April 4, 1910

CON

Haughton Lennox

Conservative (1867-1942)

Mr. LENNOX.

This, I understand, is to provide in case the owner is probably in default. But cases of that kind might arise in which little or no moral blame would attach to the owner. Of course, I speak without knowing the proportions in this matter. I do not know what the storage for seven days on a given quantity of logs

til 75

would represent. Of course, if it is a very small matter, it is not worth discussing.

Topic:   RESTIGOUCHE LOG DRIVING AND BOOM COMPANY.
Permalink
LIB

Frank Broadstreet Carvell

Liberal

Mr. CARVELL.

1 think that under section 10 it is all provided for. Section 10 provides that the company may make bylaws fixing and regulating tolls and for the government of the company's affairs, but no by-law is to come into force unless and until it has been approved by the Governor in Council. I think this would cover all cases that might arise.

On section 21-Liability of company for logs lost by neglect: Logs lost otherwise to be secured at owner's expense.

Topic:   RESTIGOUCHE LOG DRIVING AND BOOM COMPANY.
Permalink
CON

Haughton Lennox

Conservative (1867-1942)

Mr. LENNOX.

Is there anything in this section that makes the loss of logs prirna facie evidence of neglect on the part of the company, or is that left open?

Topic:   RESTIGOUCHE LOG DRIVING AND BOOM COMPANY.
Permalink
LIB

Frank Broadstreet Carvell

Liberal

Mr. CARVELL.

That is left open. This is a very rapid river in the spring and, no matter what precautions may be taken, there is alwavs the possibility ot logs getting under the booms by the force of the current. But, unless the company have been negligent in the ordinary sense, they would not be liable, and the question of fact as to negligence is to be decided in each case.

Topic:   RESTIGOUCHE LOG DRIVING AND BOOM COMPANY.
Permalink
CON

Haughton Lennox

Conservative (1867-1942)

Mr. LENNOX.

But there is nothing stated making the fact of loss a presumption of negligence which the company would have to rebut?

Topic:   RESTIGOUCHE LOG DRIVING AND BOOM COMPANY.
Permalink
LIB

Frank Broadstreet Carvell

Liberal

Mr. CARVELL.

No, that is not specifically stated.

On section 26, expropriation of lands and rights.

Topic:   RESTIGOUCHE LOG DRIVING AND BOOM COMPANY.
Permalink
LIB

Frank Broadstreet Carvell

Liberal

Mr. CARVELL.

I beg to move that subsection 2 of section 26 be amended by inserting the wrnrd ' fishing ' between the w'ords ' the ' and ' rights ' in the 36th line thereof. I may explain generally that this section 26 recognizes the right of the fisher-.men along the shore to proprietary rights in the foreshore or even beyond the foreshore. I think there is a doubt in the law as to whether there are these rights or not. However, the lumbermen are willing to allow him these rights and to pay him for them, leaving the amount to be determined by arbitration. But there was a fear on the part of some of the riparian owners that if these provisions were made too broad the company might expropriate fishing rights and then lease them or use them for fishing purposes. The intention of subsection 2 was that the company might expropriate these fishing stands or rights only to be used for the purpose of their undertaking, and that they would not have the right to use them for fishing purposes. The word ' fishing ' was omitted from the 36th line, and it would look,there as if they could use them for any purpose Mr. LENNOX.

whatever. As amended it will read that they may expropriate these rights ' only for the purpose of the exercise of the company's owm business and without right to the company to continue to exercise any of the fishing Tights so acquired.'

They can use the locus for their own business, but they cannot use it for fishing. That is the object of inserting the word ' fishing.'

Topic:   RESTIGOUCHE LOG DRIVING AND BOOM COMPANY.
Permalink
CON

Thomas Simpson Sproule

Conservative (1867-1942)

Mr. SPROULE.

Do you not think that this will conflict with the rights of the province, if they have any rights, to control the fisheries along inland streams or lakes, or with federal rights, if there are any such rights?

Topic:   RESTIGOUCHE LOG DRIVING AND BOOM COMPANY.
Permalink
LIB

Frank Broadstreet Carvell

Liberal

Mr. CARVELL.

I realize that the question might possibly arise, hut if we have no jurisdiction to grant rights, of course, no damage will be done. For a great many years, farmers along the shores have been fishing at certain places which they call fishing stands. They have obtained licenses yearly from the federal government and in the last year or two from the province of Quebec. The company are willing anyway to recognize that the owner has some rights, perhaps, by long usage-you might call it a prescriptive right-and they are willing to pay for them whatever they may be. I realize the point raised by the hon. member for East Grey, but I do not think any difficulty will arise therefrom. This parliament certainly would have the right to control the foreshore, and the land to be used as a booming privilege really is the foreshore of the Restigouche river, or below the mouth of the river along the bay and the harbour.

