Levi THOMSON

THOMSON, Levi

Personal Data

Party
Unionist
Constituency
Qu'Appelle (Saskatchewan)
Birth Date
February 17, 1855
Deceased Date
April 14, 1938
Website
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Levi_Thomson
PARLINFO
http://www.parl.gc.ca/parlinfo/Files/Parliamentarian.aspx?Item=4d6aec7f-24f4-4f0f-bfd9-9e401c0c7fc5&Language=E&Section=ALL
Profession
crown prosecutor, farmer, lawyer

Parliamentary Career

September 21, 1911 - October 6, 1917
LIB
  Qu'Appelle (Saskatchewan)
December 17, 1917 - October 4, 1921
UNION
  Qu'Appelle (Saskatchewan)

Most Recent Speeches (Page 5 of 105)


May 25, 1921

Mr. THOMSON (Qu'Appelle) :

We might assume that those people for whom my hon. friend has so much sympathy should have some responsibility placed upon them before they undertake to get into trouble. But there is another point in connection with this section that bothers me somewhat. A feeble-minded person is described as one who is not necessarily an imbecile, but whose mental defectiveness is so pronounced that she requires care, supervision, and control for her own protection, and for the protection of others. It seems to me that my hon. friend has not been very guarded in the terms he uses. Is there in the criminal law of any other country whatever a section of this description? It seems to me that the words my hon. friend uses there are capable of various interpretations by different judges; I doubt very much whether any two judges would give the same interpretation. I think you might almost assume that almost any of these women are persons who require care, supervision and control. I think it is probably because they have not had the amount of care, supervision and control that they should have had that they have gone astray. Perhaps there are

not so many of us that have had the care, supervision and control that we should have had.

Topic:   QUESTIONS
Subtopic:   CRIMINAL CODE AMENDMENT
Full View Permalink

May 25, 1921

Mr. THOMSON (Qu'Appelle):

I am in full sympathy with the minister's desire to provide adequate punishment in these cases, but I still think that his terms are very indefinite. In his explanation of this section it seemed to me he was leaving the impression that feeble mindedness was part of the definition. As a matter of fact it is not feeble mindedness that we are defining; mental defectiveness is the term used. That is just as vague as the other terms we are referring to. As I said before, we all require "care, consideration and control." I am not sure that we are not all more or less mentally defective.

Topic:   QUESTIONS
Subtopic:   CRIMINAL CODE AMENDMENT
Full View Permalink

May 23, 1921

Mr. THOMSON (Qu'Appelle):

I admit that I am one of those who asked that these trade agents be appointed. I must say, however, that at the time that I was trying to convince my right hon. friend, I did not think I was succeeding, and I do not think yet that I succeeded. I do not think that the arguments which I and others put forward in favour of trade agents affected him at all. The arguments that our hon. friends opposite put forward by way of protection did influence him. Apparently,

the suggestion now is: Have trade agents and put on a little more protection under cover, as we got a good deal of it on the Budget debate under cover.

Topic:   REVISED EDITION. COMMONS
Full View Permalink

May 23, 1921

Mr. THOMSON (Qu'Appelle) :

In what manner does Great Britain pay her trade agents? In the same manner as the United States or as recommended in this resolution?

Topic:   REVISED EDITION. COMMONS
Full View Permalink

May 23, 1921

Mr. THOMSON (Qu'Appelle) :

I do not think for a moment that we succeeded in having any effect on the minister; but apparently the arguments of the hon. member for North Perth (Mr. Morphy) and others had an effect, because it gave him an opportunity of slipping in a little extra protection under cover. I still believe that we should have trade agents. I quite agree with my hon. friend on that, but I think we' are safer in following the example of Great Britain and the United States in this matter. It is quite true that there is something a little bit unreasonable about appointing trade agents to increase our trade when we are putting up barriers to prevent trade. We must, however, remember that those barriers have been put up. I should like to speak in answer to the argument of the hon. member for Red Deer (Mr. Clark). These barriers are up and we have to deal with existing conditions. The existing conditions are that governments on both sides have put up barriers, but the people still want to trade. It is quite proper that we should adopt some means to overcome those barriers to the greatest possible extent. Therefore, I am in favour of trade agents to overcome to a certain extent the barriers that are placed on the border by the Government on both sides. I believe those agents would not be so much needed if we had free trade. There again I disagree with my hon. friend from Red Deer with whom I do not often disagree in trade matters. I think that the proper and sensible way is to do away with the trade barriers, but as we cannot have that, I believe that this is the next most sensible way. While it is quite true that the increase in protection does not amount to anything like 2i per cent on the average it will amount to that in some particular cases. I do not know what the average trade invoice amounts to, but assuming it to be $500 this tax will amount to half of 1 per cent, which my hon. friend is adding to the customs tariff. While I approve of the idea of having trade commissioners appointed, I cannot approve of this mode of paying them. I am therefore disposed to vote against the proposal. I believe that this scheme has been adopted for the purpose of increasing our customs tariff and for no other purpose.

Topic:   REVISED EDITION. COMMONS
Full View Permalink