April 18, 1939

ROMEO LATREILLE

TRIBUTE TO EMPLOYEE OP THE HOUSE WHO, WITH A COMPANION, SAVED A CHILD PROM DROWNING


On the orders of the day:


?

Mr DANIEL McIVOR (Fort William):

Before the orders of the day are called I should like to bring to the notice of the house a matter which to me is of great importance.

Royal Seals

There appeared on the front page of an Ottawa newspaper yesterday the photograph of a young man, a servant of this house. No young man has his picture in the paper unless he has done something very good or something very bad. This young man on Sunday afternoon, all dressed in his Sunday clothes, with a companion, risked his life to save a little girl from drowning. The companion is Gordon Robillard, and the young man to whom I refer is Romeo Latreille. I would ask him to stand so that hon. members can look at him.

Romeo is a bashful boy, but he had initiative. He is a better baseball player than the hon. member for Greenwood (Mr. Massey), and he may have saved a great star. I am sure that Romeo will keep an eye on her and encourage her, and no doubt, at some distant date, Romeo will take his little Juliet by the hand and remind her of April 18, 1939-

Topic:   ROMEO LATREILLE
Subtopic:   TRIBUTE TO EMPLOYEE OP THE HOUSE WHO, WITH A COMPANION, SAVED A CHILD PROM DROWNING
Permalink
LIB

Walter Edward Foster (Speaker of the Senate)

Liberal

Mr. SPEAKER:

Order.

Topic:   ROMEO LATREILLE
Subtopic:   TRIBUTE TO EMPLOYEE OP THE HOUSE WHO, WITH A COMPANION, SAVED A CHILD PROM DROWNING
Permalink
LIB

Daniel (Dan) McIvor

Liberal

Mr. McIVOR:

-and place in her hand a gold medal-

Topic:   ROMEO LATREILLE
Subtopic:   TRIBUTE TO EMPLOYEE OP THE HOUSE WHO, WITH A COMPANION, SAVED A CHILD PROM DROWNING
Permalink
?

Some hon. MEMBERS:

Order.

Topic:   ROMEO LATREILLE
Subtopic:   TRIBUTE TO EMPLOYEE OP THE HOUSE WHO, WITH A COMPANION, SAVED A CHILD PROM DROWNING
Permalink
LIB

Walter Edward Foster (Speaker of the Senate)

Liberal

Mr. SPEAKER:

Order.

Topic:   ROMEO LATREILLE
Subtopic:   TRIBUTE TO EMPLOYEE OP THE HOUSE WHO, WITH A COMPANION, SAVED A CHILD PROM DROWNING
Permalink
?

Some hon. MEMBERS:

Go on.

Topic:   ROMEO LATREILLE
Subtopic:   TRIBUTE TO EMPLOYEE OP THE HOUSE WHO, WITH A COMPANION, SAVED A CHILD PROM DROWNING
Permalink
LIB

Daniel (Dan) McIvor

Liberal

Mr. McIVOR:

I have a suggestion to make. It is that we treat this young man with the respect worthy of one who has risked his life to save another. I thank you, Mr. Speaker, and the house for the courtesy you have shown me in my tribute to this young hero.

Topic:   ROMEO LATREILLE
Subtopic:   TRIBUTE TO EMPLOYEE OP THE HOUSE WHO, WITH A COMPANION, SAVED A CHILD PROM DROWNING
Permalink

TRADE AGREEMENTS

CANADA-UNITED STATES-CATTLE QUOTA FOR THE SECOND QUARTER


On the orders of the day:


CON

Ernest Edward Perley

Conservative (1867-1942)

Mr. E. E. PERLEY (Qu'Appelle):

I desire to direct a question to the Minister of Agriculture (Mr. Gardiner). Can he inform the house whether the cattle quota under the trade agreement for the second quarter has been filled and what percentage in number Canada has supplied? Has Mexico shared in it, and to what extent?

Topic:   TRADE AGREEMENTS
Subtopic:   CANADA-UNITED STATES-CATTLE QUOTA FOR THE SECOND QUARTER
Permalink
LIB

William Daum Euler (Minister of Trade and Commerce)

Liberal

Hon. W. D. EULER (Minister of Trade and Commerce):

Perhaps I may answer the

question as far as I can, although it is addressed to my colleague, the Minister of Agriculture. The quota has not been filled, but I have not the information at hand as to what percentage has been reached. I can obtain it.

