April 16, 1928

CON

William Alves Boys

Conservative (1867-1942)

Mr. BOYS:

I am by no means sure that this is quite as complete as it should be. I observe that there are two forums under which a prosecution may take place. One is before any justice of the peace where the penalty does not exceed twenty-five dollars, and the other is before any two justices of the peace where the penalty exceeds twenty-five dollars. There are in some municipalities, in Ontario at all events, police magistrates who I am by no means certain are justices of the peace.

I think their commissions are given to them as police magistrates. If I am right in that- and I think I am-you would not have any opportunity of proceeding before the only tribunal now in existence in practically all the towns of Ontario and possibly other provinces. In my own town you never see a justice of the peace presiding now; he is a thing of the past. There are police magistrates appointed for various districts of the county and they sit as such. If in their appointment they are not described as justices of the peace they would not have jurisdiction to proceed under this clause. I suggest that a provision be inserted in the clause that police magistrates as well as these officers have jurisdiction; and the police magistrates would have to have jurisdiction as regards penalties under twenty-five dollars as well as over twenty-five dollars.

MJr. ELLIOTT: There can be no question that a police magistrate should have the same power that a justice of the peace has. Speaking from memory and offhand I think there is in the criminal code a clause which gives to every police magistrate the same power as that of two justices of the peace. It would seem advisable to permit him to exercise that jurisdiction in this particular case unless it be covered by the general clause in the code, and I think it is covered.

St. Lawrence Waterway

Topic:   ELECTRICITY INSPECTION ACT
Permalink
CON

William Alves Boys

Conservative (1867-1942)

Mr. BOYS:

There is not the slightest doubt about what the minister says regarding the criminal code, but the jurisdiction given under this legislation is being given apart entirely from the criminal code. The fact that a police magistrate has certain powers under the criminal code does not give him those powers under this legislation. I am just mentioning the fact: I think the objection is worthy of consideration, and the minister should look into it.

Topic:   ELECTRICITY INSPECTION ACT
Permalink
LIB

James Malcolm (Minister of Trade and Commerce)

Liberal

Mr. MALCOLM:

I have no particular

knowledge with which I could dispute the question raised by my hon. friend any more than that the bill was before the law officers of the crown and I would have expected that the point he raises would be covered. If he thinks there is a doubt and desires to move an amendment in the committee to cover the point, I have no objection.

Topic:   ELECTRICITY INSPECTION ACT
Permalink
CON

William Alves Boys

Conservative (1867-1942)

Mr. BOYS:

I am certainly willing to move

it, but the difficulty is that it may be rather difficult to frame an amendment which will meet the application of the clause as at present drafted. Paragraph (a) provides for penalties under twenty-five dollars and paragraph (b) for penalties over twenty-five dollars. In my view a police magistrate should have jurisdiction in either case. The only way I see to deal with the matter would be to start off by giving a police magistrate jurisdiction to hear all complaints under this legislation, and then to give special jurisdiction to one justice of the peace in the one case and to two justices of the peace in the other. Unless the minister is particularly anxious to dispose of the matter to-night, he might ask those in charge of it in his department to draft a suitable clause. I make the suggestion for what it is worth.

Topic:   ELECTRICITY INSPECTION ACT
Permalink
LIB

John Campbell Elliott (Minister of Public Works)

Liberal

Mr. ELLIOTT:

Would it meet the views

of my hon. friend if paragraph (b) were made to read:

Before any two justices of the peace or a police magistrate, if the penalty exceeds twenty-five dollars.

That is provided that the point is not already covered.

Topic:   ELECTRICITY INSPECTION ACT
Permalink
CON

William Alves Boys

Conservative (1867-1942)

Mr. BOYS:

I do not think my hon. friend is going far enough. Suppose you have a case in a town where there is a police magistrate, and it is under $25; he would not have jurisdiction.

Topic:   ELECTRICITY INSPECTION ACT
Permalink
LIB

James Malcolm (Minister of Trade and Commerce)

Liberal

Mr. MALCOLM:

We might insert in paragraphs (a) and (b) the words "or a police magistrate."

Topic:   ELECTRICITY INSPECTION ACT
Permalink
CON
LIB

John Campbell Elliott (Minister of Public Works)

Liberal

Mr. ELLIOTT:

After the words "justice

of the peace."

Topic:   ELECTRICITY INSPECTION ACT
Permalink
CON

William Alves Boys

Conservative (1867-1942)

Mr. BOYS:

Or stipendiary magistrate.

There are cases where there are stipendiary magistrates.

Topic:   ELECTRICITY INSPECTION ACT
Permalink
CON

Richard Bedford Bennett (Leader of the Official Opposition)

Conservative (1867-1942)

Mr. BENNETT:

I think the section should stand for redrafting. If the Minister of Public Works will look at the old section 40, he will observe that if the penalty does not exceed $20, it is before any justice of the peace, and if the penalty exceeds $20, before any two justices of the peace. We would now add, "or any magistrate exercising the powers of two justices of the peace." There is a special provision in the code with respect to stipendiary magistrates, to which the Minister of Public Works referred, and that is what he has in mind, I take it, when he speaks of the stipendiary exercising the powers of two justices of the peace. I think the section should stand and be redrafted, for the terms in which it now reads might divest the stipendiary entirely of his jurisdiction because he might not happen to be a justice of the peace."

Topic:   ELECTRICITY INSPECTION ACT
Permalink
LIB

James Malcolm (Minister of Trade and Commerce)

Liberal

Mr. MALCOLM:

We will let the section

stand for redrafting.

Section stands.

Section 35 agreed to.

Progress reported.

Topic:   ELECTRICITY INSPECTION ACT
Permalink

BUSINESS OF THE HOUSE

LIB
LIB
CON

Richard Bedford Bennett (Leader of the Official Opposition)

Conservative (1867-1942)

Mr. BENNETT:

There has to be a motion to go into supply to-day, and we have an amendment to move to the motion. It is probably undesirable to start that at this time of the evening, if there is any other business we can proceed with.

Topic:   BUSINESS OF THE HOUSE
Permalink

ADJOURNMENT-ST. LAWRENCE WATERWAY


Mr. MALCOLM moved the adjournment of the house.


CON

Richard Bedford Bennett (Leader of the Official Opposition)

Conservative (1867-1942)

Mr. BENNETT:

Before the motion is

formally put, Mr. Speaker, might I point out that we were to get the correspondence to-day with respect to the St. Lawrence waterway? I do not want to complain of the Prime Minister in his absence, but unfortunately one of my colleagues informs me that the press has the correspondence, and none of us has seen it or heard of it. Surely parliament must not be treated in this way.

Si. Lawrence Waterway

Topic:   ADJOURNMENT-ST. LAWRENCE WATERWAY
Permalink
LIB

John Campbell Elliott (Minister of Public Works)

Liberal

Mr. ELLIOTT:

Was not the statement

that it would be handed to the press?

Topic:   ADJOURNMENT-ST. LAWRENCE WATERWAY
Permalink

April 16, 1928