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 5 of 119)


June 28, 1919

Mr. NICKLE:

Oh, no.

Topic:   PENSION ACT AMENDMENT.
Full View Permalink

June 28, 1919

Mr. NICKLE:

Topic:   PENSION ACT AMENDMENT.
Full View Permalink

June 28, 1919

Air. NICKLE:

In such a case the first

wife would get the pension. The overseas woman with whom the soldier had gone through the form of marriage would not be awarded a pension, but the children would.

Topic:   PENSION ACT AMENDMENT.
Full View Permalink

June 28, 1919

Mr. NICKLE:

That is a long way outside the purport of the Bill. By the provisions of the Criminal Code, as I remember the law, a man who goes through a form of marriage outside of Canada cannot be prosecuted for bigamy, unless he left Canada with the intent to commit bigamy. As the great majority of the men who went overseas and committed bigamy did not leave Canada with that intent-or at least it cannot be so proved-they cannot be punished for bigamy on returning to this country.

Topic:   PENSION ACT AMENDMENT.
Full View Permalink

June 28, 1919

Mr. NICKLE:

We fnust face conditions as they were disclosed by this war. This war had not been going on for a year before the military departments were confronted, not by scores, but probably by hundreds of women who demanded separation allowance and who were unable to produce their marriage certificates because they had never been married to the men with whom they respectively were living. Years before a domestic relationship had been in existence; the man and the woman had simply gone and lived together, each to the other, although there had been no formal marriage, and children to the number of one, two, three, four and even five had been born. They had a respectable position in the community in which they lived, and nothing would have been known about the irregularity of their former life had not proof been requested whether or not they were married. When the casualties began to pour in, the same condition confronted us who are interested in this pension legislation. What was the status of these women to be? It is all very well to raise one's hands in holy horror and to say that these women should not be recognized and that they and their children should be permitted to starve; but it seems to me you have to go further than that, because if you are prepared to take the position that these women are not entitled to pensions, you simply drive on to. the streets, a woman, who has constantly and regularly been living with a man as his wife, to get a living in the only way she can get it, namely, by selling herself to the man who is willing to buy her. I am not prepared to take that position.

Topic:   PENSION ACT AMENDMENT.
Full View Permalink