November 17, 1909

INTEREST ACT AMENDMENT.

?

Thomas Hay

Mr. H.

H MILLER (South Grey) moved for leave to introduce Bill (No. 8) to amend the Interest Act. He said: The effect of this Bill will be to compel mortgagees to accept payment of overdue principal on mortgages on real estate upon receipt of one month's notice or one month's interest in lieu of notice.

Topic:   INTEREST ACT AMENDMENT.
Permalink

Motion agreed to, and Bill read the first time.


PERSONAL EXPLANATION-RULING OF MR. SPEAKER ON DEBATE ON MOTION- TO ADJOURN.

?

Right Hon. S@

By your leave Mr. Speaker, I should like to call the attention of the House to an incident which took place yesterday. On motion to adjourn, a debate was started by my hon. friend from York, N. B., (Mr Crocket) and you, Sir, expressed the opinion that such a debate was irrelevant on a motion to adjourn. This opinion of yours was questioned by my hon. friend the leader of the opposition (Mr. R. L. Borden) and I agreed with the hon. gentleman in the opinion he expresed. On looking into the matter I find that your opinion was the correct one, and that so far as I am concerned, I was in the wrong. The point has been decided several times. I find, in this parliament. In 1899, Mr. Speaker Edgar ruled as follows, as reported in 'Hansard' of May 29 of that year :

If the hon. member wishes my ruling, I mav say, that I have stated to the House several times my view of the motion to adjourn. There are three kinds of motion to adjourn the House ; I mean to say that they have three different effects. One is a motion to adjourn the House made while a debate is going

on. That is in order to give a member who has already spoken in that debate, or any other member, an opportunity to speak again on the subject under discussion. Another kind of motion to adjourn the House is the motion that is made by the government to close the sitting of the House. That is really not a debatable motion. The other kind of motion is such a one as has just been made by the hon. member for York, N.B., that is a substantive motion to adjourn the House in the interval of the proceedings, which motion may be moved by an hon. member in ojder to bring up a particular important or unimportant public question.

I may say that we have a new rule with regard to private motions, which was adopted eight years ago. In 1901, on February 18, Mr. Speaker Brodeur also decided the point, and his opinion is recorded in these words:

I may tell the hon. member that on the motion for the adjournment of the House, the only question to be discussed is whether the House should adjourn now or not. When the orders of the day are called, if a formal motion for adjournment is made, not by a member of the Cabinet, but by some other hon. member, in order to bring up a Question tor discussion, he has a right to discuss that special question; hut on the motion tor the adiournment. of the House, which is the one made now, I do not think there can he any debate except on the question whether the House should now adjourn or not.

I understand that this opinion has been expressed twice by Speakers of the House, so it was come to after careful consideration with the Clerk of the House, at that time Sir John Bourinot, who, as we know, was quite an authority on the subject. Therefore, Mr. Speaker, I regret that I questioned your ruling, and I confess that you were in the right and I was in the wrong.

Topic:   PERSONAL EXPLANATION-RULING OF MR. SPEAKER ON DEBATE ON MOTION- TO ADJOURN.
Permalink
LIB

Frederick William Borden (Minister of Militia and Defence)

Liberal

Mr. B. L. BOEDEN.

So far as I am concerned, I am not at all convinced by the Prime Minister.

all deference to the views which have been expressed by Mr. Speaker Edgar and Mr. Speaker Brodeur, and with all deference to the opinion which has been vouchsafed by the Prime Minister and by Mr. Speaker, l would like to look a little into the English authorities to ascertain whether that point cannot be made good.

Topic:   PERSONAL EXPLANATION-RULING OF MR. SPEAKER ON DEBATE ON MOTION- TO ADJOURN.
Permalink

QUESTIONS.

DISMISSAL OF EMPLOYEES ON INTERCOLONIAL RAILWAY.

CON

Mr. PAQUET asked:

Conservative (1867-1942)

1. How many employees of the Intercolonial have been dismissed since the appointment of the commissioners charged with the administration of the affairs of this railway?

2. How many employees of the Intercolonial have been dismissed at Montreal and Camp-bellton since the establishment of the commission ?

Topic:   QUESTIONS.
Subtopic:   DISMISSAL OF EMPLOYEES ON INTERCOLONIAL RAILWAY.
Permalink
LIB

George Perry Graham (Minister of Railways and Canals)

Liberal

Hon. GEO. P. GRAHAM (Minister of Railways and Canals).

