not increase the receipts of the customs in so far as goods imported by the Crown are concerned, for the reason that we have been collecting duty on goods imported by the Crown for some years. But a question has arisen as to whether the Crown in the right of Canada would have the right to collect duty. Therefore, to. remove that doubt we are mentioning the Crown in the Act the same as we do any other importer under the tariff.
not be affected by the Act unless it was especially named. I was under the impression that some years ago an Act was passed which provided that In the case of certain departments, the Militia Department for instance, duties were to be collected on articles imported by them. Is there not some statute on the subject now?
I remember the circumstance. Prior to the time that the hon. gentleman mentions, goods imported by the Crown came in free. But the trouble there was that some people were importing goods, such as American goods, and adding the duties, and there was the possibility of irregularities occurring. At that time the Government decided that in future duties must be collected on all goods whether imported by the Crown or not, and they simply notified the Customs and all other departments that they were to collect these duties in future. Although that order was given there was no Act on the statute book stating that the Crown must pay duty. -Mr. PUGSLEY: What has emphasized
The question has arisen because some of the provincial Governmsnts took issue on the question as to whether goods imported by the Crown were dutiable. For that reason we feel that it would be better to place it in the statute so as to remove any doubt in the future.
That is more a matter of practice, but has there been any law? The original idea in regard to the status of provincial legislature, as a lawyer knows, was that the Crown was not represented there. But I thank the principle is, also good that no Statute applies to the Crown unless the 'Crown is specifically mentioned. Why does my hon. friend want to have this legislation? What is the reason for it? Is it simply confirming the usage?