January 19, 1911

LIB

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

Liberal

Mr. OLIVER.

It applies to foreign made beer, not to Canadian or British made beer.

Topic:   QUESTIONS.
Subtopic:   YUKON-REPEAL OF BEER IMPORT TAX.
Permalink
CON

Adam Brown Crosby

Conservative (1867-1942)

Mr. CROSBY.

Does the Yukon make any returns to this government, which would give us some idea of ths amount of beer consumed in that territory?

Topic:   QUESTIONS.
Subtopic:   YUKON-REPEAL OF BEER IMPORT TAX.
Permalink
LIB

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

Liberal

Mr. OLIVER.

They do not make any returns, under the system of government

now prevailing they would not be required to make any returns. I do not think it would be possible to get the information my hon. friend desires. I could, however, inquire of the Yukon government, and get such information as may be possible, and give him the advantage of it later on.

Topic:   QUESTIONS.
Subtopic:   YUKON-REPEAL OF BEER IMPORT TAX.
Permalink
CON

Adam Brown Crosby

Conservative (1867-1942)

Mr. CROSBY.

That will be satisfactory.

Resolution reported, and agreed to.

Topic:   QUESTIONS.
Subtopic:   YUKON-REPEAL OF BEER IMPORT TAX.
Permalink

ORDERS IN COUNCIL UNDER DOMINION LANDS ACT.


House went into committee to consider the following proposed resolution: Resolved, that the following orders in council made by His Excellency the Governor General in Council under the provisions of the Dominion Lands Act, chapter 20 of the Statutes of 1908, on the dates respectively mentioned, that is to say:- 1. P.C. No. 729, dated 20th April, 1910, made under the provisions of section 37 of the said chapter 20, rescinding the regulation for the disposal of coal mining rights established by order in council of the 9th May, 1907, and amending orders in council, dated respectively 16th February and 9th December, 1909, and establishing new regulations in lieu there" of. 2. P.C. No. 1012, dated 25th May, 1910, amending P.C. No. 729, dated 20th April, 1910, respecting the disposal of coal mining rights. 3. P.C. No. 2469, dated 9th December, 1909, rescinding section 3 of the coal mining regulations established by order in council of the 9th May, 1907, and substituting a new provision. 4. P.C. No. 186, dated 31st January, 1910, as to the charging of royalty upon the output of coal mines. 5. P.C. No. 3, dated 17th January, 1910, making regulations for the issue of permits to remove sand, stone and gravel, the property of the Crown, from the submerged beds of rivers and lakes in Manitoba, Saskatchewan, Alberta, the Northwest Territories and within the railway belt of the province of British Columbia. 6. P.C. No. 762, dated 21st April, 1910, rescinding section 3 of the regulations, established by order in council of the 17 th January, 1910, for the issue of permits to move sand, stone and gravel, the property of the Crown, from the beds of rivers and lakes in Manitoba, Saskatchewan, Alberta, the Northwest Territories, and within the railway belt in the province of British Columbia, and substituting a new section 3 therefor. 7. P.C. No. 313, dated 22nd February, 1910, amending the regulations established by the order in council of the 17th January, 1910, for the issue of permits to remove sand, stone and gravel, the property of the Crown, from the submerged beds of rivers and lakes in Manitoba, Saskatchewan, Alberta and the Northwest Territories, and within the railway belt in the province of British Columbia. 8. P.C. No. 933, dated 13th May, 1910, made in virtue of the provisions of subsection (b)