Topic:   RESTIGOUCHE LOG DRIVING AND BOOM COMPANY.
Permalink
CON

John Waterhouse Daniel

Conservative (1867-1942)

Mr. DANIEL.

I would like to ask the promoter of this Bill if he is satisfied that the riparian owners down there made no objection to this subsection 2 of section 26, and whether the company will have the right to expropriate their fishing rights under this Bill? This is a very valuable salmon fishing river.

Topic:   RESTIGOUCHE LOG DRIVING AND BOOM COMPANY.
Permalink
LIB

Frank Broadstreet Carvell

Liberal

Mr. CARVELL.

They have objected very seriously for a long time, but the fishermen have all been offered a certain amount of money for whatever rights they might possess, in many cases amounting to thousands of dollars. The company altogether have offered the riparian owners something like $30,000 for their rights. In most cases settlements have been made. There are three on the Quebec side and six or seven op the New Brunswick side who have not yet been settled with. Every individual party was represented before the committee by Mr. Trueman, who used to be, judge of Probate in Albert county. He is now living in Dalhonsie. This clause was darfted by Mr. Trueman himself and inserted in the Bill by the committee exactly as he requested it to be. Therefore,'

this clause is really a clause drafted by the fishermen or the riparian owners- themselves.

On section 31; security for damages.

Topic:   RESTIGOUCHE LOG DRIVING AND BOOM COMPANY.
Permalink
LIB

James Kirkpatrick Kerr (Speaker of the Senate)

Liberal

Mr. SPEAKER.

I gave notice the other day that I would move an amendment to be inserted as a new subsection of clause 28. It is as follows:

The costs of any arbitration under this Act shall be borne by the company, whether the same awarded is greater or less than the amount offered by the company.

The hon. member for Carleton (Mr. Car-veil) pointed out to me this morning that it was provided in this Bill that expropriation would be carried out under the Railway Act and that there is a clause in the Railway Act which says that if the company is condemned to pay more than it offered, the company must pay the cost of the arbitration. The hon. member (Mr. Carvell) who has legal training, says this amendment would be contrary to the prevailing jurisprudence, therefore I am not insisting, but this is the very cause of the difficulty between the riparian owners and the company. Wherever the parties have been able to agree, the riparian owners have been bought out. The Busteed estate, for instance, have sold out to the company. The riparian owners thought that the company should in any case be compelled to pay the cost of the arbitration, but if this principle is contrary to the jurisdiction it should not be insisted upon, and I will, therefore, withdraw the amendment. Of course, I make a great distinction between a railway and a river in regard to expropriation.

Topic:   RESTIGOUCHE LOG DRIVING AND BOOM COMPANY.
Permalink

NUMBERING OF BILLS FROM THE SENATE.

CON

Haughton Lennox

Conservative (1867-1942)

Mr. LENNOX.

Could not some provision be made by which the Senate Bills, which are designated only by letters, should be numbered consecutively with our own Bills so that when they come to us it would be easier to find them on our files?

Topic:   NUMBERING OF BILLS FROM THE SENATE.
Permalink
LIB

William Stevens Fielding (Minister of Finance and Receiver General)

Liberal

Mr. FIELDING.

I would suggest that the clerk of the House be asked to confer with the clerk of the Senate and see what could be done to meet the hon. gentleman's suggestion.

Topic:   NUMBERING OF BILLS FROM THE SENATE.
Permalink

CONSIDERED IN COMMITTEE-T BIRD READINGS.


Bill (No. 154) respecting the Northern Empire Railway Company.-Mr. White (Alberta). Bill (No. 168) an Act respecting the Calgary and Fernie Railway Company.-Mr. Goodeve. Bill (No. 172) respecting the Dominion Atlantic Railway Company.-Mr. Black.


QUESTIONS.

EMPLOYMENT OF ALPHONSE GERVAIS.

CON

Mr. MONK:

Conservative (1867-1942)

1. Is Alphonse Gervais employed by the government in the Inland Revenue, Department of the Interior, or elsewhere?

2. If so, when was he appointed, what is his salary, what are his duties, and is he engaged continuously in the service of the government?

3. Does he work for the government at St. Hyacinthe or elsewhere?

4. How mu-ch has he received from the government for salary or otherwise since his appointment?

5. Is it true that for a year past he has owned and operated himself a moving picture hall?

6. Was not the same Alphonse Gervais convicted in 1908 of fraudulent election practices?

Topic:   QUESTIONS.
Subtopic:   EMPLOYMENT OF ALPHONSE GERVAIS.
Permalink

April 4, 1910