Auguste Théophile LÉGER

LÉGER, Auguste Théophile

Personal Data

Kent (New Brunswick)
Birth Date
January 4, 1852
Deceased Date
October 28, 1923
farmer, lumber merchant

Parliamentary Career

December 17, 1917 - October 4, 1921
  Kent (New Brunswick)
December 6, 1921 - October 28, 1923
  Kent (New Brunswick)

Most Recent Speeches (Page 3 of 34)

May 19, 1922


I see an item here "Portage river-repairs to breakwater $1,200". In what county is Portage river?

Full View Permalink

May 19, 1922


Parish of Carleton, Kent


Full View Permalink

May 15, 1922

Mr. A. T. LEGER (Kent, N.B.):

In the interests of dairy and mixed farming in my constituency I am heartily in accord with this resolution. We are encouraging mixed farming and dairying in my part of the country as much as we can, and it is undoubtedly true that the importation and manufacture of oleomargarine is, to a certain extent, destructive of our farmers' efforts to raise more stock and more dairy products.


The subject matter of this resolution has been before the House for the last five or six years, and when, the first year after the war, the question of continuing the manufacture and importation of oleomargarine was considered, although, I believe, the majority of the people's representatives were opposed to such continuation, they felt that it would perhaps be better to extend the period for another year when conditions would be about normal.

No one can expect to make this House believe that any article containing a mixture of tallow and oil with a small amount of milk or cream is a good substitute for butter. I was amused to see the exMinister of Agriculture (Mr. Tolmie) produce a package of oleomargarine. The exterior looks fine, but, Sir, I do not believe he ever examined the inside of similar packages. I purchased a package on one occasion to satisfy my curiosity. I found the contents to be a greasy, oily looking mixture which I could not believe was fit for human consumption. But it is pressed on some poor people. I would not like to see my people use such a substitute for butter. I always like to see a poor man use good, substantial food, and not these unsatisfactory substitutes.

In stock raising we have to use the milk from our cows. I ask hon. members, would it be right for us to throw away the cream, as we would have to do, so that oleomargarine may take the place of our butter? I think not. Now that we are getting back to normal conditions there is no longer any necessity to import or to manufacture this stuff at the expense of our dairy and stock raising industry. Therefore I am strongly in favour of doing away with the further importation or manufacture of oleomargarine, and I shall have much pleasure in supporting this resolution.

Full View Permalink

May 11, 1922


I desire to support my hon. friend from Prince Edward Island (Mr. MacLean). I have heard many complaints in my own county against this law. As far back as a hundred years ago I understand there was no closed season for migratory birds, and to-day they are just as numerous as they were at that time, so I do not think there is any fear of their extermination by allowing our people to shoot a few in the spring season.

Full View Permalink

May 5, 1922


I would like on this item to put a few questions to the hon. minister with reference to the marine agencies in our part of the country. In the winter of 1918 the marine agencies in the maritime provinces, which since Confederation had been run on provincial lines, were changed, apparently by the Marine Department's officials, in a very arbitrary manner. The marine agency at St. John, which properly had control of all the aids to navigation in the province, had the whole of Baie des Chaleurs, Gulf of St. Lawrence and Northumberland Strait taken away from its jurisdiction; the latter district was transferred to the Prince Edward Island agency at Charlottetown and the Baie des Chaleurs agency was transferred to the Quebec district. I believe the change should not have been made; I would like to see each province have its own agencies. For instance, if anything happens in Kent county, or on the north shore district of New Brunswick, we have to get the agent from Charlottetown to come to that district. Now, some of the matters requiring attention are of a very trivial nature and a method of that kind is certainly not economical. I wish to read the following item bearing upon this matter which I took from a New Brunswick paper the other day:


Supply-Marine and Fisheries

W. H. Prowse, inspector of lighthouses, Charlottetown, crossed this week by the car ferry Steamer en route to Buctouche and Richi-bucto.

That is in my county.

At the former place he held an examination of applicants for the position of lightkeeper, the former keeper having died some time ago.

The holding of an examination for the position of lightkeeper is not a very difficult thing to do; it should not he necessary to have an inspector of lighthouses make a trip of that kind to carry out so trifling a duty. Besides, the cost is considerable. The clipping goes on:

At Richibuoto he will look into the matter of changing the Richibucto bar light, which change is necessary on account of the shifting of the channel.

This also, I am informed, is a trifling bit of work which almost any man around the district could do with satisfaction to the public. To my mind, the present system is an extravagance, and I would therefore ask the minister to look into this question with a view to providing each province with its own marine agency. It would give us a much better service. I hope the minister will bring back the old system that we had from Confederation down to a few years ago.

Full View Permalink