THE SENATE. Ottawa, Thursday, March 30th, 1882. holders The SPEAKER took the Chair at Three p.m. Prayers and routine proceedings. Certain by-laws are attached to the Bill INSOLVENT BANKS AND INSUR in the schedule, and these by-laws are de- HON. MR. MACFARLANE-I quite concur in the remarks of the hon. Minister of Justice. I have not looked into the Bill as I have only taken charge of it since it came up from the Commons at I have no doubt the request of a friend. when it goes before the Private Bills Committee the points raised by my hon. friend will be carefully enquired into. ANCE COMPANIES BILL. REPORTED FROM COMMITTEE. He said: This Bill HON. SIR ALEX. CAMPBELL presented the report of the Select Committee to whom was referred Bill (A) "An Act respecting Insolvent Banks, Insurance Companies, and Trading Corporations," with amendments. has received a great deal of attention at the hands of the Select Committee to whom it was referred, and in consequence of the number of changes that have been made, I thought it desirable, in order that the House may have a clear comprehension of it, that it should be reprinted. That has been done, and the amended Bill has been distributed. I now move that the Bill be referred to a committee of the whole House on Monday next. The motion was agreed to. SASKATCHEWAN DIOCESAN REPORTED FROM COMMITTEE. HON. MR. BELLEROSE, from the Committee on Standing Orders and Private Bills, reported, without amendThe motion was agreed to and the Bill ment, Bill (51), "An Act to incorporate was read the second time. HON. MR. MACFARLANE moved that the Bill be referred to the standing committee on Private Bills. the Synod of the Diocese of Saskatchewan, and for other purposes connected therewith." HON. MR. VIDAL-There being no amendments to this Bill, I beg to move HON. MR. DICKEY suggested that that it be read the third time presently. the Bill be referred to the Committee on Banking and Commerce as it related strictly to a commercial matter. The suggestion was adopted. The Senate adjourned at 5.45 p.m. HON. MR. DICKEY-On the second reading of this Bill I took occasion to call the attention of the Committee to whom it was referred to the extraordinary provisions which it contained, and I should like to have some explanation of the reason why my suggestions were not con The motion was agreed to. SUN LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY. THIRD READING. HON. MR. ALLAN, from the Standing Committee on Banking and Commerce, reported, without amendment, Bill (4), "An Act respecting the Sun Mutual Life Insurance Company, of Montreal." sidered; especially as my hon. friend may be looked into, and I may be able to (Mr. Vidal) himself said that he entirely reply to them. concurred in my opinions, and assured the House that they should receive every attention at the hands of the Committee. I must say that it is to me a novel principle of legislation altogether that this House should be called upon to sanction these Church courts, and their decisions as to the important matter of depriving a man of his living and divesting him of his sacred office-it is a novel principle that they should be incorporated in the legislation of this country. I speak strongly on this subject, because my hon. friend on my right (Mr. Archibald) and I were both members of a legislature where it was carefully considered, and where it was recognized as a vicious principle which ought not be admitted into our legislation with regard to a church which is not established in this country, and only stands on the same footing as other denominations. HON. MR. VIDAL-I called the special attention of the committee to this particular clause, and, also, took the HON. MR. RYAN moved the third reading of the Bill. The motion was agreed to, and the Bill was read the third time and passed. PLANTERS' BANK BILL. THIRD READING. HON. MR. ALLAN, from the Standing Committee on Banking and Commerce, reported Bill (52), “An Act to incorporate the Planters' Bank of Canada," with an amendment, which he explaired was not of any importance. HON. MR. OGILVIE moved concurrence in the amendment. The motion was agreed to, and the Bill trouble to invite over to attend the committee the hon. gentleman who had charge of the Bill in the House of Commons. He very kindly came over, and explained to the committee very fully all the provisions of the Bill, clearly was then read the third time and passed. showing that there was nothing new or unusual in the wording of the clausethat it was simply a transcript of the clause as it exists in the former Act. It was, therefore, considered unnecessary to make any amendments to the Bill. However, if my hon. friend really wishes the third reading to be postponed for any purpose, I certainly shall not press it now. MUTUAL LIFE ASSOCIATION BILL ́ HON. MR. DICKEY-I do think it is the general sense of the House, the principle is so unusual. Although, it may have crept into former legislation, there is no reason why we should keep it up any more than we should keep up the amalgamation clauses which have been struck out of bills during the present session. HON. MR. VIDAL-Then, I beg to move that the third reading of this bill be fixed for Monday next, and I hope the hon. gentleman will let us have the advantage of his objections, in order that they THIRD READING. HON. MR. ALLAN, from the Standing Committee on Banking and Commerce, reported Bill (27), "An Act further to Life Association of Canada, and to change amend the Act incorporating the Mutual the name thereof to the 'Life Association " with an amendment, which, of Canada,' he explained, was unimportant. HON. MR. HOPE moved concurrence in the amendment. The motion was agreed to, and the Bill was then read the third time and passed. CHARTERED BANK OF LONDON REPORTED FROM COMMITTEE. HON. MR. ALLAN, from the Standing Committee on Banking and Commerce reported Bill (28) "An Act to amend the Charter of the Chartered Bank of London and North America, and to change the name thereof to the Chartered Bank of London and Winnipeg with certain amendments." HON. MR. GIBBS moved that the amendments be taken into consideration to-morrow. The motion was agreed to. MILITARY BARRACKS AT INQUIRY. HON. MR. GIRARD inquired: What measures has the Government seen fit to take in order to afford shelter for the numerous settlers who are expected to be on their way this spring to Manitoba and the North-West? And would it not be advisable to place the military barracks at Fort Osborne, within the limits of the City of Winnipeg, or such portions of the said barracks as are not needed by the Government, at the disposal of the local authorities of Winnipeg for that purpose? Also what does the Government intend to do with these buildings? He said I make this inquiry in view of the numbers of people who are arriving in Winnipeg every day, and I am desirous I have not Mars, or public square. heard whether the Government has done anything yet towards the improvement of Here is an what will be perhaps the largest city in the west before many years. opportunity to do something for the improvement of Winnipeg. Without further comment I beg to put my question, and I am sure that the answer will be favorable to the people of Winnipeg. HON. SIR ALEX. CAMPBELL-In reply to the question of my hon. friend I beg to say that the Government does intend to place the barracks at Fort Osborne at the disposal of the immigrants who are arriving at Winnipeg, for the purpose of assisting to meet the difficulties that are felt there in consequence of the very large number of daily arrivals. I do not say that the barracks will be handed over to the local authorities for the purpose, for we have the means of doing it without that, but the barracks will be put at the disposal of the immigrants, and instructions will be forwarded to that effect. MARRIAGE WITH A DECEASED DEBATE CONTINUED. The order of the day having been called to get information from the Government for resuming the adjourned Debate on if possible, as to what steps will be taken the Hon. Mr. Bellerose's motion in amendto provide for their accommodation. From ment to the Hon. