April 28, 1911

QUESTION OF PRIVILEGE.

LIB

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

Liberal

Sir WILFRID LAURIER.

I deem it my duty to call attention to an article which appeared yesterday in the Toronto ' Telegram,' in which direct reference was made to me. The article is a long one, and I need not read it all. It will be sufficient to read the matter which has reference to my name. The article proceeds to say that on the 2nd of March this letter was addressed to me:

My Dear Sir Wilfrid,-I see that you are having troubles of your own by the defection of the 'young Napoleon' on the trade question and in other ways. The other ways are the more serious. Only in one instance in the history of Canada has the trade question played a part in making or unmaking a government, and that was in 1878. Even then, as you will know, there was contributory negligence on the part of the government.

Clifford Sifton's defection on the present occasion will not count against your government. He is a squeezed lemon politically, and without patronage, controls no following.

Neither your government nor any other government will fall, except from weakness on the inside. That was what happened to the Tories in 18S6. Ministers of the cabinet had become corrupt and the McGreevy-Lange-vin scandal, aided by the Manitoba School Bill and cabinet crookedness, did the rest. Recently evidence had come to me that one of your colleagues is a grafter and a boodler. I shall be in Ottawa for a few days, and am willing to submit the evidence to you as Tarte was willing to submit his evidence of the Langevin-McGreevy boodling to Sir John Macdonald. Should you see fit to take im-

Opposition.

Haggart (Lanark), Beattie,

McCarthy,

Northrup,

Osier,

Maddin,

Forget,

Lewis,

Kidd,

Daniels,

Meighen,

Wilsox,

Macdonnell,

Lancaster,

Clare,

Haggart (Winnipeg), Bristol,

Bradbury,

Campbell.

Gordon (Nipissing), Jameson,

Owen,

Sharpe (Ontario), Currie (Simcoe), Boyce,

Ames,

Foster,

Broder,

Marshall,

Lalor,

Worthington.

*mediate action it would go no further. The alternative would he to (place the document, letters and photographs of cheques, &c., in the hands of the opposition.

On the receipt of that letter, I instructed my secretary to send the following communication to the gentleman who wrote it:

Ottawa, March 3, 1911.

Dear iSir,-I am instructed toy the Prime Minister to inform you that he will toe in his office at .10 o'clock to-morrow, Saturday morning, and ready to see you.

Tours very sincerely,

E. J. LEMAIRE, Private (Secretary.

The gentleman in question waited bn me, as stated in the rest of the letter, several times. Without committing my memory as to the number of times, I know it was more than once, but the tenor of each conversation between us on these occasions was of the same nature. The gentleman in question, with whom I had in former years friendly relations, but with whom I have not been in communication for many years, called on me and gave me the name of one of my colleagues and said that he had lost the confidence of the party, particularly in his own province, that he was a boodler and a grafter, and for these reasons should go out of the government. I said that I had no reason to doubt the honesty of my colleague, who was not only a colleague but a personal friend, and that I would not accept the alternative he mentioned, namely, 'should you see fit to take immediate action it would go no further; but the alternative would be, to place the documents, letters and photographs of cheques in the hands of the opposition.' I .stated to my informant that I would not take any such action as he suggested under such terms, that I had the fullest confidence in my colleague, that I believed in his honesty, and that if it were shown that my confidence were misplaced, he would have to take the consequences. My informant was free to take such steps as he pleased, to place the papers and documents in the hands of the opposition and do anything he pleased with them. If my colleague were then proved to be dishonest, he would have to take the consequences, but if not it was my duty to stand loyally by him. This is the gist of any conversation that took place between us. This is the position I take and I leave that position in the hands of parliament and the country.

Topic:   QUESTION OF PRIVILEGE.
Permalink

THE IMPERIAL CONFERENCE.

CON

Robert Laird Borden (Leader of the Official Opposition)

Conservative (1867-1942)

Mr. BORDEN (Halifax).

I would like to inquire of the right hon. the Prime Minister what his intentions are with respect to attendance at the approaching Imperial Conference and Coronation?

Topic:   THE IMPERIAL CONFERENCE.
Permalink
LIB

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

Liberal

Sir WILFRID LAURJER.

