May 2, 1916

LIB

John Howard Sinclair

Liberal

Mr. SINCLAIR:

That is quite true. It is a legal point, of course, but what struck me was that if a prosecution is brought in court under the Act of 1908, that Act being specially mentioned, and when the case comes up for trial'it is folind that there is no Act of 1908 but instead an Act of 1916, the point may be one which a lawyer would make. He might say that the prosecution was invalid, I think it is usual to provide that existing rights will not be interfered with.

Topic:   CANADA TEMPERANCE ACT AMENDMENT.
Permalink
CON

Charles Joseph Doherty (Minister of Justice and Attorney General of Canada)

Conservative (1867-1942)

Mr. DOHERTY:

If there was any real

repeal I would agree with the hon. gentleman, but there is no real repeal here. The Act of 1908 still continues in force. What is done is to say that section 127 of the Act of 1908 is repealed, and the same provisions are substituted, so that everything that was in the Canada Temperance Act remains the law.

Topic:   CANADA TEMPERANCE ACT AMENDMENT.
Permalink
LIB
CON

Charles Joseph Doherty (Minister of Justice and Attorney General of Canada)

Conservative (1867-1942)

Mr. DOHERTY:

With something added. There is something more that is the law, 'but everything that was in is still in. We have created another offence; that is all.

Topic:   CANADA TEMPERANCE ACT AMENDMENT.
Permalink
LIB

Charles Marcil

Liberal

Mr. MARCIL:

I am sorry that I was not present when the amendments were made to the other Bill, 'but out of the mass of amendments some doubt has arisen which I would like to clear up. In the province of Quebec, where municipalities have adopted prohibitory legislation to the extent of refusing to grant licenses, and, on top of that, where the county council has also refused to grant any license and has passed a resolution covering the whole county, is there anything in the new legislation which will prevent liquor from being brought into that county for any purpose whatever?

Topic:   CANADA TEMPERANCE ACT AMENDMENT.
Permalink
CON

Charles Joseph Doherty (Minister of Justice and Attorney General of Canada)

Conservative (1867-1942)

Mr. DOHERTY:

No, not for any purpose whatever, but for any purpose which the provincial legislation prohibits.

Topic:   CANADA TEMPERANCE ACT AMENDMENT.
Permalink
LIB
CON

Charles Joseph Doherty (Minister of Justice and Attorney General of Canada)

Conservative (1867-1942)

Mr. DOHERTY:

Then nobody can bring liquor into that county for the purpose of its being sold, but if the provincial legislation permits one to have liquor, then, under the Act which was passed, there , would be nothing to prohibit the sending of if.

Topic:   CANADA TEMPERANCE ACT AMENDMENT.
Permalink
LIB

Charles Marcil

Liberal

Mr. MARCIL:

Then so far as the province of Quebec is concerned, out of 44 constituencies that have adopted prohibition, the

Dominion legislation will have no effect whatever?

Topic:   CANADA TEMPERANCE ACT AMENDMENT.
Permalink
CON

Charles Joseph Doherty (Minister of Justice and Attorney General of Canada)

Conservative (1867-1942)

Mr. DOHERTY:

It will certainly prevent any man who wants to use liquor within the province for the purpose of violating the law having it sent in for that purpose. We have not undertaken, and I have never suggested that we were undertaking to impose upon any province, or upon any part of a province, more prohibition than it wanted. All we pretend to do is that we will not let the outside man bring about within the province a violation of the provincial law. I would like, with the permission of the committee, to amend the clause for the purpose of .making an amendment to an additional section. The clause itself provides, as will be seen, for the repealing of a certain number of sections and the substitution of sothething else. There is another section of the Canada Temperance Act which I desire to amend. It is section 136 and it provides for the right of search upon a warrant for that purpose being obtained. The section as it now stands provides that the search may be carried out in the daytime only. It has been represented to me from very numerous sources that the presence in the Canada Temperance Act of that limited right of search during the daytime presents a very serious obstacle to its effectiveness. I desire to amend the section which provides for the right of search by striking out the words "in the daytime." I beg therefore to move:

That clause 1 be amended by inserting the following words after "twenty-seven" in the ninth line on page one:

"Section one hundred and thirty-six and form R";

That the following clause be inserted immediately after clause one hundred and twenty-seven on page three:

