May 17, 1911

ALBERT AND MONCTON RAILWAY COMPANY.

LIB

Henry Robert Emmerson

Liberal

Hon. H. R. EMMERSON (Westmoreland).

Bill (No. 220) to incorporate the Albert and

Moncton Railway Company, was read the first time last night. With the leave of the House I propose that it be now read the second time, and referred to the Select Standing Committee on Railways, Canals and Telegraph Lines.

Topic:   ALBERT AND MONCTON RAILWAY COMPANY.
Permalink
CON

Haughton Lennox

Conservative (1867-1942)

Mr. LENNOX.

I do not know why this kind of thing has to happen so frequently. We are not going home to stay at home for ever; we are coming back in a couple of months, and, unless there is some special reason for it, I do not think this ought to happen. I think we should all observe the ordinary procedure and not being everlastingly breaking our own rules.

Topic:   ALBERT AND MONCTON RAILWAY COMPANY.
Permalink
LIB

Henry Robert Emmerson

Liberal

Mr. EMMERSON.

I quite appreciate the fact that if any hon. member objects this cannot go through, but I would urge that consideration be given to this Bill. It is connected with a large enterprise in the county of Albert, involving the development of the shale interests in that section of the province and, expedition is necessary in order to further the objects in view. That is the only reason I would urge upon my hon. friend (Mr. Lennox) to give his consent, and other hon. members to raise no objection.

Topic:   ALBERT AND MONCTON RAILWAY COMPANY.
Permalink
CON

Haughton Lennox

Conservative (1867-1942)

Mr. LENNOX.

I only wanted the hon. member (Mr. Emmerson) to give some reason for his motion. I do not propose to jump on his Bill in particular; a gentleman for whom I have very great respect -but I do not like this procedure as a rule, and I wanted some reason given.

Topic:   ALBERT AND MONCTON RAILWAY COMPANY.
Permalink
LIB
CON

Thomas Simpson Sproule

Conservative (1867-1942)

Mr. SPROTJLE.

I heard this shale argument advanced about twenty years ago. I am afraid it comes now a litt'le late in the day.

Topic:   ALBERT AND MONCTON RAILWAY COMPANY.
Permalink
LIB
CON

Thomas Simpson Sproule

Conservative (1867-1942)

Mr. SPROTJLE.

I can hardly imagine that the question of the Bill going through a few weeks later or a few weeks earlier would make much difference to that great interest in that county.

Topic:   ALBERT AND MONCTON RAILWAY COMPANY.
Permalink
LIB

Henry Robert Emmerson

Liberal

Mr. EMMERSON.

I may explain that English capitalists have taken hold of the matter now, and if there is delay here that will delay their movements in connection with the development of what is hoped to be a very great industry. As my hon. friend has said the shales have lain dormant for many years, and we cannot hasten their development now with too great speed.

Topic:   ALBERT AND MONCTON RAILWAY COMPANY.
Permalink

Motion agreed to, and Bi'll read the second time.


COMMITTEE ON RAILWAYS CANALS AND TELEGRAPH LINES.

LIB

Hugh Guthrie

Liberal

Mr. GUTHRIE.

I move:

That leave be granted to the Select Standing Committee on Railways, Canals and Telegraph Lines to sit during the time the House is in session in accordance with the recommendation contained in the 21st report of the said committee.

Topic:   COMMITTEE ON RAILWAYS CANALS AND TELEGRAPH LINES.
Permalink
CON

Thomas Simpson Sproule

Conservative (1867-1942)

Mr. SPROULE.

I think this is entirely unnecessary. There is very little to come before that committee, and if the committee would meet, as it did to-day, half an hour before the time of the sitting of the House, there would be plenty of time for it to pass all the Bills that come before the committee. We have granted this leave in the case of two committees this session, when, in my judgment, there was no need for it. When the House was in session, most of the members desire to be here and possibly to take part in the debates that go on. But if the committee is sitting at the same time as the House, a member of the committee must make a choice which he shall attend. What is the reason for asking that this committee be allowed to sit while the House is in session?

