If we are going to make a form that is to be a kind of skeleton the same as in the Bill, why not put it all in or take it all out so it will not mislead anybody? If there is no form the section will be followed.
to the committee that this discussion on the forms has been carried on more or less by unanimous consent owing to the fact that they were hurriedly passed at the last meeting of the committee. But the forms were voted, and no amendment could now be legally proposed to them without the unanimous consent of the committee. In the absence of such consent, it would perhaps be better to put the motion which is now before the committee: shall the title carry?
to take up the time of the House at this hour, but it will only be for a minute or two. This Act is in the nature of an experiment, and it is only through its being worked out at elections that we can see its merits and demerits. Section 3 of the Bill provides that judges of the respective judicial districts shall' be revising officers, and subsection (b) provides that judges may appoint substitutes to revise the lists, such substitutes, with respect to the lists, "to exercise all the powers and perform all the duties of such judge," I must say that this subsection may lead to grave abuses. There has been an election quite recently in the province from which I come. The judge happened to be sitting for the judicial' district in which the constituency was situated and he appointed a certain gentleman as revising officer. Now, I do not say anything against him. I know him very well; he was a colleague of mine in this House, and was a member of this Government after 1911. He was a candidate at the last elections, in 1917; he was the mover of the resolution which nominated one of the candidates at a convention of his party. He took an active part in the recent by-election, spoke at different meetings, and when not speaking disturbed order at the meetings. I say that this is a grave abuse and that judges and judges only should sit as revising officers and be the final judges of the lists to be used at an election. Surely such an abuse will not inspire any confidence on the part of the electors in this law. I thought I should call the attention of the Government to this section, and if it is still possible to repeal
subsection (b) and allow judges and judges only to revise the lists, that should be done.
Main motion (Mr. Guthrie) carried on division, and Bill read the third time and passed.