the charter is within the exclusive jurisdiction of the Dominion parliament and the province has no legislative authority with respect to it. We have a very striking precedent, the incorporation of the Niagara Power Company under the provincial law. I understand that, subsequently to their incorporation by the province, the company came to this parliament, believing that if they had their charter ratified by this parliament it would be more within the law. But I am told that when they came here their application was refused and they are operating to-day under a provincial charter and carrying on their affairs as effectively as if incorporated by this parliament.

Topic:   ONTARIO AND MICHIGAN POWER COMPANY.
Permalink
CON

Thomas Simpson Sproule

Conservative (1867-1942)

Mr. SPROULE.

Notwithstanding that it is a boundary stream.

Topic:   ONTARIO AND MICHIGAN POWER COMPANY.
Permalink
CON

William Sora Middlebro

Conservative (1867-1942)

Mr. MIDDLEBRO.

Notwithstanding that there is no doubt whatever about the Niagara river being a boundary stream. But I am glad to hear the Minister of Justice say that the mere fact that either one of these is an international stream does not affect the right of this parliament to grant this charter. I understand that the Pigeon river is partly an international river, but so far as the Nipigon river is concerned, it is wholly within the bounds of Ontario. Even as to the Pigeon river, one-half its bed belongs to the province.

Topic:   ONTARIO AND MICHIGAN POWER COMPANY.
Permalink
CON

Martin Burrell

Conservative (1867-1942)

Mr. BURRELL.

The member for Rainy River (Mr. Conmee) says that the Nipigon is an international river.

Topic:   ONTARIO AND MICHIGAN POWER COMPANY.
Permalink
CON

William Sora Middlebro

Conservative (1867-1942)

Mr. MIDDLEBRO.

I take issue with him on that point; I believe that the Nipigon is not at all an international stream, and the Pigeon river is only partly international. But, one-half the bed of the Pigeon river belongs to the province of Ontaiio, and, that being the case, the province certainly has the power to grant incorporation to a company such as this. This company applied for incorporation in 1906 under the name of the Port Arthur Power and Development Company. This was a purely local name. I understand that it did not purpose exporting to the United States.

Topic:   ONTARIO AND MICHIGAN POWER COMPANY.
Permalink
LIB

James Conmee

Liberal

Mr. CONMEE.

I desire to correct the hon. member Mr. Middlebro). If he looks at the Bill of that year, referred to, he will find the same declaration for exportation as in this.

Topic:   ONTARIO AND MICHIGAN POWER COMPANY.
Permalink
CON

William Sora Middlebro

Conservative (1867-1942)

Mr. MIDDLEBRO.

I observe that the name is a purely local name-the Port Arthur Power and Development Company. But that Bill was thrown out. The mat-

ter came up again in 1908 in its present form. I understand that that Bill was introduced m the Senate and thrown out by the Senate Committee, and now we have the Bill before this House. As the Minister of Justice (Mr. Aylesworth) has said, this is a question of expediency as well as a question of power. I think the time has come when we should be very careful in disposing of our national assets. We have arrived at a time when we think these assets of such importance that we have established an international commission to care for them. The object of the North American Conservation Commission is stated in its declaration of principles as follows:

We recognize the mutual interests of the nations which occupy the continent of North America, and_ the dependence of the welfare of each upon its natural resources. We agree that the _ conservation of these resources is mdispensible for the continued prosperity of each nation. . . We agree that those resources which are necessaries of life should be regarded as public utilities, that their ownership entails specific duties to the public, and that as far as possible effective measures should be adopted to guard against monopoly.

One thing seems to me certain-that the incorporation of this company is not pro bono publico. If it is incorporated, it is not, as the Minister of Justice has said, for the general advantage of Canada. We have in Ontario a public utilities commission known as the Hydro-Electric Commission, which was expressly constituted for the purpose of taking charge of the great public assets of the province of Ontario, such as are covered by this Bill. These are public assets, and it will not be many years before they are required by the province as motive power for our manufacturers. Our fuel must be depleted, but the ' white coal ' will go on-men may come and men may go, but this, we hope, will go on for ever. It is the most useful and economical kind of power, and it behooves us to pause long before we grant incorporation to such a company, not for the public good but for the purpose of enriching a few private gentlemen.

If we look at the public press, we find everywhere _ throughout the country that they are alive to this matter. I have here an editorial of the Toronto ' Globe,'-and no person will say that that journal is unfriendly to the present administration. This is from April 1, 1909.

Mr. Conmee's Little Bill.

It is disappointing, to say the least, that thirty members of the party which is identi-npd with the maintenance of the provincial rights should be found voting for the Bill of the Ontario and Michigan Power Company. The province was represented bv counsel in opposition to granting a charter,"but his protests were of no avail, as the committee seems to have been lobbied on a party basis, and, I Mr. MIDDLEBRO.

with the exception of Mr. Black, the Liberal member for Hants, the committee was divided on strictly party lines. Mr. Black is to be honoured for his vote.

As Mr. Calvert said, it was more a question of policy than of jurisdiction, and, as policy strongly calls for leaving provincial matters alone, it is a pity he did not vote that way. The contention that the Nipigon river is an international stream, as Mr. Blackstock says, affronts common sense. Even if it were, it is surely not so distinctly an international stream as the Niagara river, over whose power rights the Ontario government has exercised complete jurisdiction.

