Cyrille DUMAINE

DUMAINE, Cyrille

Personal Data

Party
Liberal
Constituency
Bagot (Quebec)
Birth Date
July 8, 1897
Deceased Date
October 11, 1946
Website
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cyrille_Dumaine
PARLINFO
http://www.parl.gc.ca/parlinfo/Files/Parliamentarian.aspx?Item=ee64e57a-df38-4b28-9e3a-4c2f900c32a4&Language=E&Section=ALL
Profession
notary

Parliamentary Career

January 27, 1930 - May 30, 1930
LIB
  Bagot (Quebec)
July 28, 1930 - August 14, 1935
LIB
  Bagot (Quebec)

Most Recent Speeches (Page 4 of 6)


May 26, 1933

Mr. DUMAINE (Translation):

I will make an exception in the case of the Hon. Solicitor-General.

I mentioned a moment ago the part of Rou-ville that remained in Bagot and the hon. Minister of Marine asked me a question. Allow me to tell you frankly that in so far as I am personally concerned, in so far as the county of Bagot is concerned, I am satisfied that such part of Rouville should remain in the county of St. Hyacinthe-Bagot because they are fine agricultural parishes belonging to our district. I do not know why the hon. Minister of Marine should refuse to accept parishes like L'Ange-Gardien, St. Paul-d'Abbotsford, the village of Canrobert, the parish of St. Cesaire, also the village of St. Cesaire. They are old parishes founded more than a century ago. The people of those parishes are peaceful, well-to-do farmers, excellent citizens, and despite their separation from the remainder of the county we are proud to retain them in our midst.

Mr. Chairman, I do not want to speak at too great length. I have outlined practically all my grievances. I trust the Government will not request the adoption of the bill as presently submitted, I trust changes will be made, that families will be reunited, that so far as possible counties will be left as they are and that justice will be done to the province of Quebec, to both rural and urban representation.

Topic:   REDISTRIBUTION BILL
Full View Permalink

May 26, 1933

Mr. DUMAINE (Translation):

Mr. Chairman, the hon. minister of Marine has just made a statement in 'which he claims that redistribution as applied to St-Hyacinthie-Bagot and Ohambly-Rouville is very equitable. The county of Ohamibly-Vercheres had a population of 42,000 the same as the county of St-Hyaeinthe-Rouville. The hon. Minister of Marine claims that he cannot accept what remains of Rouville. Why did the committee not consider the fact that the hon. Minister of Marine withholds three parishes of the county of Vercheres; Beloeil, McMasterville and St-Julie-de-Vercheres? Why does the hon. Minister retain that part of the county of Vercheres when the committee was ready to annex it to the county of Richelieu? The county of Richelieu had a population of only

35,000. Why are parishes of Vercheres detached and added to Cham'bly-Rouville. I know the reason, Mr. Chairman; it is due to the fact that those three municipalities gave a Conservative majority.

Topic:   REDISTRIBUTION BILL
Full View Permalink

May 26, 1933

Mr. DUMAINE (Translation):

Nicolet

could have remained as it was; it had a sufficient population, even larger than the populations of Stanstead, Shefford, Dorchester and Compton which are left to the Conservatives.

Topic:   REDISTRIBUTION BILL
Full View Permalink

May 26, 1933

Mr. DUMAINE (Translation):

Certainly.

Topic:   REDISTRIBUTION BILL
Full View Permalink

May 26, 1933

Mr. DUMAINE (Translation):

Certainly.

Topic:   REDISTRIBUTION BILL
Full View Permalink