May 24, 1933

LIB

Joseph Raoul Hurtubise

Liberal

Mr. HURTUBISE:

For a copy of all correspondence, letters, telegrams, petitions, reports and other documents in possession of the government, respecting any change made since 1930 in the postmastership or in the location of the post office at Field, Ontario.

Topic:   QUESTIONS
Subtopic:   MOTIONS FOR PAPERS
Sub-subtopic:   POST OFFICE-FIELD, ONT.
Permalink
LIB

Olof Hanson

Liberal

Mr. HANSON (York-Sun'bury) (for Mr. Gott):

For a copy of the report, evidence and all information obtained by the Sutherland commission, in the investigation into tobacco buying conditions in the province of Ontario, following alleged report of combine and application for investigation under the Combines Investigation Act.

Topic:   QUESTIONS
Subtopic:   MOTIONS FOR PAPERS
Sub-subtopic:   SUTHERLAND COMMISSION REPORT
Permalink
CON

Pierre Édouard Blondin (Speaker of the Senate)

Conservative (1867-1942)

Mr. SPEAKER:

I think this had better stand.

Motion stands.

Topic:   QUESTIONS
Subtopic:   MOTIONS FOR PAPERS
Sub-subtopic:   SUTHERLAND COMMISSION REPORT
Permalink
LAB

James Shaver Woodsworth

Labour

Mr. WOODSWORTH (far Mr. Mitchell) moved:

For a copy of the report and evidence arising cut of the investigations of Fred McGregor, registrar, under the Combines Investigation Act into the importation of British coal.

Topic:   QUESTIONS
Subtopic:   MOTIONS FOR PAPERS
Sub-subtopic:   COAL INQUIRY
Permalink
CON

Richard Bedford Bennett (Prime Minister; President of the Privy Council; Secretary of State for External Affairs)

Conservative (1867-1942)

Mr. BENNETT:

The Minister of Labour (Mr. Gordon) a few days ago made clear the position of the department with respect to this matter. The evidence in question has been transmitted to the attorney general of Quebec, and the report of the registrar upon the evidence would prejudice the position of any person who might be brought to trial. Under the general provisions of the law and the rules that regulate the conduct of government I submit that in the first place it is improper to ask for the papers and, in the second place, that the government would have to resist the motion because it cannot prejudice the position of any person who might be accused under the provisions of the act. The report of the registrar upon the evidence is calculated to prejudice the fair trial of any person who might be accused.

Topic:   QUESTIONS
Subtopic:   MOTIONS FOR PAPERS
Sub-subtopic:   COAL INQUIRY
Permalink
LAB

James Shaver Woodsworth

Labour

Mr. WOODSWORTH:

May I ask the Prime Minister if it has not been the practice in certain cases to publish such evidence, and if so why should there be any change of policy in this particular instance?

Topic:   QUESTIONS
Subtopic:   MOTIONS FOR PAPERS
Sub-subtopic:   COAL INQUIRY
Permalink
CON

Richard Bedford Bennett (Prime Minister; President of the Privy Council; Secretary of State for External Affairs)

Conservative (1867-1942)

Mr. BENNETT:

I cannot answer that question. If it has been done in times past that is no reason why the position of a possible defendant to a criminal charge should be prejudiced by the premature publication of comments upon the testimony on which he might be adjudged guilty or innocent.

Topic:   QUESTIONS
Subtopic:   MOTIONS FOR PAPERS
Sub-subtopic:   COAL INQUIRY
Permalink
CON

Pierre Édouard Blondin (Speaker of the Senate)

Conservative (1867-1942)

Mr. SPEAKER:

Does the hon. member withdraw the motion?

Topic:   QUESTIONS
Subtopic:   MOTIONS FOR PAPERS
Sub-subtopic:   COAL INQUIRY
Permalink
LAB

James Shaver Woodsworth

Labour

Mr. WOODSWORTH:

It is the only thing to be done, I suppose, if the government will not give the information.

Motion withdrawn.