Topic:   COMMITTEE ON RAILWAYS CANALS AND TELEGRAPH LINES.
Permalink
LIB

Henry Robert Emmerson

Liberal

Mr. EMMERSON.

I believe it has been in contemplation on the part of many mem bers that it would be desirable to adjourn the House on the 19th instant, instead of waiting until the 23ri. I may say that I am particularly anxious that the committee should have this leave, because I wish to expedite the Bill, which has just been read the second time. But, if this House remains in session until Tuesday next, or even Monday, there will be opportunity for me to have this Bill brought to the consideration of the Railway Committee in ordinary course. I would urge that in the public interest, and in the special interest of the section I represent, this committee should be allowed to meet as proposed by the chairman (Mr. Guthrie) and take into consideration, as they very well can, this Bill, and any others that may properly come before them-

Topic:   COMMITTEE ON RAILWAYS CANALS AND TELEGRAPH LINES.
Permalink
CON

Thomas Simpson Sproule

Conservative (1867-1942)

Mr. SPROULE.

That is simply a scare signal thrown up. There is plenty of time for the committee without their meeting when the House is in session. I for one am opposed on principle to a committee doing business while the House is in session If there were a rush of business I could understand it; but I imagine there are very few Bills to come before the committee, and those of such a nature that they need take up very little time.

Topic:   COMMITTEE ON RAILWAYS CANALS AND TELEGRAPH LINES.
Permalink
?

Mr HENDERSON.

I desire to add my protest against the meeting of the Railway Committee while the House is in ses-

sion. A few days ago twenty or twenty-five of us were called up stairs to attend a committee meeting while the House was in session, and while the Minister of Railways (Mr. -Graham) was explaining a long resolution he had with reference to the Canadian Northern railway. I regret very much that I had not the opportunity to listen to his explanation, and I have no doubt there are other members in the same position. Besides, I think there is no real excuse for this procedure. The House has been in session for six months. Why did not these gentlemen bring forward their Bill and have it passed in the regular way.

Topic:   COMMITTEE ON RAILWAYS CANALS AND TELEGRAPH LINES.
Permalink
LIB
CON

David Henderson

Conservative (1867-1942)

Mr. HENDERSON.

Somebody is responsible for not having that Bill brought forward either in the Senate or this House. I for one, do not intend to put a premium on delays of that kind-simp'ly holding legislation back with the hope that it will be rushed through without notice in the dying hours of the session, or just prior to adjournment. I do not know whether this motion requires notice or not, but if it does, then I do not consent to it.

Topic:   COMMITTEE ON RAILWAYS CANALS AND TELEGRAPH LINES.
Permalink
CON

Samuel Simpson Sharpe

Conservative (1867-1942)

Mr. SHARPE (Ontario).

Important legislation is coming before this House constantly now, that we are on the eve of adjournment, and it is very desirable that every member should be in his place, and pay attention to the proceedings. One Bill that the Railway Committee desires to deal with is the Water-power Bill, that was before the House last night. This Bill came before the Private Bills Committee when there were only four members present; but the chairman with enlarged vision saw a quorum and reported the Bill unanimously, and the House started to deal with it last night, notwithstanding that it was not on the Order Paper.

This Bill is not of such urgent importance that it should be rushed through the House at this end of the session. It is a very important Bill, and while the .Railway Committee desires time for its consideration, it is desirable we should all be here and pay attention to the legislation going through the House. I think it would be a mistake to pass the motion presented by the chairman of the Railway Committee. The rights under the old Bill of 1903 have been forfeited, and the object of this legislation is to renew the rights granted in 1903, and which were forfeited three years ago. Why the urgent necessity, when they have not asked for a renewal for three years, and why should we seek now to rush the Bill through the House in the course of two or three days?

Topic:   COMMITTEE ON RAILWAYS CANALS AND TELEGRAPH LINES.
Permalink

May 17, 1911