136. If it is proved upon oath before any judge of the sessions of the peace, recorder, police magistrate, stipendiary magistrate, two justices of the peace, or any magistrate having the power or authority of two or more justices of the peace, that there is reasonable cause to suspect that any intoxicatipg liquor is kept for sale in violation of Part II of this Act, or of The Temperance Act of 1864, or is stored, warehoused, or kept for delivery, in violation of Part II of this Act, in any dwelling house, store, shop, warehouse, outhouse, garden, yard, croft, vessel, building, or other place or places, such officer may grant a warrant to search such dwelling house, store, shop, warehouse, outhouse, garden yard, croft, vessel, building, or other place or places, for such intoxicating liquor, and if the same or any part thereof is there found, to bring the same before him.

"2. Any information under this section may be in form Q and any search warrant under this section may be in form R".

And that the following form be inserted immediately after clause one hundred and thirty-nine on the said page three:

Form R.

Form of Search Warrant.

Canada Pi evince of

District (or county, or as the case may be) of

To all or any of the constables or other peace officers in the district (or county or as the case may be) of

Whereas K. L. of in the

said district (or county, or as the case may

be) of (yeoman) hath this

day made oath before the undesigned one of His Majesty's justices of the peace in and for the said district (or county, or as the case may

be) of that he hath just

and reasonable cause to suspect and doth suspect that intoxicating liquor is kept for sale (or is stored or is warehoused or is kept for delivery) in violation of Part II of The Canada Temperance Act, in the (dwelling house, etc.,)

of one P. Q. of in the said

district (or county, or as the case may be) of

- These

are therefore, in the name of Our Sovereign Lord the King, to authorize and require you, and each and every of you, with necessary and proper assistance, to enter into the said (dwelling house, etc.,) of the said P. Q. and there diligently search for the said intoxicating liquor ; and if the same, or any part thereof, shall be found upon such search, that you bring the intoxicating liquor so found, and also all barrels, cases, boxes, packages, and other receptacles of any kind whatever containing the same before me to be disposed of and dealt with according to law.

Given under my hand and seal at

In the said district (or county, or united counties, or as the case may be) of

this day of in the year

of Our lord

(Seal) W.S.

A justice of the peace in and for the said..

Section as amended agreed to.

Bill reported, read the third time and passed.

Topic:   CANADA TEMPERANCE ACT AMENDMENT.
Permalink

GOVERNMENT RAILWAYS SMALL CLAIMS ACT AMENDMENT.


On motion of Hon. J. D. Reid, Acting Minis ter of Railways and Canals, Bill No. 91, to- amend the Government Railways Small Claims Act, was read the second time, and the House went into committee thereon, Mr. Rhodes in the Chair. On the preamble:


LIB

James Joseph Hughes

Liberal

Mr. J. J. HUGHES:

I think the Bill should be amended toy making it retroactive so that it would apply to the Prince Edward Island railway from the time the first. Bill was enacted.

There is no question but Parliament thought that the Bill passed in 1910 applied

to all Government railways; that is obvious from the discussion that took place at the time. It would be an anomaly to have the Bill apply to the Intercolonial railway and not to the Prince Edward Island railway, simply because the Intercolonial railway happened to be mentioned in the Bill and the Prince Edward Island railway was not. I know one case, at allevents, where the complainant in a suit was non-suited just because the

Prince Edward Island railway was not mentioned' in the Bill. Lawyers on the island have told me that they have advised other parties who have consulted them in regard to bringing suits not to enter on an action because the Bill did not apply to the Prince Edward Island railway. Now, this is an injury to the people of that province. It is putting them in a different position from the people of New Brunswick, Nova Scotia, and Quebec, and I presume that it was not the intention of Parliament to pass legislation of that kind. In order to provide a remedy I would ask the committee to make the Bill retroactive, so that these people will be in the position they would have been in if the intention of Parliament had been carried out in the first instance. I therefore beg to move, seconded by Mr. Turriff, that Bill No. 91 be amended by adding thereto section 2, as follows:

The said Acts shall be deemed to have applied to claims arising out of the operation of the said railways, branches and ferries, on and from the respective dates at which the said Acts were passed, and shall apply thereto in the same manner and to the same extent as they apply to claims arising out of the operation of the Intercolonial railway.

