May 6, 1914

LIB

Frank Broadstreet Carvell

Liberal

Mr. CAEVELL:

No, the member for Car-leton never loses his temper and he can usually stick to his text. I have several cases in New Brunswick exactly in a line with the case brought forward by the member for North Grey. I have written the minister about four men at least in Charlotte county. I have sent him the correspondence. There is a man named J. Mil-liken who was right on the ground, within a few miles of where the actual invasion took place at St. George. He is one of a number who were on guard night and day for a month, men belonging to No. 3 company of home guards. They received their arms and accoutrements from the capital of the province, Fredericton. They were ordered out by Col. Wetmore, in charge of the militia forces in that portion of New Brunswick. These men were called out by somebody, it is true not by a proclamation made by the Governor, and the men referred to by North Giey were called out by somebody, possibly not by the Governor of the province. Surely my hon. friend can get broad enough, surely he can see the justice of this contention and will amend this resolution. He has it in his power now. It is not going through tonight, he will have time to think over it and dream over it and surely he can amend it and bring down a reasonable Bill. I am not; pleading, I have always taken the ground that a man should not be paid for defending his fireside. I take that ground to-night. But if my hon. friend, for political purpose and nothing else, is going to introduce legislation like this, then I am like the member from Kings, I say that every portion of this Dominion should be treated alike and treated fairly. If my hon. friend is going to say that, because of the digging up of an old musty record of the city of Halifax, the volunteers of the province of Nova Scotia had a right to this money on a technicality, surely my hon. friend ought to big enough man to amend his law; if he does not want to reduce the men of Nova Scotia, bring everybody else in Canada up to that level. If he cannot bring other people up to it, cut them down, get it into some sort of reasonable shape Take the men mentioned by the hon. member for North Grey. Take the men I have referred to here in Charlotte in New Brunswick and the men in other places who actually were called out, I do not say by the Government, but by somebody over them, in this case by Colonel Wetmore, the chief military officer of that portion of the province. These were men who were called out, who went to the front, who complied with all

the technicalities and the definition laid down by the minister when the Bill was introduced two years ago. Surely my hon. friend can be big enough to amend his Bill and take in the men who really, in all common sense and honesty, ought to *be included in this and not stick to the jug-handled interpretation which he is applying. I think I am justified in saying, in view of what has taken place to-night, in view of the statement of the hon. member for Annapolis that they did not know anything about this for a year after the Bill was passed until finally they found the old proclamation, in view of all this the minister ought to come down to the House with a reasonable measure, which will give the bonus to the people entitled to it and put every province and every person in this Dominion on a fair footing and get the Bill through and make an end of the whole matter. I do not think that the minister should get chesty because some criticism is made of this measure and I do not think that the member for North Ontario and Kings and Albert have helped him along very much by attempting to throw stones at me because I do not mind them very much and, as I said before, I usually come back and say what I want to say in the end. I think I am putting to the minister now a reasonable proposition. I am only asking him to change the law and make it reasonable and apply it to every section of Canada alike.

Topic:   QUESTIONS.
Subtopic:   COMMON."
Permalink
LIB

James Joseph Hughes

Liberal

Mr. HUGHES:

I know the cases of these four men. I have looked them up. They undoubtedly turned out voluntarily as did thousands in the county from which I come, and drilled, but I have never yet seen an order from Colonel Wetmore ordering these men out. If the men can produce that we will be glad to see it. We have looked into the case as carefully as possible. We have had men down there in every case; the officers in charge have done their level best to follow the cases up.

Topic:   QUESTIONS.
Subtopic:   COMMON."
Permalink
LIB

Frank Broadstreet Carvell

Liberal

Mr. CAEVELL:

Here again is where I

contend my hon. friend is not reasonable. One of these four men is no less a person than Senator Gillmor, a man alive and well to-day.. All these men have made affidavits, but Senator Gillmor does not want the $100; he holds the same views as I do. The other men do want it. What better evidence does my hon. friend want than that?

Topic:   QUESTIONS.
Subtopic:   COMMON."
Permalink
LIB
LIB

Frank Broadstreet Carvell

Liberal

Mr. CAEVELL:

Then make a law to

comply with it; make the law fair.

Topic:   QUESTIONS.
Subtopic:   COMMON."
Permalink
CON

William John Macdonald

Conservative (1867-1942)

Mr. MACDONALD:

I think that every

hon. gentleman will agree with me that we could discuss this resolution much more effectively in daylight.

Topic:   QUESTIONS.
Subtopic:   COMMON."
Permalink
LIB
CON

William John Macdonald

Conservative (1867-1942)

Mr. MACDONALD:

My hon. friend will make the change in 1914?