I may suy that I deem it my duty to attend the Conference, not only because I have been invited, but because in the last Conference in 1907, the permanency of the Imperial Conference was assured. It was decided that it should meet every four years and be attended by the Prime Minister of Great Britain, the Colonial Secretary, the Prime Ministers of the self-governing dominions, and such members of the cabinets as should be selected. It is now over six weeks since I have taken my passage on the Virginian to sail on the 12th of May, and it is my intention to sail on that day unless prevented by public business. I have come to the conclusion that should my presence here be required, as indeed there is every indication it may be, it will be my duty to forego the privilege of attending the conference. My first duty is to Canada, but I still hope that nothing will prevent my sailing on the 12th of May.

Topic:   THE IMPERIAL CONFERENCE.
Permalink
CON

Robert Laird Borden (Leader of the Official Opposition)

Conservative (1867-1942)

Mr. BORDEN (Halifax).

In order that our own position on this side may be made quite clear, I now move the adjournment of the House for the purpose of discussing the (Subject which my right hon. friend has just alluded. I am very happy indeed to concur in the hope which he has expressed that he may be enabled to attend the approaching Imperial Conference. As we all know, it was originally designated as a Colonial Conference, and in its original idea consisted of the Prime Ministers of the self-governing dominions and the Colonial Secretary or some other member of the British government. The Prime Minister has referred to the circumstance that the conference was made permanent in 1907; that is entirely correct. But there was a further change made. It became an Imperial Conference instead of a Colonial Conference in its designation; and while the Prime Minister of each of the self-governing dominions is necessarily a member of the conference, other members of the governments of the various dominions who previously were admitted purely on suffrance, have now become members of that conference when so designated by their respective governments. It is quite true that the vote is by government, that is, each government has one vote, as I understand it; but nevertheless, other designated members of the governments of the various dominions are admitted, in. addition to the Prime Ministers, to full rights as members of that conference. The present constitution of the conference is set forth in a resolution which was unanimously agreed to by the Imperial Conference of 1907. I will read a portion of the paragraph which relates to the constitution of this conference.

That it will be to the advantage of the empire if a conference, to be called the Imperial

Conference, is held every four years, at which questions of common interest may he discussed and considered as between His Majesty's government and his governments of the selfgoverning dominions beyond the seas. The Prime Minister of the United Kingdom will be ex-officio president, and the Prime Ministers of the self-governing dominions will be ex-officio members of the conference. The Secretary of State for the Colonies will be an ex-officio member of the conference and will take the chair in the absence of the president. He will arrange for such imperial conferences after communication with the Prime Ministers of the respective dominions.

Such other ministers as the respective governments may appoint will also be members of the conference-it being understood that, except hy special permission of the conference each discussion will be conducted by not more than two representatives from each government, and that each government will nave only one vote.

Now the House will observe that the Prime Minister of Canada is ex-officio member of that conference, he is the only member of this government who occupies that position in the conference. I need not dwell upon the importance of the position of the Prime Minister in the latter day development of parliamentary institutions, both in the mother country and in the various self-governing dominions. The development of those institutions has been along very much the same lines, whether in the mother country, in Canada, Australia, or New Zealand. One feature of the development of parliamentary institutions in modern times has been the increasing power of the cabinet as distinguished .from that of parliament, and within the cabinet, the increasing power, importance and influence of the Prime Minister. It is perfectly obvious, therefore, that the presence of the Prime Minister of Canada is entirely necessary at the approaching conference, if this country is to be represented as it should be represented in that conference. In his absence, no definite or important action can very well

be taken; it will be a question of reference to the Prime Minister after the conference is over, and in my humble opinion the absence of the Prime Minister from the approaching conference would be a blow at the continued existence of this great factor in the solution of Imperial problems. Now the Prime Minister has alluded to possible reasons of public urgency on account of which it is within the bounds of possibility that he will not be able to attend that conference. It is quite true that we have matters of very great importance pending before parliament at the present time; it is equally true that we on this side of the House do not see eye to eye with hon. gentlemen on the other side of the House with regard to one matter of very great moment which is now Mr. BORDEN (Halifax).

occupying the attention of parliament and of the country. It is only right to say in passing that the particular subject to which I allude is the proposal of the government for closer trade relations with the United States of America. These proposals were not introduced into this House until the 26th day of January last, nearly two and a half months after the session had opened and parliament had commenced business.

