May 1, 1930

CON

Henry Herbert Stevens

Conservative (1867-1942)

Mr. STEVENS:

There is another interpretation which I think supports my hon. friend from Peace River. Section 4 says:

If the tolls on live animals or goods liable to deteriorate or perish while in the possession of the company are not paid forthwith on demand-

In other words, if the company suspects that there may be some risk in carrying these live animals or goods liable to deteriorate, they can demand prepayment of the freight forthwith.

Topic:   RAILWAY ACT AMENDMENT
Permalink
CON

George Reginald Geary

Conservative (1867-1942)

Mr. GEARY:

My point is that if they do demand prepayment and do not take the goods until the money is paid, the provision for resale would never occur, because they cannot sell goods that they have not got. If they do not take the goods, they certainly cannot sell them.

Topic:   RAILWAY ACT AMENDMENT
Permalink

Section agreed to.


CON

George Reginald Geary

Conservative (1867-1942)

Mr. GEARY:

If I may revert for a moment to section 2, why is it that provision is made for compensation under the compensation

Railway Act Amendment

provisions of the act in the case of private property, whereas later in the section referring to leave being obtained to carry a railway along a highway, the original section is still retained which requires an order of the board before any compensation is payable?

Topic:   RAILWAY ACT AMENDMENT
Permalink
LIB

Thomas Alexander Crerar (Minister of Railways and Canals)

Liberal

Mr. CRERAR:

Section 2 does not take away any of the provisions of the old act in regard to compensation. Under the old section, if the question of compensation arose, the arbitrators held that compensation had to be paid no matter how small it was. What the amendment seeks to do is to give the arbitrators the power to decide whether or not any compensation should be paid, as well as the amount of compensation if any.

Topic:   RAILWAY ACT AMENDMENT
Permalink
CON

George Reginald Geary

Conservative (1867-1942)

Mr. GEARY:

But why do you make it

provide for compensation to private owners and not to municipalities under the latter part of section 2?

Topic:   RAILWAY ACT AMENDMENT
Permalink
LIB

Thomas Alexander Crerar (Minister of Railways and Canals)

Liberal

Mr. CRERAR:

I do not think that question arises.

Topic:   RAILWAY ACT AMENDMENT
Permalink
CON

George Reginald Geary

Conservative (1867-1942)

Mr. GEARY:

Yes; it says:

Provided that where leave is obtained to carry any railway along a highway the board may require the company to make compensation to the municipality-

And that is determined under the provisions of the compensation section. In other words, you have retained the mischievous clause in regard to public ownership, but not in regard to private ownership.

Topic:   RAILWAY ACT AMENDMENT
Permalink
LIB

Thomas Alexander Crerar (Minister of Railways and Canals)

Liberal

Mr. CRERAR:

We are not seeking to

change the clause in that respect.

Topic:   RAILWAY ACT AMENDMENT
Permalink
CON
LIB

Thomas Alexander Crerar (Minister of Railways and Canals)

Liberal

Mr. CRERAR:

That question has not come up.

Bill reported, read the third time and passed.

Topic:   RAILWAY ACT AMENDMENT
Permalink

FOOD AND DRUGS ACT AMENDMENT


The house in committee on Bill No. 125, to amend the Food and Drugs Act-Mr. King (Kootenay)-Mr. Johnston in the chair. Bill reported. On motion of Mr. Mackenzie King the house adjourned at 10.50 p.m. Friday, May 2, 1930.


May 1, 1930