Topic:   QUESTIONS.
Subtopic:   COMMON."
Permalink
LIB
LIB

Daniel Duncan McKenzie

Liberal

Mr. McKENZIE:

There was such a strong attack made upon the members of Nova Scotia by the hon. gentleman who was put up by the minister for that purpose-

Topic:   QUESTIONS.
Subtopic:   COMMON."
Permalink
LIB
LIB

Daniel Duncan McKenzie

Liberal

Mr. McKENZIE:

When the minister has any legislation of any character to put to the House, if he has anything to say to members on this side of the kind that was meted out to us to-night, it would be more to the purpose and more manly, if I may use the word, for him to say it himself than to get a muck dredge like the hon. member for Annapolis, who has one spout in the air and another in the mud, to do the service.

Topic:   QUESTIONS.
Subtopic:   COMMON."
Permalink
?

Some hon. MEMBERS:

Order, order.'

Topic:   QUESTIONS.
Subtopic:   COMMON."
Permalink
LIB

Daniel Duncan McKenzie

Liberal

Mr. McKENZIE:

I think the minister

would do well to dispense with this muck dredge performance the next time he has a resolution to put through. I must say that I cannot congratulate the hon. member for Annapolis on the way in which he handles Holy Writ. He might know something about muck dredges and things of that sort, but when he goes into the realms of Moses and the prophets I am afraid he is on territory that he knows nothing about. There are certain things which we should all observe. I am not now referring particularly to the hon. member for Annapolis. When there is a real scoundrel walking up and down this country nature provides against his making havoc among the people by putting a certain stamp upon his face that warns them: This chap is a scoundrel, look out for him.

Topic:   QUESTIONS.
Subtopic:   COMMON."
Permalink
CON

Avard Longley Davidson

Conservative (1867-1942)

Mr. DAVIDSON:

I hope my face compares favourably with the hon. gentleman's.

Topic:   QUESTIONS.
Subtopic:   COMMON."
Permalink
LIB

Daniel Duncan McKenzie

Liberal

Mr. McKENZIE:

The Lord has .put a

stamp on the face of the hon. member for Annapolis which says: You are prohibited from handling the book of Holy Writ; To you it is a sealed book; the seven seals cannot be touched by you. The hon. member for Annapolis showed to-night that the holy volume is to him a sealed book of

. 1

which he knows nothing whatever. He made a most unfortunate comparison: he put himself up as the wealthy man who had all the power behind him, and spoke of us poor chaps on this side of the House as Lazarus. Perhaps there is some truth in the comparison; poor Lazarus was licked by a. dog. My hon. friend will not perhaps wish to apply that part of the Scriptures to

himself. There was another point; the rich man passed through the dissolution of the tabernacle and in hell he lifted up his eyes. Does the hon. member fox Annapolis wish to apply that portion of the Scriptures to himself? I trust he will go home and say his prayers before he does the disappearing act in a chariot of fire, smelling of brimstone. This is the very cheap vaudeville that we have received from the hon. member for Annapolis. I suppose the minister gave him a trial before he took him on, just as actors undergo before going on the boards. I suppose he performed before the minister. There is an account of a certain damsel who performed before a king who promised her anything to the half of his kingdom. I suppose the minister had this man perform before him before giving him the task of abusing members on this side of the House. If so, I cannot congratulate him on his judgment in giving the job to the hon. member for Annapolis. There are some hon. gentlemen on that side of the House who could have done this thing with better effect, and whose word would be accepted with some degree of credence and weight in the country. The minister will find that the faults of the man he chose are something like the faults in the Frenchman's horse. A Frenchman had traded a horse. He said: ' Now that we have .made the trade I might as well state that the horse has two faults.' 'Oh, what are they? '

' Well', said the Frenchman, 'when you let him go he is pretty hard to catch, and when you catch him he is not worth a damn.'

Topic:   QUESTIONS.
Subtopic:   COMMON."
Permalink
?

Some hon. MEMBERS:

Order, order.

Topic:   QUESTIONS.
Subtopic:   COMMON."
Permalink
LIB

Daniel Duncan McKenzie

Liberal

Mr. McKENZIE:

It may have been

difficult for the minister to get a man to perform the muck dredge act, but when he did get one he turns out to be something like the Frenchman's horse. If the hon. member for Annapolis thought he was going to make capital against Nova Scotia members by his performance he is very much mistaken. For myself-and I am but the least among the members of Nova Scotia-I am not at all afraid of any attack