Topic:   GOVERNMENT RAILWAYS SMALL CLAIMS ACT AMENDMENT.
Permalink
CON

John Dowsley Reid (Minister of Customs)

Conservative (1867-1942)

Mr. REID:

I was asked some days ago by the Prince Edward Island members to introduce an amendment to the Small Claims Act, bringing the Prince Edward Island railway under the Act. In 1910 the Act for the adjudication of small claims arising in respect of the operation of the Government railways was passed, section 2 of which reads as follows:

Subject as hereinafter provided, any claim against His Majesty arising out of the operation of the Intercolonial railway and not exceeding in amount the sum of two hundred dollars, for damages alleged to be caused by negligence, or made payable by statute, may be sued for and prosecuted by action, suit or other proceeding in any provincial court having jurisdiction to the said amount over like claims between subjects.

In 1913 an amendment was made increasing the amount from $200 to $500, When this'matter was brought to my attention I

Topic:   GOVERNMENT RAILWAYS SMALL CLAIMS ACT AMENDMENT.
Permalink

S304 COMMONS


took it up with officials, and we thought it well that the whole Government railway system should be included, instead of having an amendment relating merely to the Prince Edward Island railway. If the Act is good for the Intercolonial and good for the Prince Edward Island railway it is good for the other parts of the Government railway system, and it is was with that idea in view that I introduced the amendment to the Government Railways Small Claims Act. I certainly could not agree to my hon. friend's suggestion to make the Act retroactive and apply to any suits or actions since 1910, and if he presses his amendment I would rather withdraw the Bill and let it stand until another session, when I could look into it further. Under the circumstances I would ask that the Bill go through as I have introduced it.


LIB

William Pugsley

Liberal

Mr. PUGSLEY:

Is the minister's objection that he does not wish to make valid any suits that have already been brought? Would he have any objection to allowing this Act to apply to actions brought in the future in respect to claims that have arisen before the Act came into force; in other words, make-the Bill retroactive as to procedure?

Topic:   S304 COMMONS
Permalink
CON

John Dowsley Reid (Minister of Customs)

Conservative (1867-1942)

Mr. REID:

My object in introducing this amendment is to make the Act apply to any suits or actions brought in future against any part of the Government railway system. For instance, there may be claims against the Transcontinental. Any claims arising in future will be dealt with under the law as it stood before this Act was passed. I think it would be unfair to make the Bill retroactive and apply to cases that have already been disposed of. It does seem to me that as this Bill has been on the Order Paper for quite a while the Ihon. member might have done me the courtesy of sending me a copy of the amendment he proposed to make; this is the first time I ever heard of it. I have tried to carry out the wishes of t'he members for Prince Edward Island by having the Act apply not only to the Prince Edward Island railway, but to the whole Government railway system. I would rather have the Bill stand than have it amended at this time, as my Ihon. friend suggests.

Topic:   S304 COMMONS
Permalink
LIB

William Pugsley

Liberal

Mr. PUGSLEY:

It seems to me that the minister is not drawing a proper distinction between the mode of enforcing the claims and the giving rise to the claim itself. I do not understand that my hon. friend

[iMr. J. D. Reid. ]

from Kings wants to have any different law applied to the right of action; what he wants is that the remedy which is afforded by this Bill shall apply to causes of action which may have arisen before this legislation comes into force as well as to those which may arise afterwards. Take the case of a man who has a perfectly just claim against the railway. Before this legislation comes into force, an animal has been killed on the railway. Because the owner happens to live in Prince Edward Island, why should he be compelled to bring his suit in the Exchequer Court of Canada where the costs would amount to ten times the value of the animal? Why should he not be permitted to avail himself of this cheap remedy and use the provisions which have been made for the enforcement of the collection of small claims? Surely the minister might go that far, not in any way to alter the cause of action, nor the circumstances which would give rise to a claim, but only as to the mode of enforcing a claim. I understand that is all the member for Kings wants. The minister should not refuse to accept the amendment just on account of any pique or resentment against the hon. member for Kings because he did not let him know before that he was going to move the amendment. The amendment is so simple in its character that the hon. member assumed that the minister would at once grasp the justice and the reasonableness of it and would allow it to be passed.

Topic:   S304 COMMONS
Permalink
CON

John Dowsley Reid (Minister of Customs)

Conservative (1867-1942)

Mr. REID:

The Act of 1910, as it was

introduced, was not made retroactive.

Topic:   S304 COMMONS
Permalink

May 2, 1916