Now, there are three courses which would permit the Prime Minister to attend the approaching Imperial Conference. If the present session of parliament should not have some to a conclusion at the time when it will be necessary for him to leave, he could proceed to the conference, leaving his colleagues in charge of the business of the House; that is one alternative 's to the desirability or expediency of which I am not so good a judge as the Prime Minister himself. I frankly concede that that is a matter upon which it is his right, his duty, to exercise his own judgment. In the second place, he can bring the session to an end, leaving some of these very important matters unfinished and letting them stand over to another session. It has already been intimated to us that the Bank Act will not toe pressed at the present session. If that is to stand over to another session, there can be no particular Teason why the proposals for closer trade relations with the United States should not also stand ove' until another session. I do not wish to enter into any controversial observations with regard to that, I only mention it as another alternative which is open to the Prime Minister in that regard. Then in the third place, he can adjourn this session of parliament for two or three months, or whatever length of time may be sufficient to enable him to attend the Imperial Conference and the coronation. After the coronation and after the conference, the session can be resumed; and I desire to say now that for the purpose of facilitating public business we would be prepared to give interim supply to such an extent as the public interest would demand, in case the Prime Minister should see fit to follow that course.

So far as reciprocity is concerned, I have already stated that we do not see eye to eye across the floor of this House. Our own attitude with regard to that is one of uncompromising opposition, for the reason that we have no doubt that the results of these proposals, if they should be carried into effect, would be disastrous, not only to Canada, but to the empire. I am not uttering that as a controversial observation, but merely for the reason that I desire to make our attitude perfectly plain.

Then in addition to the Imperial Confer-I ence, there is another great occasion which

will occur in the month of June, on the 22nd I think, that is the coronation of his most gracious Majesty King George V., an occasion of great importance, not only to the mother country, but to every dominion of the empire; and I would say in conclusion that in my opinion it would be doubly regrettable if Canada were not represented at the coronation by the Prime Minister of this country.

Topic:   THE IMPERIAL CONFERENCE.
Permalink
LIB

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

Liberal

Sir WILFRID LAURIER.

I entirely agree, and everybody will agree, that under existing circumstances, under the present conditions to which the British Empire has attained, the Imperial Conference having been adopted as a permanent feature of our relations, it would be unfortunate that any of the Prime Ministers of the self-governing dominions should not be present at that important event. If it is not possible for me to attain to that, the fault will not be mine. My hon. friend (Mr. Borden, Halifax) has been kind enough to make several suggestions which would allow me to go to the conference, but each involving this principle-that it must agree with the view of the opposition. He offered three alternatives. The one thing that separates us, apparently, is the trade agreement with the United States. The hon. gentleman has stated that he and his friends offer an uncompromising opposition to that agreement. I may tell him that on this side we offer an uncompromising support of this agreement. He thinks it would be a bane to Canada and a possible danger to the empire. We think it would be a boon to Canada, and the danger to the empire we do not regard as serious. What I have in mind which may force me not, to go on with my present plan of attending the conference is this: As I

stated more than six weeks ago I obtained my passage. It never occurred to me at the time that there would be any possibility of my not going. But, Sir, since that time rumours have come to us which have been afloat about the corridors of this House that the opposition will not allow this measure to go through. It is well known that the rules of this House are the old rules of the British House of Commons in 1867. Those rules then were not abused. But in Great Britain abuses arose; the rules were taken advantage of by a minority to block legislation which, in the view of the majority, was necessary for the good government of the country. So, I would like to say, it is in the power of the opposition here to block legislation almost indefinitely. I have said that it has come to us that the opposition have such an intention. The corridors have been full of these rumours. I have not paid any attention to these rumours, nor have I attached any importance to them. But I have in my hand the report of a 2541

speech delivered yesterday in the city of New York by one of the most important members of the opposition in which we are told practically that the opposition will not allow this agreement to be carried into effect. That is what the hon. member for East Hastings (Mr. Northrup) said yesterday:

The government of to-day in Canada has introduced the measure into parliament. It therefore stands pledged to carry it and if it fails, it loses the reins of power, which will be taken up by its opponents. You can therefore easily understand how strong is the feeling of the supporters of the government even though they disapprove of the measure, to consider it the lesser of two evils and to vote for it rather than vote the government out.

It is therefore altogether probable : hat, if the government can force the measure to a vote, it will be carried. On the other hand the opposition can, if it sees fit, probably prevent a vote. There are 300 items which will give opportunity for illimitable discussion. P e have already granted supplies up to the first of June, but money cannot be spent for public purposes unless first voted by the parliament. If we would decline to pass further estimates, the public treasury would be emptied on the first of June. Public officials would have to borrow instead of receiving their salaries and public works would be at a standstill. This, of course, in any event, would be only a last resort not to be adopted unless considered absolutely necessary; but at the same time every one will admit that if the opposition felt that any measure was of such tremendous importance as to seriously affect, perhaps directly, the future history of our country, it would then be justified in refusing to grant any supplies or pass the measure until there had been an appeal to the people.