Topic:   QUESTIONS
Subtopic:   MOTIONS FOR PAPERS
Sub-subtopic:   COAL INQUIRY
Permalink
UFA

Edward Joseph Garland

United Farmers of Alberta

Mr. GARLAND (Bow River):

For a copy of (1) amended rules and regulations governing the administration of the Patents Act; (2) regulations and forms for carrying into effect the Unfair Competition Act of 1932. which were made effective September, 1932.

Topic:   QUESTIONS
Subtopic:   MOTIONS FOR PAPERS
Sub-subtopic:   PATENTS ACT RULES AND REGULATIONS
Permalink
CON

Charles Hazlitt Cahan (Secretary of State of Canada)

Conservative (1867-1942)

Mr. CAHAN:

It would be impossible for me to comply with this order within the next twenty-four hours, but if the hon. gentleman will withdraw it I shall see that copies are

Conferring of Titles

sent to him at the earliest possible date. Some of these rules are under consideration and are before council for modification, and I will send him the amended copies as soon as possible.

Topic:   QUESTIONS
Subtopic:   MOTIONS FOR PAPERS
Sub-subtopic:   PATENTS ACT RULES AND REGULATIONS
Permalink
UFA

Edward Joseph Garland

United Farmers of Alberta

Mr. GARLAND (Bow River):

Very well; stand.

Motion stands.

Topic:   QUESTIONS
Subtopic:   MOTIONS FOR PAPERS
Sub-subtopic:   PATENTS ACT RULES AND REGULATIONS
Permalink

On the orders of the day:


LIB

William Lyon Mackenzie King (Leader of the Official Opposition)

Liberal

Right Hon. W. L. MACKENZIE KING (Leader of the Opposition):

Mr. Speaker,

I should like to ask the Prime Minister a question arising out of the reply he made yesterday to my inquiry with regard to the government's view with respect to the conferring of titles. Yesterday the right hon. Prime Minister stated:

... it is the considered view of His Majesty's government in Canada that a resolution passed o.v one house of parliament is legally effective only as an expression of the opinion of those vho support such resolution in that house, and this is particularly true with respect to the prerogative of the crown.

The sovereign can only be deprived of a prerogative right by statute of parliament, in very special form, which the government does not propose to introduce. There is apparently no opportunity at this time for discussion of the matters referred to by the right honourable gentleman.

The matter referred to by myself, mentioned in the last sentence, was as to whether the government would undertake to say that no titles' would be conferred until parliament had been given an opportunity to discuss the matter anew. I wish now to ask the Prime Minister whether he will give the house the assurance that we will have an opportunity to discuss the question of titles before the government advises His Majesty in any way with respect to the exercise of the royal prerogative in regard to the conferring of titles in Canada.

I should like to add to my question, if I may, that the reason I urge that this assurance be given is that the house has all along been under the impression, until the reply of the Prime Minister was made, that a resolution of this house would bind the government. The question with respect to titles was asked at the beginning of this part of the session, I think, but was answered only a day or two ago so really no opportunity has been given the house to discuss the question as I am sure it would have wished to do had the opinion of the government been made known.

I might add further that, as my right hon. friend will recall, on February 14, 1929, the

house refused to entertain a motion of the present hon. Secretary of State (Mr. Cahan) that a special committee be appointed to inquire into the question of titles with a view to considering whether the resolution of the House of Commons of May, 1919, should not be rescinded. That motion was voted down by a very large majority, I think it was 114 to 60. In view of that fact, and because on two occasions the house has expressed itself as opposed to the conferring of titles, and also since there has been an understanding on the part of hon. members that the resolution of 1919 would be binding, no intimation to the contrary having been given until yesterday-

Topic:   QUESTIONS
Subtopic:   MOTIONS FOR PAPERS
Sub-subtopic:   CONFERRING OF TITLES
Permalink
CON

Richard Bedford Bennett (Prime Minister; President of the Privy Council; Secretary of State for External Affairs)

Conservative (1867-1942)

Mr. BENNETT:

Some days ago.

Topic:   QUESTIONS
Subtopic:   MOTIONS FOR PAPERS
Sub-subtopic:   CONFERRING OF TITLES
Permalink
LIB

William Lyon Mackenzie King (Leader of the Official Opposition)

Liberal

Mr. MACKENZIE KING:

I accept my

right hon. friend's correction; I believe the statement of the government's position was made a day or two ago, but the question as to opportunity being given hon. members of discussing the matter was not answered, until yesterday. I do not imagine hon. members would wish to discuss the matter at this stage of the session; before, however, His Majesty is advised to exercise the right of conferring titles I think an opportunity should be given for a full discussion of this question.

