Edmund Boyd OSLER

OSLER, Sir Edmund Boyd

Personal Data

Party
Conservative (1867-1942)
Constituency
Toronto West (Ontario)
Birth Date
November 20, 1845
Deceased Date
August 4, 1924
Website
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Edmund_Boyd_Osler_(Ontario_politician)
PARLINFO
http://www.parl.gc.ca/parlinfo/Files/Parliamentarian.aspx?Item=4e01e3c6-73dc-40cf-8a42-e6156318db32&Language=E&Section=ALL
Profession
financier

Parliamentary Career

June 23, 1896 - October 9, 1900
CON
  West Toronto (Ontario)
November 7, 1900 - September 29, 1904
CON
  West Toronto (Ontario)
November 3, 1904 - September 17, 1908
CON
  Toronto West (Ontario)
October 26, 1908 - July 29, 1911
CON
  Toronto West (Ontario)
September 21, 1911 - October 6, 1917
CON
  Toronto West (Ontario)

Most Recent Speeches (Page 219 of 219)


February 28, 1901

Mr. OSLER.

Banking and Commerce Committee would have the advantage not only of the opinions of very able members representing the legal and commercial classes, but there would be a full hearing from gentlemen outside who could give valuable evidence as to some of the questions of fact that have come up in this discussion. The questions of fact raised are as to the necessity for the Bill in, say, the maritime provinces or the province of Ontario, or whether certain provinces might not well be exempt from its operations. My hon. friend from Annapolis (Mr. Wade) has raised the question whether, if this Bill should be adopted, there would not be a necessity for amending some of the laws relating to usury in the province of Nova Scotia. I have not looked into that question, but it is well worthy of consideration. If it is in accordance with the rules of the House, I would move in amendment that this Bill be referred to the Committee on Banking and Commerce.

Topic:   MONEY-LENDERS.
Full View Permalink

February 28, 1901

Mr. E. B. OSLER (West Toronto).

Speaking for Toronto, and from what I know of Ontario, I do not think there is any need for this Bill. I have heard very little complaint, certainly of late years, of any great hardship in connection with usury. When times are hard, it is quite natural that cases will happen of very high rates of interest being charged. But, I do not think many such cases prevail, at any rate, in the older communities. I dare say that in Manitoba things may be different, and that there, money being scarce, very high rates will be charged. I think it would be a mistake to enact such a law as this, for it is not required now, and it would have a very

bad effect as interfering with freedom of trade in this regard. If a man is desparate-ly hard up, he will borrow money from a money-lender if he can, no matter what laws you make to prevent him doing so; and, often the more difficult you make the borrowing of money under these circumstances, the higher the rate the borrower has to pay, because of the greater risk the lender runs; and yet the lending and borrowing will go on where men are bound to have money, and other men will lend it at a very high rate taking risks. I fail to see how any good can come of this Bill, even if it is passed by the House.

Topic:   MONEY-LENDERS.
Full View Permalink

February 22, 1901

Mr. OSLER.

It was quite refreshing to hear from the government the absolute repudiation of the main plank in their antielection speeches. There is to be no calling for tenders at all, but they are going to buy fairly from their own men. They are afraid to allow Conservatives to tender, because the Conservatives might tender lower than the friends of the government. It is quite pleasant to hear the frank avowal that contract by tender is a thing of the past.

Topic:   SUPPLY-THE BUDGET-INQUIRY.
Subtopic:   J. L. McDOUGALL, A.G.
Full View Permalink

February 21, 1901

Mr. OSLER.

Yes, for the country ; they were very anxious that monopolies should be prevented by Act of parliament-perhaps the most difficult thing to accomplish that a government ever attempted to carry out. But here, at least, was a case in which the government had it absolutely in their own power to prevent a monopoly. They have now a manufactory of this binder twine of their own, and, consequently, can sell it to the farmers at a reasonable price, covering the cost, and by doing so keep down the prices of other manufacturers. Instead of doing that, however, they deliberately combine with the other manufacturers to prevent the farmers getting the binder twine readily and cheaply from the government factory. The result of this combine between the government and the other manufacturers has been that the binder twine factories in Ontario have for the last two years divided among their shareholders dividends ranging all the way up from 40 to 100 per cent on their paid up capital. The government had it in their power to remedy that state of affairs. I do not object to a company which risks its money in manufacturing making a very handsome profit, because manufacturing business is uncertain. But binder twine is, perhaps, the simplest form of manufacturing we have in this country, and yet there is no manufacturing concern in Canada that has distributed among its shareholders in the past four years, or since this government has been in power, such enormous dividends as lias been paid by the binder twine manufacturers. I think the resolution is a proper one. The government are manufacturers of twine, and they could sell the twine to the farmers at cost price, thereby carrying out in some small measure one of their promises, and showing that they were in earnest when they declared themselves anxious to provide that there should not be any unjust combine of capital against the farmers and artisans of this country.

Topic:   MANUFACTURE OF BINDER TWINE.
Full View Permalink

February 21, 1901

Mr. E. B. OSLER (West Toronto).

I happen to be a farmer during two or three months in the year, and, therefore, may claim some right to the indulgence of the House while I speak on this subject. When the government came into power in 1896

Topic:   MANUFACTURE OF BINDER TWINE.
Full View Permalink