I do not know how far the hon. member for East Hastings has the right to speak for the opposition, but if I am correctly informed he is voicing the decision of the caucus held only a few days ago. If such be the temper of the opposition, I think it will probably make it necessary for me to resign my determination to go to England, and stay in Canada.

Topic:   THE IMPERIAL CONFERENCE.
Permalink
CON

Robert Laird Borden (Leader of the Official Opposition)

Conservative (1867-1942)

Mr. BORDEN (Halifax).

I desire to make just one or two very brief observations in reply to what the Prime Minister (Sir Wilfrid Laurier) has said.

Topic:   THE IMPERIAL CONFERENCE.
Permalink
LIB

James Kirkpatrick Kerr (Speaker of the Senate)

Liberal

Mr. SPEAKER.

Ahy hon. member who wishes to speak should speak now, for under the rules of the House, the leader of the opposition (Mr. Borden, Halifax) speaks to close the debate.

Topic:   THE IMPERIAL CONFERENCE.
Permalink
CON

Robert Laird Borden (Leader of the Official Opposition)

Conservative (1867-1942)

Mr. BORDEN (Halifax).

The Prime Minister has alluded to the fact that he took his passage six weeks ago, and he intimated some surprise that the conditions to-day are not what he expected at that time they would be at this date. At least that was the impression I took from his remarks, and I do not desire to misquote him. If, in making that statement

he alludes to the debate which has been proceeding from day to day for some time upon the proposed trade agreement with the United States, then I would like to inform him that hon. gentlemen on the other side of the House have been taking their turn in that debate, and have had their fair share in it. Although I have not taken the trouble to compute the columns of ' Hansard' that have been occupied by the two sides of the House respectively, I venture the statement, that if, the right hon. gentleman were to make such research, he would find that as much of the time of this House had been taken up by his own supporters as by hon. gentlemen on this side.

Topic:   THE IMPERIAL CONFERENCE.
Permalink
?

Some hon. MEMBERS

More.

Topic:   THE IMPERIAL CONFERENCE.
Permalink
CON

Robert Laird Borden (Leader of the Official Opposition)

Conservative (1867-1942)

Mr. BORDEN (Halifax).

I am corrected by hon. gentlemen beside me who say that more time has been taken up by hon. members on that side of the House. I do not need to go that far; I say that up to the present time the debate has proceeded regularly on both sides of the House, and there was no occasion for the Prime Minister to make what I regarded as an insinuation in expressing surprise that the debate has been so protracted. I would like to say to him further that he did not meet in a very gracious spirit what I regarded as a pretty fair and even generous offer on my part. I said to him that we would consent to the adjournment of this Blouse for two or three, or four months, in order that he might have the opportunity to attend the conference, and the coronation. But I said something more; I said that we would consent to grant such interim supply as would provide for the public necessities of the country in the meantime, and until the session could resume. And the only answer to that offer, is an insinuation from the Prime Minister, and a quotation from, some newspaper containing an alleged report of remarks by the hon. member for East Hastings (Mr. Northrup). Well, it does not strike me that that is exactly the spirit in which such an offer should be received.

I would like to quote to the Prime Minister from the observations of his own Minister of Finance in 1907 when this same question was to the fore. The hon. Minister of Finance said:

There are duties to Canada which can heel; he performed in Canada, and chiefly in the parliament of Canada; hut there are also duties to Canada which can be performed in other parts of the world, and notably in the capital of the empire.

I think this is an occasion when the Prime Minister of Canada might have regard, not only to trade relations with the United States, but to trade relations with Mr. BORDEN (Halifax).

this great empire to which we belong What are the subjects which are to be debated at the conference? They are some eighteen in number.

Merchant shipping and navigation laws.

Cheaper cable rates.

All-red route.

A special object of consideration by the right hon. gentleman.

Imperial Court of Appeal.

State-owned Atlantic cable and telegraph lines across Canada.

Imperial representation.

Commercial co-operation for the encouragement of British manufactures and shipping.

Emigration and the position of labour exchanges.

Co-operation between the naval and military forces of the empire and the status of Dominion navies.