Topic:   TRADE AGREEMENTS
Subtopic:   CANADA-UNITED STATES-CATTLE QUOTA FOR THE SECOND QUARTER
Permalink

ROYAL SEALS

QUESTION AS TO THE APPLICATION TO CANADA OF THE REGENCY ACT, 1937


On the orders of the day:


CON

Charles Hazlitt Cahan

Conservative (1867-1942)

Hon. C. H. CAHAN (St. Lawrence-St. George):

I wish to make a short statement,

which is not controversial, and on that to base several questions to the government, of which I gave notice yesterday.

The house will remember that Bill No. 76, dealing with the sealing of royal instruments, passed the house very rapidly on Tuesday afternoon last, the first day after the Easter recess. In accordance with the demands of the press that the progress of business be facilitated it passed without discussion, although I was absent and desired to put to the government certain questions regarding that bill upon its second reading or in committee- questions in which a considerable number of people in Canada who are interested in constitutional questions have shown deep concern.

The Regency Act, chapter 16 of the statutes of the United Kingdom for 1937, provides for a regency in the event of a sovereign acceding to the throne when under eighteen years of age, and that the royal functions shall in such case be performed in the name and on behalf of the sovereign by a regent. Provision is also made in the act for the appointment of a regent if, by reason of infirmity of mind or body, the sovereign is incapable for the time being of performing the royal functions, or is for some definite cause not available for the performance of those functions. The same act also provides that in the event of illness not amounting to such infirmity of mind or body, or of absence or of intended absence from the United Kingdom, the sovereign may, in order to prevent delay or difficulty in the dispatch of public business, by letters patent under the great seal, delegate to councillors of state, for the period of that illness or intended absence, such of the royal functions as may be specified in the letters patent.

It would appear that the Regency Act of 1937 probably binds Australia and New Zealand, as the parliament of neither of those dominions has yet adopted sections 2, 3, 4, 5 and 6 of the statute of Westminster, 1931. although admittedly that statute does apply to Canada.

The Regency Act, 1937, as enacted at Westminster, does not recite that Canada has requested and consented to its enactment as provided in section 4 of the statute of Westminster, which enacts that-

4. No act of parliament of the United Kingdom, passed after the commencement of this

Royal Seals

act, shall extend, or be deemed to extend to a dominion as part of the law of that dominion, unless it is expressly declared in that act that the dominion has requested, and consented to the enactment thereof.

It is therefore possible that the Regency-Act, 1937, may not automatically extend to Canada as a part of the law of this dominion.

Several questions therefore arise for consideration :

1. Will a regent, appointed under the Regency Act, ipso facto assume the performance of all royal functions relating to Canada, hitherto performed by his majesty in person?

2. If not, why was not the necessary request made and consent given by Canada so that by its terms the Regency Act would apply to Canada?

3. Is it assumed by the government that,

by the terms of the British North America Act, or otherwise, Canada now has the legislative authority to provide for the appointment of a regent in case the necessity should arise? _

4. What is now Canada's constitutional position in relation to the appointment of councillors of state under the terms of the Regency Act?

I am not requesting an immediate answer to these questions, but I respectfully suggest that at an early day and at a convenient time the government should clearly state the position which it officially takes with regard to these important matters.

Topic:   ROYAL SEALS
Subtopic:   QUESTION AS TO THE APPLICATION TO CANADA OF THE REGENCY ACT, 1937
Permalink
LIB

Ernest Lapointe (Minister of Justice and Attorney General of Canada)

Liberal

Right Hon. ERNEST LAPOINTE (Minister of Justice):

With regard to the remarks of my hon. friend as to his not being present when the bill concerning the sealing of royal instruments was discussed in the house, I may say that I did not know he intended to speak on that bill. However the matter is still before parliament in another place, and if my hon. friend has any objections I am sure he could see that they are registered before the bill becomes law. But I do not see the connection between that bill and the questions he has just asked. My hon. friend says he intended on the second reading of the bill to make the remarks he has made about the Regency Act and ask the questions which he has just put on Hansard. The two matters are independent of each other. However, I shall see to it that my hon. friend gets an answer to the questions he has just asked, except perhaps that as my hon. friend well knows, it is not the business or under the rules it is not the task of the government or the Minister of Justice to give what would purport to be legal advice. But there are questions of fact which are embodied in his query, and I shall try to meet his wishes as far as possible as soon as I can look into the matter.

Topic:   ROYAL SEALS
Subtopic:   QUESTION AS TO THE APPLICATION TO CANADA OF THE REGENCY ACT, 1937
Permalink

April 18, 1939