I think the dropping of
this preamble by the Senate is of more moment than my hon. friend suggests. One of the points in the preamble to which strong objection was and ought to be taken is that the upper chamber presumed to speak for the government. Let me read the preamble:
Whereas certain creditors of the Home Bank of Canada have by their petition to the Governor in Council represented that they have, by the suspension of that bank, sustained serious losses which they are ill able to bear, and have prayed that pecuniary aid may be afforded them on the grounds of commiseration and of an alleged moral responsibility of the government of Canada, for the causes of sudh losses; and whereas such responsibility is not admitted, but it is expedient to afford pecuniary aid to certain of the said creditors as provided, by this act: Therefore His Majesty, by and with the advice and consent of the Senate and House of Commons of Canada, enacts as follows:
With that amendment inserted, the position of the Senate would be confirmed that they practically had a right really to initiate a money bill on behalf of the government. I say that to get the consent of the Senate to remove that preamble altogether was a very long step towards the contention of this House as presented to the Senate in the objections raised by this House to the acceptance of the amendment.
Topic: WAYS AND MEANS
Subtopic: HOME BANK DEPOSITORS