of section 3. section 38 and subsection (k) of section 76 of the Dominion lands Act, approving the regulations annexed thereto for the leasing and administration of lands containing limestone, granite, slate, marble, gypsum, marl, gravel, sand, or any building stone, in the provinces of Manitoba, Saskatchewan, and Alberta, the Northwest Territories, within twenty miles on either side of the main line of the Canadian Pacific railway in the province of British Columbia, and in the tract of three and one-half million acres acquired by the government of the Dominion from the province of British Columbia and referred to in subsection (b) of section 3 of the Dominion lands Act. 9. P.C. No. 414, dated 11th March, 1910, rescinding the regulations governing the disposal of petroleum and natural gas rights the property of the Crown, in Manitoba, Alberta, Saskatchewan, the Northwest Territories and the Yukon Territory, established by order in council dated the 31st May, 1901, the 22nd December, 1902, the 23rd March, and the 1st of October, 1904, the 22nd of July, 1905, and the 26th December, 1906, and substituting therefor the regulations annexed. 10. P.C. No. 277, dated 14th February", 1910, approving and establishing regulations governing the disposal of tar-sand deposits, the property of the Crown, in that portion of the province of Alberta lying north of township 80, and between the 4th and 5th initial meridians, under and in accordance with the provisions of section 37 of the Dominion Lands Act, being chapter 20 of 7-8 Edward VII. 11. P.C. No. 188, dated 9th May, 1910, rescinding clause (m) of number 17 of the regulations governing the granting of yearly licenses and permits to cut timber on Dominion lands, and substituting therefor a new clause (m). 12. P.C. No. 2103, dated 15th October, 1909, ordering that provision be made in the regulations governing the granting of yearly licenses and permits to cut timber on Dominion Lands, for the issue of yearly permits in the Peace River district to portable sawmill owners, whereby each such owner shall be permitted to cut timber on a definitely described tract of land not exceeding one square mile in extent, the quantity not to exceed 200,000 feet B.M. Dues shall be paid at the rate of 75 cents per thousand feet B.M., 20 per cent being payable in advance and the balance at the expiration of the permit. 13. P.C. No. 261, dated 1st March, 1910, amending section 29 of the Quartz Mining Regulations, approved by order in council of the 13th August, 1908, by adding the following paragraph thereto:- 'The grant issued for such a location shall include the right to the iron and mica only, and shall not include the surface. The grantee may, however, upon application, be permitted to purchase at the rate of $10 an acre whatever area of _ the available surface rights thereof the minister may consider necessary for the efficient and economical working of the rights granted/ 14. P.C. No. 595, dated 20th April, 1910, amending the regulations established under the order in council of the 2nd June, 1909, governing the mode of granting water-power


CON

Adam Brown Crosby

Conservative (1867-1942)

Mr. CROSBY.

rights in connection with Dominion Lands in the provinces of Manitoba, Saskatchewan and Alberta.

15. P.C. No. 91, dated 21st January, 1910, ordering that the dues payable under permits to cut timber under Timber Licenses issued for tracts of unsurveyed lands which, upon survey, become school lands, shall be 50 cents per 1,000 feet B.M. and the rental $5 per square mile.

Copies of each of which orders in council were laid before this House on the 11th day of January, 1911, for the approval of this House under the provisions of section 77 of the said Act, are now so approved.

On resolution No. 1,

Topic:   QUESTIONS.
Subtopic:   ORDERS IN COUNCIL UNDER DOMINION LANDS ACT.
Permalink
LIB

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

Liberal

Mr. OLIVER.

Order 729, as stated in the resolution, is an amendment of the regulations for the disposal of eoal lands which regulations were passed in 1907. After two years of operation it was found desirable to make amendments in certain minor particulars, but particularly In regard to the location of lands so as to secure proper priority to the person who actually located. In order to reach this end, instead of making an amendment to certain sections, it was thought advisable rather to draft an entirely new set of regulations for the information of the public, so that any person who had a copy of the regulations would have the law on the subject complete. There is no material difference between the regulations of 1910 and those of 1907.

For the information of the committee I may say that the regulations of 1907 made a very radical change from the regulations that prevailed previously. Up to that time coal lands were disposed of by sale at a fixed price per acre. The coal right was sold at $7 an acre and the surface right in addition, at an additional price of $3 per acre, so that up to the passage of the order in council of 1907 the condition wjas that any person had the right to apply for and purchase coal and surface rights at $10 an acre.

Topic:   QUESTIONS.
Subtopic:   ORDERS IN COUNCIL UNDER DOMINION LANDS ACT.
Permalink
CON

Thomas Simpson Sproule

Conservative (1867-1942)

Mr. SPROULE.

Had he the right to purchase any quantity?

Topic:   QUESTIONS.
Subtopic:   ORDERS IN COUNCIL UNDER DOMINION LANDS ACT.
Permalink
LIB

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

Liberal

Mr. OLIVER.

No, he had only the right to purchase 320 acres, but he had the right to assign or take an assignment so that the effect was that any person might acquire any area of land that he saw fit to buy at that price. There was, however, a royalty of ten cents per ton upon the coal mined. The effect of these regulations was, first, to give an opportunity to acquire valuable surface rights when the policy and administration did not look to the acquirement of such rights by private individuals. Where the surface right had appreciated in value so as to be worth more than $10 an acre and where the ordinary purchaser could not acquire that land, an individual might come forward and, by applying for it as coal land, could acquire it subject, of course, to

the royalty on the mined coal. But the fact of the royalty being ten cents per ton deterred the mining of coal upon that land because a great deal of land had passed from the hands of the Crown in the early days without any condition of Toyalty, and as there was plenty of such land to furnish an opportunity for coal operators the ten cents per ton royalty was a bar to development. The $10 per acre price afforded an opportunity for speculation and the ten cents per ton royalty was a bar to development. In 1907 the regulations were changed so that coal lands would not he sold, so that only the right to the coal could be acquired and that under lease at a rental per year. At the same time the royalty on coal to be mined was reduced from ten cents to five cents a ton upon such leased land, the result of which was that the man who wanted to acquire coal land for actual development found his opportunity improved by the change in the regulations because he acquired the right to operate by the payment of a yearly rental and on his operation he paid only half as much royalty as in the former case.