There is also the subject of naturalization, although it is suggested that the question of uniformity of naturalization laws is essentially a technical one, and as such may more properly be remitted to a committee of the full conference sitting as a subsidiary conference. Nevertheless, that all-important subject of naturalization is one which should command the attendance of the Prime Minister of Canada in order that the anomalies which now exist, and which exercise a disintegrating influence upon this empire, may be removed at the earliest possible moment.

The Prime Minister suggests the importance of this trade agreement with the United States. I am willing to concede that from his point of view. We, on this side of the House, entertain a precisely contrary view, and, under the privileges of parliamentary institutions in this country, we are entitled to the full expression of our view, and we propose to exercise that right. We have been told by ministers of the Crown that the honour of this country has been pledged to the President and government of the United States of America in connection with that agreement. Well, I do not propose to deal with the controversial aspect of that question except to say that I do not know when the people of Canada gave any mandate to the Prime Minister or the government of this country to pledge the honour of Canada to these proposals. But, I would like to say to the right hon. gentleman that if the honour of this country is pledged to the United States in respect to this matter, it is also pledged to the empire in respect to all the matters which I have just enumerated. It would seem to me that the question which must present itself to the Prime Minister is whether or not our trade and other relations with the United State_s of America are more important in his mind than our trade and other relations with this empire

_:1

of which we form' a part. I have made an offer to him which is as reasonable an offer, I think, as could tie made by any man standing in my place, under which he can attend the Imperial Conference, and go on with his determination, if he persists in it, to force these reciprocity proposals through this House. I have made that proposal to him for two reasons; because I know that his trade proposals appeal to him, but, on the other hand, because our relations to the empire and the importance of Canada's representation in the Imperial Conference appeal to us on this side just as strongly, and more strongly than his trade agreement appears to him. Therefore, conceding to him his right to attempt to force this agreement upon us by his majority if he is in a position to do so, I assert that, without any interference with that right-, he would also be able under my proposal to charge, as Prime Minister of Canada, the duty which he owes not only to this country, hut to the empire as well so long as he continues to act in that capacity. Under these circumstances, Mr. Speaker, I trust that the Prime Minister will reconsider the intimation which he gave in the concluding portion of his remarks and that Canada, at the approaching Imperial Conference and at the Coronation as well will be represented as it should be represented 'by its Prime Minister.

Motion to adjourn negatived.

Topic:   THE IMPERIAL CONFERENCE.
Permalink

DISTRIBUTION OF SEED GRAIN.


On the orders of the day being called. M.r. HERRON. I wish to draw the attention of the hon. Minister of Agriculture (Mr. Fisher), and I had hoped also that of the hon. Minister of the Interior (Mr. Oliver), but I am sorry to see that the Minister of the Interior is not in his seat, to a matter that has come to my attention in connection with the supply of seed grain to settlers in the Northwest. I received a communication to-day from a settler in my constituency complaining of the quality and cost of the seed grain supplied by the government to settlers in that vicinity. I have here a sample of the wheat which was supplied, and I suppose that the sample would be one which would appeal more particularly to the Minister of Agriculture. I have -also a complaint with reference to the price. As I understand this grain is supplied through the Department of the Interior, and their officials in the Northwest, and the complaint made to me is to the effect that this wheat, laid down at Gleichen, a station on the main line of the Canadian Pacific railway near Calgary, at a cost of $1.25 per bushel is of a rather inferior grade, and from my own knowledge of wheat, grading and price, I would say that it would grade probably No. 2 Northern, and not more than that if it was clean which it is not. It is tainted very badly. with weed seeds. I am not capable of judging whether they are of the noxious kind or not, but I presume they are. The wheat is mixed very badly with weed seeds. For the last two or three years wheat of this quality has been sold at the stations in the locality where this wheat is supplied at 75 cents, or at the most, 80 cents a bushel. It seems to me that this is entirely too much to pay for that quality of seed wheat. My correspondent has not given me very full information regarding the seed. Whether it was purchased in Manitoba, or in some of the western provinces, or in Ontario, I have no means of judging. But I think that the two points which I have mentioned, quality and price are worthy of consideration. I shall be glad to hand over the sample to the Minister of Agriculture, and see if he would not consider that it was very injurious to the interests of the Northwest to have seed of that quality supplied and distributed among the farmers of that country. I think the Minister of the Interior would be justified in investigating closely the price charged because, as far as I am capable of judging, it is much above the standard price.


LIB

Sydney Arthur Fisher (Minister of Agriculture)

Liberal

Mr. FISHER.

