William Folger NICKLE

NICKLE, William Folger, Q.C., B.A.

Personal Data

Party
Unionist
Constituency
Kingston (Ontario)
Birth Date
December 31, 1869
Deceased Date
November 15, 1957
Website
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/William_Folger_Nickle
PARLINFO
http://www.parl.gc.ca/parlinfo/Files/Parliamentarian.aspx?Item=a83f8a69-ff76-4167-8161-88d909e75a9c&Language=E&Section=ALL
Profession
lawyer

Parliamentary Career

September 21, 1911 - October 6, 1917
CON
  Kingston (Ontario)
December 17, 1917 - July 7, 1919
UNION
  Kingston (Ontario)

Most Recent Speeches (Page 4 of 119)


July 1, 1919

Mr. NICKLE:

The amendment proposed by section 97 (b) in the second part of clause 1 makes it an offence for any person to publish, distribute or import any book, pamphlet, etc., promulgating the doctrines prohibited by section (97a). I can quite understand that it is necessary, if convictions are to be secured under this clause that there should be a presumption of knowledge, but it seems to me to be radically unfair that if a person is in a position to prove that he either printed, distributed, or imported any of this objectionable literature without having any knowledge of its contents, he should not be exonerated from responsibility or should be considered as a criminal. I would therefore, to put the argument shortly, like to suggest to the minister that to the clause there should be added a provision that no conviction should be recorded under subsection 1, 2 and 3 of clause 97 (b) if the prisoner satisfies the court that he had no knowledge that the literature contained the objectionable matter in reference to that he was charged with printing, distributing or importing. It strikes one as radically unfair that if perchance a printer printed a part of a work, the full import of which he did not understand, or somebody distributed a book the contents of which he did not know or, if somebody brought into the country a magazine without knowing the contents of it, he should stand trial and be convicted without having an opportunity of being freed under the charge if he satisfied the court that he had no knowledge of what the document contained and was really innocent in the eyes of the law.

Topic:   REVISED
Full View Permalink

June 30, 1919

Mr. NICKLE:

The hon. member is quite correct in directing attention to the error in my statement. I should explain to the committee wherein he is correct and wherein I was incorrect. There is a provision in the Bill under which, on the death of a man who was wounded to an extent of disability exceeding 80 per cent, the widow shall be entitled to the same pension as if the man had continued to live. That would give occasion for an award in those cases where a married man, having been awarded a pension for disability exceeding 80 per cent, died and left a widow. There are not a very great number of those cases, although there are some. I have been on these pension committees since 1916 and I doubt if any other members of the committee have given more careful consideration than I have to the domestic problems that have arisen in reference to the war and to the pensionability of men. It is not a theory we have to face; it is a condition. I know, as a member of the Central Executive of the Patriotic Fund, and the member for St. Antoine (Sir Herbert Ames) knows as the organizer and chief force behind that Fund, that the war has thrown aside the veil from many a home of which otherwise we would not have known anything, and we have found that conditions existed that we little suspected. But, as I say, we are facing a condition, not a theory, and the question is, what is to be done in reference to the unmarried wives1-if, in order to be brief, I may use that objectionable term-whose husbands were killed or died in the war? The member for Maisonneuve (Mr. Lemieux) said there was provision in our law that made the relationship of a man who lived with a woman unmarried to her a crime against the law. If my recollection of the criminal law is correct, there is no provision in the Dominion criminal law, although there is in the criminal law of New

[Mr. Nickle.J

Brunswick, by which an adulterous relationship is made a crime. The hon. gentleman also directed the attention of the committee to the fact that a Bill was now before the Senate, and would shortly come before this House-

Topic:   QUESTIONS.
Subtopic:   PENSION ACT AMENDMENT.
Full View Permalink

June 30, 1919

Mr. NICKLE:

My hon. friend (Mr. J.

H. Sinclair) is, I think, incorrect in his assertion that if these sections pass in relation to the status of the unmarried wife, we shall have " thousands and tens of thousands " of applicants for pension under this provision. Only 60,000 men were killed overseas-a multitude, in fact, but only those women can make application for pension who were the wives of men who were killed or died, and the statistics will prove beyond possibility of contradiction that the proportion of married men to those who were unmarried would not permit tens of thousands of applications to be made. Of many of the applications that will * be made and in respect of which pensions will be granted, the domestic relationship was quite regular and no dispute or question could arise.

Topic:   QUESTIONS.
Subtopic:   PENSION ACT AMENDMENT.
Full View Permalink

June 30, 1919

Mr. NICKLE:

Topic:   QUESTIONS.
Subtopic:   PENSION ACT AMENDMENT.
Full View Permalink

June 30, 1919

Mr. NICKLE:

Yes.

Topic:   QUESTIONS.
Subtopic:   PENSION ACT AMENDMENT.
Full View Permalink