John BARR

BARR, John, M.D.

Personal Data

Party
Conservative (1867-1942)
Constituency
Dufferin (Ontario)
Birth Date
March 4, 1843
Deceased Date
November 19, 1909
Website
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Barr_(Canadian_politician)
PARLINFO
http://www.parl.gc.ca/parlinfo/Files/Parliamentarian.aspx?Item=494a8cbe-9876-4914-974a-77fca67aace8&Language=E&Section=ALL
Profession
physician

Parliamentary Career

November 3, 1904 - September 17, 1908
CON
  Dufferin (Ontario)
October 26, 1908 - July 29, 1911
CON
  Dufferin (Ontario)

Most Recent Speeches (Page 75 of 76)


February 3, 1905

Mr. BARR.

I might ask if the banking interests in this Dominion have been consulted ? Probably they could- give some light on this subject. It is certainly a large undertaking involving large expenditures and it seems doubtful whether due consideration has been given to tjie undertaking. The banking interests are probably best able to inform the House on questions of this kind and I would like to know if they have been consulted.

Topic:   SUPPLY.
Subtopic:   FEBKUAKY C, 1905
Full View Permalink

February 2, 1905

Mr. BARR.

If the Salvation Army have accomplished so much, why should they not get the credit ? Why should you give it all to Inspector Archibald ? I think this is a recognition of the work they have accomplished which has done more for these unfortunate men than the machinery of the law, and in that case why not give them the credit ? It does seem to me that we should encourage the Salvation Army and try to further the work that they are now doing.

Topic:   SUPPLY.
Full View Permalink

February 2, 1905

Mr. BARR.

Does the Salvation Army receive any assistance from the government?

Topic:   SUPPLY.
Full View Permalink

January 31, 1905

Mr. BARR.

Is that for the whole Dominion ?

Topic:   INSPECTION AND SALE OF SEEDS.
Full View Permalink

January 31, 1905

Mr. BARR.

It seems to me that the object of the Bill is. to a considerable extent, Mr. WALSH.

to furnish grist to the lawyers. The usual custom is for the farmer to sell his grain wherever he finds the best market. Surely there should be a guarantee given the farmer that he did or did not sell the grain for seed. Otherwise the merchant can throw the responsibility back upon the farmer and endless litigation would be the result. There should be some provision to protect the farmer or he will be in continual trouble. No doubt where a seed grower has grown grain for seed, where he has exhibited it for sale as seed, it is necessary that the law should protect the purchaser against the purchase of foul seeds. But when a farmer sells grain without understanding that it is purchased to be sold again as seed, why should he be responsible? A country merchant, purchasing grain from a farmer might ask if he could sell the grain for seed. The farmer, not understanding the law-it would take a long time to understand it-gives his consent, and sells his grain at the best price he can get for it. The merchant can afterwards plead that he purchased the grain for seed and so paid a high price, and, if proceeded against under the law, might throw the responsibility on the farmer. I submit that the farmer, selling his grain in that way must be given better protection than he is given under this Bill.

Topic:   INSPECTION AND SALE OF SEEDS.
Full View Permalink