David TISDALE

TISDALE, The Hon. David, P.C., K.C.

Personal Data

Party
Conservative (1867-1942)
Constituency
Norfolk (Ontario)
Birth Date
September 8, 1835
Deceased Date
March 31, 1911
Website
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_Tisdale
PARLINFO
http://www.parl.gc.ca/parlinfo/Files/Parliamentarian.aspx?Item=767d2ad4-15bd-4cc2-9ce2-29707e4c6128&Language=E&Section=ALL
Profession
lawyer

Parliamentary Career

February 22, 1887 - February 3, 1891
CON
  Norfolk South (Ontario)
March 5, 1891 - April 24, 1896
CON
  Norfolk South (Ontario)
June 23, 1896 - October 9, 1900
CON
  Norfolk South (Ontario)
  • Minister of Militia and Defence (May 1, 1896 - July 8, 1896)
November 7, 1900 - September 29, 1904
CON
  Norfolk South (Ontario)
November 3, 1904 - September 17, 1908
CON
  Norfolk (Ontario)

Most Recent Speeches (Page 3 of 134)


June 12, 1905

Mr. TISDALE.

As definite as possible, but in figures ; (3) the estimated expenditures of the war office, if they have it, on these men and all other expenses, if they have it, connected with the maintenance of the establishment and the pay, or in any way connected with the garrison ; (4) the estimated expenditures of the cost of the number of men who are to be substituted and their incidentals ; (5) the estimated expenditures of the fortifications themselves for the year. I think we are entitled to this Information and that is all I wish.

Topic:   QUESTIONS.
Subtopic:   MILITIA ACT AMENDMENT-PERMANENT FORCE.
Full View Permalink

June 12, 1905

Mr. TISDALE.

Including the allowances the salary provided is a very comfortable one and it has enabled us to get a veiy efficient officer.

Topic:   QUESTIONS.
Subtopic:   ROYAL MILITARY COLLEGE-SALARIES.
Full View Permalink

June 12, 1905

Mr. TISDALE.

In other words there may be anticipated a very large expenditure. It will all depend on how these fortifications are manned and armed at the present time.

Topic:   QUESTIONS.
Subtopic:   MILITIA ACT AMENDMENT-PERMANENT FORCE.
Full View Permalink

June 12, 1905

Mr. TISDALE.

If these fortifications were only for the defence of Canada it would be an entirely different thing. I do not want to oppose this proposition if I possibly can avoid it, but I certainly must know what we are doing before I support it. Speaking as a Canadian I would be proud to make an expenditure for the joint defence of the empire and of Canada, but it goes past pride and becomes conceit when any one thinks that the defence of Canada is more important than the defence of the empire. I will join with the government in any reasonable expense, but I want first to know what we are about.

Topic:   QUESTIONS.
Subtopic:   MILITIA ACT AMENDMENT-PERMANENT FORCE.
Full View Permalink

June 12, 1905

Mr. TISDALE.

Don't begin too fast, and don't begin unnecessarily, and don't forget that you are now undertaking not only to defend Canadian interests but imperial interests as well. It is one thing to provide

for the defences of Canada alone, and it is another thing to undertake the defence of the empire.

Topic:   QUESTIONS.
Subtopic:   MILITIA ACT AMENDMENT-PERMANENT FORCE.
Full View Permalink