the hon. member for Annapolis will make upon me in the eastern part of Nova Scotia, or in the county I represent. As to what took place in this Parliament in 1906, I must plead all ignorance, for I was not here. I first came to the House in 1904; I resigned early in 1906, and came back again in 1908. So what took place in 1906 is not attributable to me in any way whatsoever. But if I had been here when that resolution was passed, so long as the resolution had reference only to Ontario and Quebec, and involved no benefits to Nova Scotia, I would have recorded my vote against it. The same resolution exactly was repeated when I was here in 1911, and for two reasons I voted against it: first, because it was brought in as a vote of want of confidence; and secondly, because it was exactly similar to the resolution introduced in 1906 having reference particularly to a grant of land; the people of Nova Scotia at that time could not go out to the West, and the grant of land under the conditions mentioned would have been of no benefit to them. I submit therefore that in view of what was involved in the resolutions of 1906 and 1911, they were not capable of conferring any advantage on the veterans of Nova Scotia, and we have committed no sin in voting against them. Since then the legislation that the minister has brought down for the purpose of paying $100 has come before Parliament, and I have given it my cordial support. On the 28th March, 1912, I made these observations:

l would ask the minister if there is any clear definition of what is meant by a volunteer? I think that when the men were called out and went into camp, and were prepared to go to the front, they should be regarded as volunteers. Any man who went into camp to drill by reason of that raid, and was prepared for active service, should be called a volunteer. Having turned out and gone into camp, even though it was not necessary for them to go to the front, still I think they are entitled to recognition.

That is the position I took, and that is the position I take now, I never saw any letters forwarded such as were read by the hon. member for Annapoli's. I had tried to help people in my county to put their claims properly before the department. I helped hundreds of them, and I would help them again. Several little mistakes happened in the department, for which I do not blame them, owing to similarity of names, such as Macdonalds, Mackenzies and Campbells, and other causes. The member for the county can be serviceable

in straightening out mistakes that are liable to occur. As representing the electors in mj* county, I tried to help them out in that way. Many gave wrong addresses, or mistakes were made resulting in the address turning out wrong. Cheques were held in the Finance Department because they did not have the right addresses. I have straightened out very many of these things. If the hon. member for Annapolis thinks it a censuraole action on my part to help an old gentleman who may be in my county and does not get his cheque, I do not agree with him, because I think it is my duty to help him as quickly as possible. I am doing that. Every member has such duties to perform, and I presume he performs them. The hon. member for Annapolis, I presume at the suggestion of the minister, comes forward, lashes himself into a fury, and tries to foment the whole House and make little of us through the province of Nova Scotia because we are trying to help out the veterans in our respective counties in getting the bounty which the mihister has been kind enough to give them. This should not be a matter of politics at all. It should not have been dragged into politics. I do not think we have any right to try and make politics out of it. I do not say what we might have done but we are not to be accused of what we might have done when we have not done it. It is not a matter of politics, it is a matter of recognizing deserving acts performed by patriotic citizens forty or fifty years ago. When the hon. member for Annapolis broke out in a fury and endeavoured to make political capital out of it he disregarded every higher consideration which this gift by the minister might involve. There are other things that perhaps we can deal with later on. I am sorry indeed that this gift on the part of the minister and of the Government has been used in the vilest possible form in every election in Nova Scotia from the little town elections to the top notch elections it is used in every shape for corrupting purposes. I presume that was not the intention of the minister and I am sure he would do well if he would try and put an end to it as quickly as possible. I make these observations so that 'Hansard' will not go out this morning with the flaring observations of the assistant deputy minister of Militia, the hon. member for Annapolis, and without some statement in defence of the position that I have taken.

Topic:   QUESTIONS.
Subtopic:   COMMON."
Permalink
CON

William John Macdonald

Conservative (1867-1942)

Mr. MACDONALD:

In the second line of the resolution I understand that the min-

ister has agreed to put ' 1914 ' instead of ' 1915.' Then, in place of the words 1 to every volunteer who is living son the date of the passing of an act based upon this resolution,' I suggest that the minister make it read ' to every volunteer who was living on the first day of April, 1912.' This resolution is .continuing chapter 53 of the Act of 1912, and that language is there. ' Every volunteer who was living on the date of the passing of this Act,' which was April 1, 1912, is the language used. If the minister would make that change, then the latter part of the resolution would be consistent with that which provides for the payment to widows of parties who were living on that date. Then, the last words of the resolution read: * and to whom no grant has previously been made under the authority of any Act.' That does not appear in chapter 53, and I do not know that it is relevant. I would suggest that, while we have no objection to the resolution going through, the minister would be wise if he would frame his act so as to make clear the points that I have called his attention to.

Mr. SAM. HUGHES: I will read two clauses of the proposed Act. The first two sections are the same as those in the previous Act. Then, section 3 provides that:

The Governor in Council may at any time before the 31st December 1915-

We will change that to 1914.

-grant the sum of - one hundred dollars to every volunteer who is living on the date of the passing of this Act.

Topic:   QUESTIONS.
Subtopic:   COMMON."
Permalink
CON

William John Macdonald

Conservative (1867-1942)

Mr. MACDONALD:

They must have been living on the 1st day of April, 1912.

Topic:   QUESTIONS.
Subtopic:   COMMON."
Permalink

May 6, 1914