As this seed is distributed to the settlers with whom the Department of the Interior is in close touch, the whole work in connection with the distribution is managed by the Department of the Interior.

I have not, therefore, the information at my command at the moment to reply to the hon. gentleman, but I would be very glad if he would let me have a sample of the seed he has, and I would consult with my colleague, the Minister of the Interior, and investigate the matter.

Topic:   DISTRIBUTION OF SEED GRAIN.
Permalink

FISHERIES ACT AMENDMENT.


House went into committee to consider the following proposed resolution: Resolved, that it is expedient to provide that the Fisheries Act, chapter 45 of the Revised Statutes, 1906, he amended by enacting that in the province of British Columbia" no one shall engage in the manufacture of oil or other commercial products from sea-lions, hair seals, sharks or dog-fish, nor operate a salmon cannery or salmon curing establishment, except under license from the minister; that the site of reduction works must be approved by the minister ; that operations must proceed within one year from issue of the license for which annual fees shall be required; that the annual fees for a lobster fishing license be increased and based on the total number of pounds of canned lobsters; that the annual returns to the minister by the owner or manager of a lobster factory, through the inspector of fisheries oif the district, shall furnish more details and be submitted not later than the 31st day of



May, each year, and penalties for failure to make such returns shall he imposed; and that licenses unust he obtained for maintaining lobster pounds, with an annual fee for the same.-iMr. Brodeur.


LIB

Louis-Philippe Brodeur (Minister of the Naval Service; Minister of Marine and Fisheries)

Liberal

Hon. L. P. BRODEUR (Minister of Marine and Fisheries).

In this resolution we first ask for a provision authorizing the government to enact that in British Columbia no one shall engage in the manufacture of oil or other commercial products from sea lions, hair seals, sharks, or dog-fish, without taking out a license. from the department. This has been asked by some people who are willing to take up that industry. So far nothing has been done with regard to the reduction of sea lions and similar mammals. I think we should encourage any person or company willing to start works for the purpose of destroying those mammals, which are a menace to the food fish generally. It has been suggested to us that such a thing could not be done unless we could establish regulations by which the reduction works could be established at a certain distance, one from the other, in order to give each factory an area large enough to ensure a catch which would maintain the reduction works. We have now similar legislation in regard to the whale fisheries, no whale reducing works may be established within a certain distance of an existing reduction works. By having power to license reduction works we can at the same time determine the area within which they may fish and the distance at which other works may be established. This legislation has worked very satisfactorily in connection with the whale fisheries. We are now asked to apply the same regulations to reduction works on the British Columbia coast for the handling of sea * lions, hair seals, sharks and dog-fish. The fee proposed is a nominal one, $1. I think there should be no objection to that proposal.

The second proposal is to authorize the government to impose a license upon salmon canning or salmon curing establishments. Some years ago we had in British Columbia a very extensive commission which inquired into the whole question of fisheries in that province. That commission recommended that the salmon canning establishments should be licensed, and the owners of these establishments have themselves asked for the imposition of a license. The license fee proposed is $50. This license is the result of the unanimous recommendation of the commission, and it is accepted, as I have said, by the cannery establishments themselves.

The other change is with regard to the annual fee for lobster fishing establishments. This proposal is the result of the report and recommendation of the Committee on Marine and Fisheries last year. Lobster fishing licenses were the subject of a great Mr. FISHER.

deal of discussion in the maritime provinces. For years there were complaints that the regulations were not sufficient and that amendments should be made. The House referred the whole question to the Committee on Marine and Fisheries. The committee sat during the session of 1909. A very long inquiry was then made by the committee, and they suggested to the government that during the recess a commissioner should be appointed to visit the different portions oi the maritime provinces and continue the investigation, securing especially the evidence of the fishermen. Dr. Wakeham was appointed to make this investigation. He went through all the maritime provinces and made a report, which has been submitted to the Committee on Marine and Fisheries. The committee at the end of last session recommended some changes in our regulations. These changes have all been carried out by an order in council passed in September last, which - was amended some months later with regard to a certain feature. The commission recommended the increase in the licenses which I am now proposing.

Topic:   FISHERIES ACT AMENDMENT.
Permalink
CON

Robert Laird Borden (Leader of the Official Opposition)

Conservative (1867-1942)

Mr. BORDEN (Halifax).

To what extent is the industry of manufacturing oil from dogfish carried on?

Topic:   FISHERIES ACT AMENDMENT.
Permalink

April 28, 1911