Topic:   QUESTIONS
Subtopic:   MOTIONS FOR PAPERS
Sub-subtopic:   CONFERRING OF TITLES
Permalink
CON

Richard Bedford Bennett (Prime Minister; President of the Privy Council; Secretary of State for External Affairs)

Conservative (1867-1942)

Right Hon. R. B. BENNETT (Prime Minister) :

I regret that I am unable to give any such assurance with respect to any matter of that character. I can only add that personally I have never held the opinion, that a resolution of this house had any effect upon succeeding parliaments, or that it was binding upon anyone other than the persons who were parties to it or who desired to be bound by it. A resolution passed 'by this house stands in exactly the same position as a resolution passed by any other deliberative body in Canada whether it be a city council or a town council, so far as the effect on the legal position is concerned. I do not care to give any assurance with respect to a matter of executive government or with respect to what might be, without governmental intervention, the exercise of the prerogative rights of the sovereign, which have not been limited in any sense by any action taken by this parliament, and which could be 'limited only in the special manner which I indicated yesterday.

Mr. ARMAND LaVERGNE (Montmagny): I hesitate to interpose my remarks in connection with a question on which I was not consulted, but I was just wondering whether the resolution passed by this parliament, called the Nickle resolution, is not in direct conflict

Canada Shipping Act

with the statute of Westminster. That is a phase of the matter which should be looked into. It seems to me that the Nickle resolution was for the advice of the Imperial government, and ithat the king exercised his prerogative on the advice of the Imperial government. In view of the statute of Westminster I should think this resolution would become void because of the new position assumed by the Dominion of Canada.

Topic:   QUESTIONS
Subtopic:   MOTIONS FOR PAPERS
Sub-subtopic:   CONFERRING OF TITLES
Permalink
LIB

William Lyon Mackenzie King (Leader of the Official Opposition)

Liberal

Mr. MACKENZIE KING:

I suppose it

is not proper to debate this question at the moment, but the point just raised by my hon. friend shows the desirability of having the question debated by the house before any steps are taken. If he will permit me to do so I should like to say to my right hon. friend the Prime Minister that his reply raises an even larger question, inasmuch as I take it to mean that the prerogative of conferring titles may be exercised by His Majesty the King altogether apart from the advice of his ministrj'. I submit that the exercise of all the royal prerogatives are subject to the advice of the ministry, the one with regard to titles quite as much as the one with regard to pardons.

Topic:   QUESTIONS
Subtopic:   MOTIONS FOR PAPERS
Sub-subtopic:   CONFERRING OF TITLES
Permalink
CON

Richard Bedford Bennett (Prime Minister; President of the Privy Council; Secretary of State for External Affairs)

Conservative (1867-1942)

Mr. BENNETT:

With Your Honour's permission I only desire to direct the attention of the right hon. gentleman, who is widely mad, to the life of Mr. Asquith. My right hon. friend will recall the communication sent [DOT]to Mr. Asquith by his sovereign, who made it abundantly clear that it was not on the advice of anyone that he asked Mr. Asquith to accept an earldom. The prerogative of the sovereign is still in existence; it has not been taken from him and can only be taken away in the manner I have indicated. I only mention that to be correct legally. My right hon. friend will recall another instance in which the same action was taken b}' the late Queen Victoria.

Topic:   QUESTIONS
Subtopic:   MOTIONS FOR PAPERS
Sub-subtopic:   CONFERRING OF TITLES
Permalink
LIB

William Lyon Mackenzie King (Leader of the Official Opposition)

Liberal

Mr. MACKENZIE KING:

But may I say that the exercise of the prerogative in each of those cases was in accord with the well known and established custom at Westminster. The contrary is the case here.

Topic:   QUESTIONS
Subtopic:   MOTIONS FOR PAPERS
Sub-subtopic:   CONFERRING OF TITLES
Permalink

May 24, 1933