March 14, 1910

LIB
LIB

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

Liberal

Mr. DEPUTY SPEAKER.

As I understand it, clause 1 is before the committee. There was a motion that the committee rise and report progress but that was defeated and it cannot be repeated until some further business is done.

Topic:   EDITION.
Permalink
CON
LIB

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

Liberal

Mr. DEPUTY SPEAKER.

I declared a motion of that kind lost at an earlier stage and it cannot be repeated until some further step has been taken.

Topic:   EDITION.
Permalink
LIB

Emmanuel Berchmans Devlin

Liberal

Mr. DEVLIN.

I think it is unfair for honourable gentlemen opposite to keep us here against our will and prevent the public business from going on.

Topic:   EDITION.
Permalink
CON
LIB

Emmanuel Berchmans Devlin

Liberal

Mr. DEVLIN.

We want to get at the public business. I am as keen as any other hon. member to maintain provincial rights, but I hardly see how that question comes in here. We are dealing with the St. Lawrence river, which is a navigable river, and is therefore under the exclusive jurisdiction of this parliament. But we are now considering simply clause 1 of this Bill, and the question before us is, shall a number of gentlemen of the (province of Ontario be allowed to form themselves into a company for some purpose to be here after considered? I ask the leader of the opposition whether he considers that we are wrong.

Topic:   EDITION.
Permalink
CON

Edward Arthur Lancaster

Conservative (1867-1942)

Mr. LANCASTER.

Let me enlighten the hon. gentleman with regard to clause 1, which he evidently does not understand. The St. Lawrence River Power Company, which was incorporated in 1901, and this company, are practically one and the same company, incorporated to do the same thing. [DOT]

Topic:   EDITION.
Permalink
LIB

Emmanuel Berchmans Devlin

Liberal

Mr. DEVLIN.

They are two different companies, composed of altogether different gentlemen.

Topic:   EDITION.
Permalink
CON

Edward Arthur Lancaster

Conservative (1867-1942)

Mr. LANCASTER.

I do not say they are the same people; but the hon. gentleman proposes to incorporate two companies to do the same thing on the same river.

Topic:   EDITION.
Permalink
LIB

Emmanuel Berchmans Devlin

Liberal

Mr. DEVLIN.

Will the hon. gentleman state whether, if we vote for clause 1, we must of necessity give this company power-that may conflict with those of another company? .

Topic:   EDITION.
Permalink
CON

Edward Arthur Lancaster

Conservative (1867-1942)

Mr. LANCASTER.

It follows that we must give them some powers, and it follows from the name of the company that wre must give them powers for the transmission of power from the St. Law'rence river.

Topic:   EDITION.
Permalink
CON

Richard Blain

Conservative (1867-1942)

Mr. BLAIN.

My hon. friend from Wright (Mr. Devlin) asks for some expression from this side of the House as to wrhy this Bill should not pass. May I direct his attention to his neighbour sitting besides him, the hon. member for St. Mary's division, Montreal (Mr. Martin). That hon. gentleman will say that in his opinion, in the interests of the largest city in Canada, this Bill should not become law because it gives this company the right to enter on the streets of Montreal without the consent of the municipality.

Topic:   EDITION.
Permalink
LIB

Sydney Arthur Fisher (Minister of Agriculture)

Liberal

Mr. FISHER.

That statement is not correct, as the Bill stands before the committee. This company will have no power to enter on the streets of Montreal or those of any municipality without the consent of that municipality. If permitted, I would like to make clear one or two points which are evidently not known to some hon. gentlemen opposite. I had not an opportunity to be here early in the discussion, as I arrived in Ottawa only at midnight. According to my interpretation of the Bill as it has been reported on by the Private Bills Committee, the rights of the city of Montreal are absolutely safeguarded.

Topic:   EDITION.
Permalink
CON

Richard Blain

Conservative (1867-1942)

Mr. BLAIN.

May I ask the hon. minister if the hon. member for St. Mary's division agrees with that?

Topic:   EDITION.
Permalink
LIB

Sydney Arthur Fisher (Minister of Agriculture)

Liberal

Mr. FISHER.

I do not think my hon. friend would dispute it for a moment, if he reads the Bill and also section 247 of the Railway Act.

Topic:   EDITION.
Permalink
CON

Richard Blain

Conservative (1867-1942)

Mr. BLAIN.

I may say that the hon. member for St. Mary's division (Mr. Martin, and the hon. member for St. James di-

Topic:   EDITION.
Permalink
LIB

Emmanuel Berchmans Devlin

Liberal

Mr. DEVLIN.

vision^ (Mr. Gervais) appeared before the committee and contended that this Bill did invade the rigths of the city of Montreal.

Topic:   EDITION.
Permalink
LIB

Sydney Arthur Fisher (Minister of Agriculture)

Liberal

Mr. FISHER.

That was before the Bill was changed. I was in the committee at the sitting when this Bill was finally passed upon and reported to the House. It was only in that sitting that the provision I have referred to was inserted. Consequently any disputes in regard to that point must have been at previous sittings.

Topic:   EDITION.
Permalink
CON

March 14, 1910