Edward Armour PECK

PECK, Edward Armour, K.C.

Personal Data

Party
Conservative (1867-1942)
Constituency
Peterborough West (Ontario)
Birth Date
September 11, 1858
Deceased Date
July 18, 1947
Website
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Edward_Armour_Peck
PARLINFO
http://www.parl.gc.ca/parlinfo/Files/Parliamentarian.aspx?Item=4f67ea43-a53e-4c7f-865e-f93d2df80a0d&Language=E&Section=ALL
Profession
barrister

Parliamentary Career

October 29, 1925 - July 2, 1926
CON
  Peterborough West (Ontario)
September 14, 1926 - May 30, 1930
CON
  Peterborough West (Ontario)
July 28, 1930 - August 14, 1935
CON
  Peterborough West (Ontario)

Most Recent Speeches (Page 1 of 19)


June 24, 1935

Mr. PECK:

I want to bring that same question up when we come to consider clause 4.

Progress reported.

Topic:   PROVISION FOR LOANS BY GOVERNMENT AND LENDING INSTITUTIONS UP TO EIGHTY PER CENT OF COST OF CONSTRUCTION
Full View Permalink

May 21, 1935

Mr. E. A. PECK (West Peterborough):

Mr. Speaker, as a member of the private bills committee and having heard the evidence and argument before that committee, I should like to say a few words in opposition to the motion which is before the chair.

I think we ought to consider very seriously this motion as it might affect the life of one of our citizens, and that citizen a woman. If the motion carries, the respondent in this case is going to be charged with what is possibly in the minds of some people the worst offence of which a woman can be guilty, disloyalty to her husband; and not only would it brand her with that disloyalty but in all probability it would have the effect of separating her from her children and depriving her of the support of her husband. It is a very serious matter. This woman has strenuously opposed the charge which has been made against her. She has fought this case as hard as she could before the senate committee. The seven members of that committee were unable to agree, after hearing the testimony, that she was guilty of the charge against her. The senate committee divided with a very narrow majority of four to three. Then the case came before the private bills committee of the house, where we considered the testimony and heard the argument and voted on the question, and the committee to which this case had been referred by this house came to the conclusion by a majority of over two to one-I think the vote stood at 21 to 9-that the woman was not guilty and that the petition should be dismissed. Then the matter came before the house by way of report from the chairman of the committee, and the report was adopted. Now at this late stage we are asked to reopen the whole matter, and the question is brought up through a form of procedure that as far as my experience in this house goes has never before been attempted. I have sat in this house for ten years and I have never heard of any report of the private bills committee being upset, certainly not any report dealing with a matrimonial case. I do think that this is a most unusual proceeding and that it should not be permitted to establish a precedent in this house for the future.

I refrain from dealing with the testimony. I quite agree with the hon. member for Lisgar (Mr. Brown) that we should not in an open sitting of this house deal with matters of this kind. We are dealing with a question of fact. We are sitting here either as jury or as judges,

and whichever way you look at it we are not properly constituted to be a court of appeal because we have not before us the litigants nor have the litigants the opportunity of appearing before us through their counsel. It seems to me a most unwise proceeding for us sitting here as members of the house to undertake to deal with this question, which after all is a question of fact. I submit, therefore, that if there is any doubt in the minds of any of the members and they feel that this matter should be further considered, it should be done by a reference back to the private bills committee, or by a reference of the case to a special committee, or by reference to a judge. The case might be dealt with in any one of these ways, but I do submit that we should not at this stage undertake to reverse the decision of a tribunal appointed by this house which has given this matter the fullest consideration. I submit, Mr. Speaker, that the motion should be negatived.

Topic:   CLARENCE MACGREGOR ROBERTS
Full View Permalink

March 26, 1935

Mr. PECK:

Would you superannuate a man at forty?

Topic:   THE BUDGET
Subtopic:   CONTINUATION OP DEBATE ON THE ANNUAL FINANCIAL STATEMENT OP THE MINISTER OP FINANCE
Full View Permalink

March 26, 1935

Mr. PECK:

Would the hon. member

answer this question-

Topic:   THE BUDGET
Subtopic:   CONTINUATION OP DEBATE ON THE ANNUAL FINANCIAL STATEMENT OP THE MINISTER OP FINANCE
Full View Permalink

March 21, 1935

Mr. PECK:

I would not consider it necessary to speak but for the fact that the people I represent are very much interested in the tourist traffic. The county of Peterborough offers a great deal of attraction to tourists who come by thousands to enjoy the scenery. We are able to give them and we do give them a very pleasant time and they come again. I agree with my hon. friend from East Simcoe as to the attractiveness of that general system that runs from Georgian bay to the Trent, known as the Kawartha system, comprising islands, lakes, rivers and canals. It attracts many thousands of people to its shores every year and those whom I represent are particularly interested in promoting the traffic. Other places in Canada are similarly situated and are looking for tourists. I am quite sure therefore that the government is doing the wise thing in setting aside a sum of money to advertise the traffic and to make provision for tourists to see that they are properly guarded against exorbitant charges. The bureau can do a great deal in furnishing information to the prospective tourist. After all, the best advertisement that Canada can have is the good will of those who visit the country and report favourably upon its advantages. That is the first essential. Further, the bureau should be in a position to give information to those who are ignorant of the country and are anxious to know where they can spend a happy and profitable holiday at reasonable cost. It will be the function of the bureau to collect all this information and to check it over, and it can do many things to smooth the way for the tourist. The tourist wants a reasonable means of approaching the particular point on which he has set his mind; he wants to know that he will be comfortably looked after at moderate cost; he wants to know that fishing is provided for, and he wants to know particularly that he will be able to get into ready communication with his own home by mail, telegraph or telephone. A good many inquiries are made respecting the district I come from with regard to these points particularly which I have enumerated, and the officer in charge of the bureau can do a good deal in cooperation with the various departments to clear up such points. Every man coming to visit us wants to know, as I have said, that he will be able to get into ready communication with his home in case of emergency. From every point of view therefore we can commend this appropriation and I congratulate the government. I assure them it will do a great deal to improve the tourist traffic and increase the numbers of those who visit us.

Topic:   RAILWAYS AND CANALS
Full View Permalink