James ARTHURS

ARTHURS, The Hon. Lt. Col. James

Personal Data

Party
Conservative (1867-1942)
Constituency
Parry Sound (Ontario)
Birth Date
October 4, 1866
Deceased Date
October 7, 1937
Website
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_Arthurs
PARLINFO
http://www.parl.gc.ca/parlinfo/Files/Parliamentarian.aspx?Item=ffc0d86c-0b49-4d02-97fa-af4c40b96369&Language=E&Section=ALL
Profession
gentleman, merchant

Parliamentary Career

October 26, 1908 - July 29, 1911
CON
  Parry Sound (Ontario)
September 21, 1911 - October 6, 1917
CON
  Parry Sound (Ontario)
December 17, 1917 - October 4, 1921
UNION
  Parry Sound (Ontario)
December 6, 1921 - September 5, 1925
CON
  Parry Sound (Ontario)
October 29, 1925 - July 2, 1926
CON
  Parry Sound (Ontario)
September 14, 1926 - May 30, 1930
CON
  Parry Sound (Ontario)
July 28, 1930 - August 14, 1935
CON
  Parry Sound (Ontario)

Most Recent Speeches (Page 1 of 296)


June 18, 1935

Mr. ARTHURS:

What about the dead

ones?

Topic:   DOMINION FRANCHISE ACT
Subtopic:   EVIDENCE IN APPEAL TO JUDGE FROM RULING OP REGISTRAR OP ELECTORS
Full View Permalink

June 6, 1935

Mr. ARTHURS:

What amount, if any, has been spent for the opening of an airport at or near Emsdale, at or near South River and at Lake Two Rivers, project 144 (a) for land; (b) for

salaries and wages; (e) other expenditures; (d) board and clothing; (e) what is average number of men employed?

Topic:   AIRPORT PROJECT EXPENDITURES
Full View Permalink

June 3, 1935

Mr. ARTHURS:

I rise to a point of order. I have listened very attentively to this debate, and I would submit that it is entirely out of order, the item before the committee being "fair wages and inspection" under the Fair Wages Act. Under that act the government has control only of wages on public works-

Topic:   DEPARTMENT OF LABOUR
Full View Permalink

June 3, 1935

Mr. ARTHURS:

-not on post offices or anything of that kind. That is controlled by the Post Office Department.

Topic:   DEPARTMENT OF LABOUR
Full View Permalink

May 28, 1935

Mr. ARTHURS:

Before the bill passes to

a further stage I should like to say a few words. As it was first introduced and brought before the banking and commerce committee I found myself opposed to certain clauses. Now however I am just as much in favour of the clauses in the present bill. It seems to me ridiculous that including costs any man should be charged rates of 10 per cent or 12 per cent upon money which is rightly his. These loans are made only upon the surrender value of an insurance policy. If he chose, a man could surrender the policy and accept the money. On the other hand he may choose to borrow a few dollars for the purpose of keeping his policy in force or for other reasons, and in the past he has been charged seven per cent and in many cases much more. I say there is no security so ample as that given by the borrower; it is surer than Dominion of Canada bonds because, as I previously stated, the policyholder is borrowing his own money. The insurance companies are most anxious to keep it that way; they do not wish to have policies surrendered, and at the same time they are attempting to secure much greater interest than they could possibly secure from the best securities they hold. I am in favour of the reduction in the rate of interest, and would1 be content to vote for even a larger reduction.

Topic:   FOREIGN INSURANCE COMPANIES
Full View Permalink