I want to ask the hon. gentleman to be patient in regard to answers to questions of this character. It will take days to get this information. It -has to come from Moncton, and sometimes from various other stations along the line. But I have asked for the information by wire.

Topic:   QUESTIONS.
Subtopic:   DISMISSAL OF EMPLOYEES ON INTERCOLONIAL RAILWAY.
Permalink

NATIONALITIES OF IMMIGRANTS TO CANADA.


Mr. FOSTER-by Mr. Geo. Taylor-asked : What is the total number of persons from the five largest national contributors who have settled in Canada for each year from lS'JO to 1909, inclusive?


LIB

Frank Oliver (Minister of the Interior; Superintendent-General of Indian Affairs)

Liberal

Hon. FRANK OLIVER (Minister of the Interior).

The total number of persons from the largest five national contributors who have settled in Canada for each year from 1897 to 1909, inclusive:

Topic:   NATIONALITIES OF IMMIGRANTS TO CANADA.
Permalink
LIB

Wilfrid Laurier (Prime Minister; President of the Privy Council)

Liberal

Sir WILFRID LAURIER.

I am not surprised at that.

Topic:   NATIONALITIES OF IMMIGRANTS TO CANADA.
Permalink
CON

Robert Laird Borden (Leader of the Official Opposition)

Conservative (1867-1942)

Mr. R. L. BORDEN.

I am not surprised that my right hon. friend is not surprised, because he has never been able to convince me. My idea, which I submit with all deference, is that any hon. member can argue that the House should not be adjourned until he has obtained some information upon a public question which lie presents. That seems to me to be a very reasonable view. The proposal is that the House shall adjourn. The hon. member who desires to discuss an important subject says: 'It is not desirable to adjourn the House at present, but it is time for the government to give information upon a particular point as to which I desire information, and I do not consent that the House shall adjourn until I have obtained that information.' In that way he is arguing strictly and definitely upon the point of immediate adjournment; and with

British Isles. United States. ! Galicia. 1 Italy. .c3 'oo 09 3 Ph1897.... 11,383 2,412 3,917 t t1898.... 11,608 9,119 5,509 t t1899.... 10,660 11,945 6,700 398 8,0851900*... 5,141 8,543 4,992 957 1,2871900-01. 11,810 18,055 4,702 4,710 1,7201901- 02. 17,259 26,461 6,550 3,828 3,7711902-03. 41,792 49,473 8,382 3,371 7,2391903-04. 50,374 45,229 7,729 4,445 2,8001904-05. 65,359 43,652 6,926 3,473 3,2341905-06. 86,796 57,919 5,656 7,959 4,4591906-07. 55,791 34,659 1,652 5,114 2,9761907-08. 120,182 58,312 14,268 11,212 7,4931908-09. 52,901 59,832 6,644 4,228 4,210541,056 425,611 83,627 49,695 47,286

* Six months, t Not recorded.

Note.-The particulars asked for are not of record prior to 1897.

Topic:   NATIONALITIES OF IMMIGRANTS TO CANADA.
Permalink
?

Sir WILFRID LATTRTER@

Topic:   NATIONALITIES OF IMMIGRANTS TO CANADA.
Permalink

GRAND TRUNK PACIFIC-COST OF SECTIONS.


Mr. FOSTER-by Mr. Geo. Taylorasked: 1. What is the cost per mile to date of the Grand Trunk Pacific from Winnipeg to Edmonton? 2. What amount per mile is estimated to complete this section? 3. What is the same information as respects -the section from Winnipeg to Lake Superior J unctio^i ? 4. What is the exact mileage of each section? 5. What has been expended to date on the Moncton-Quebec section ? 6. What is estimated as necessary to complete this section, and what is the exact mileage ? 7. What has been expended to date on the section from Edmonton to Prince Rupert, and what is now estimated as necessary to finish it? 8. What is the exact mileage of this section?


?

Hon. GEO P.@

GRAHAM (Minister of

Railways and Canals). This question is divided into three parts. I could give reply to a portion of it now, but I would prefer if the member for North Toronto could *wait until to-morrow, when I will answer it altogether.

Topic:   GRAND TRUNK PACIFIC-COST OF SECTIONS.
Permalink

WATER LOTS ON ST. CHARLES RIVER.

November 17, 1909