The Liberal members in parliament are not sent there to get in behind Mr. Conmee's Bill or to promote his commercial ventures, if he has any. We do not pretend to settle the constitutional or legal question raised. All that we

Topic:   ONTARIO AND MICHIGAN POWER COMPANY.
Permalink
LIB

Gilbert Howard McIntyre (Deputy Speaker and Chair of Committees of the Whole of the House of Commons)

Liberal

Mr. DEPUTY SPEAKER.

I think it is against the rules of order to quote from any newspaper in this House reflecting upon the action of members of parliament in parliament. I think it is not in order for the hon. member (Mr. Middlebro) to quote from a newspaper in that respect?

Topic:   ONTARIO AND MICHIGAN POWER COMPANY.
Permalink
CON

William Sora Middlebro

Conservative (1867-1942)

Mr. MIDDLEBRO.

Does the Chairman say that this is against rule 19 and is offensive?

Topic:   ONTARIO AND MICHIGAN POWER COMPANY.
Permalink
LIB

Gilbert Howard McIntyre (Deputy Speaker and Chair of Committees of the Whole of the House of Commons)

Liberal

Mr. DEPUTY SPEAKER.

No, but there is a distinct rule of the House, to be found in Bourinot and May, that newspaper articles reflecting upon the action of members of the House in the House may not be read.

Topic:   ONTARIO AND MICHIGAN POWER COMPANY.
Permalink
CON

William Sora Middlebro

Conservative (1867-1942)

Mr. MIDDLEBRO.

I am just reading the comments in the public press. If you, Mr. Chairman, rule that editorial articles to be found in the ' Globe ' are offensive and unfit to be read to the Liberal members of the House

Topic:   ONTARIO AND MICHIGAN POWER COMPANY.
Permalink
LIB

Gilbert Howard McIntyre (Deputy Speaker and Chair of Committees of the Whole of the House of Commons)

Liberal

Mr. DEPUTY SPEAKER.

I have risen to order. The hon. gentleman (Mr. Middlebro) will please take his seat. It is not in order to comment in any way on the ruling of the Speaker or of the Chairman; his ruling must be accepted, unless there is an appeal against it to the House.

I think it proper to say as well that, inasmuch as I would refuse to allow my decision to be discussed, I think approbation or .disapprobation of it by applause or otherwise, is also out of order.

Topic:   ONTARIO AND MICHIGAN POWER COMPANY.
Permalink
CON

Thomas Simpson Sproule

Conservative (1867-1942)

Mr. SPROULE.

Is it out of order, on any question that comes up from time to time in this House, to read the comments of the press, because that would apply to the budget speech, to protection or to anything else which is constantly referred to in the press?

Topic:   ONTARIO AND MICHIGAN POWER COMPANY.
Permalink
LIB

Gilbert Howard McIntyre (Deputy Speaker and Chair of Committees of the Whole of the House of Commons)

Liberal

Mr. DEPUTY SPEAKER.

If the circumstance arises I will endeavour to rule at the moment, but I am not supposed to answer hypothetical questions.

Topic:   ONTARIO AND MICHIGAN POWER COMPANY.
Permalink
CON

William Sora Middlebro

Conservative (1867-1942)

Mr. MIDDLEBRO.

I bow to your ruling. Now, a word as to what the Minister ol Justice said with reference to provincial powers. As I understand the British North America Act, all powers which previously belonged to the provinces, and which have not by the express terms of the British North America Act been conveyed from the provinces to the Dominion, still remain within the exclusive jursdiction of the provinces; so unless there is something in the British North America Act which expressly takes away the former power of the provincial legislature to incorporate such a company as this, then it certainly remains within the exclusive power of the provincial legislature. The section to which the Minister of Justice refers is subsection 10 of section 92. Among the exclusive powers of provincial legislatures are:

Local works and undertakings, other than such as are of the following classes:-

a. Lines of steam or other ships, railways, canals, telegraphs, and other works and undertakings connecting the province with any other or others of the provinces, or extending beyond the limits of the province.

Now, unless it can be said that a company that simply exports its product, extends its operations beyond the limits of the province, then it does not come within that limitation. My contention is that the mere fact that this Bill proposes to give a company power to export its product does not make it of an international character, therefore it comes within the exclusive jurisdiction of this parliament. Now, the Minister of Justice has said that this company is entirely local in its operations, and, therefore, he does not think it would be correct to say that this company is for the general advantage of Canada. Now, if that is so, it seems to me it must be a local undertaking; if it is not for the general advantage of Canada it must be a local undertaking, and if it is a local undertaking, then it is within the exclusive jurisdiction of the provincial legislature. Apart from the question of the legality of the Bill, I say that as a matter of policy it would be extremely inadvisable to pass it, especially in view of the fact that we are now taking action for the purpose of conserving our national resources, and in view of the fact that we have established in the past few years in the province of Ontario a hydTO-electric commission for the very purpose of developing the powers which this Bill proposes to place in the hands of private parties.

Topic:   ONTARIO AND MICHIGAN POWER COMPANY.
Permalink

April 19, 1909