Topic:   QUESTIONS.
Subtopic:   ORDERS IN COUNCIL UNDER DOMINION LANDS ACT.
Permalink
CON

George Eulas Foster

Conservative (1867-1942)

Mr. FOSTER.

If my hon. friend will allow me to interrupt him for a moment, only for the sake of getting clearly at this legislation-the minister will see that this is just the same as if he brought down fifteen Billsyand put them before the House with the idea that the House would legislate upon them. If they were Bills they would be on file and every member would have the Bills and could study their provisions and go along with the minister in his explanations. These orders in council have been brought down, they have been put on the table of the House, but the clerk has put them in his capacious pocket and spirited them away, and from that hour up to this not a single member of parliament has seen one of them unless he has been curious or wise enough to get at them and look into them. Under these circumstances it seems to me that it is absolute blindness for us to pass fifteen Bills really simply from the minister's explanations, which are plain enough, but, although we listened to the explanations we cannot form a judgment upon them because they are diffuse, and there are too many of them. In some way or other, if legislation like this is to take place, orders in council ought to be treated the same as Bills, printed and put before the members so that we could have them the same as Bills. This just occurs to me; it is all a blind piece of work to me; I try to follow it as nearly as I can, and I think the same would be true with regard to most members of the House. It is important legislation. Does the minister not know any way by which he could suggest a more intelligent consideration of the matter than this? I suppose these orders in

council are fairly voluminous, are they, or are they Tather short?

Topic:   QUESTIONS.
Subtopic:   ORDERS IN COUNCIL UNDER DOMINION LANDS ACT.
Permalink
LIB

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

Liberal

Mr. OLIVER.

They are not very long.

Topic:   QUESTIONS.
Subtopic:   ORDERS IN COUNCIL UNDER DOMINION LANDS ACT.
Permalink
CON

George Eulas Foster

Conservative (1867-1942)

Mr. FOSTER.

Then I will suggest to the minister that it would make things far better if he would print a stated number of them so that each member of the House would have his copy the same as he would have a Bill and then in a little time take them up. Does the minister not think that would be a better way?

Topic:   QUESTIONS.
Subtopic:   ORDERS IN COUNCIL UNDER DOMINION LANDS ACT.
Permalink
LIB

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

Liberal

Mr. OLIVER.

There is no objection, I know of, to following the hon. gentleman's suggestion, but I may say that I am merely following the terms of the statute and the precedent of other years.

Topic:   QUESTIONS.
Subtopic:   ORDERS IN COUNCIL UNDER DOMINION LANDS ACT.
Permalink
CON

George Eulas Foster

Conservative (1867-1942)

Mr. FOSTER.

If we had not so many of them thrown at us at once it would not be so bad.

Topic:   QUESTIONS.
Subtopic:   ORDERS IN COUNCIL UNDER DOMINION LANDS ACT.
Permalink
LIB

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

Liberal

Mr. OLIVER.

We have every desire that every member should have the fullest information. These regulations have been printed for the information of every person interested, and I assumed there was sufficient information in the hands of members to enable them to form their judgment.

Topic:   QUESTIONS.
Subtopic:   ORDERS IN COUNCIL UNDER DOMINION LANDS ACT.
Permalink
CON

George Eulas Foster

Conservative (1867-1942)

Mr. FOSTER.

Probably the minister has a sufficient number printed now.

Topic:   QUESTIONS.
Subtopic:   ORDERS IN COUNCIL UNDER DOMINION LANDS ACT.
Permalink
LIB

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

Liberal

Mr. OLIVER.

Very likely. I do not know whether there would be enough of the order in council in its original form, but I think we would have sufficient copies of the information which was prepared for general use.

Progress reported.

Topic:   QUESTIONS.
Subtopic:   ORDERS IN COUNCIL UNDER DOMINION LANDS ACT.
Permalink

CLOTHING OF DISCHARGED CONVICTS

January 19, 1911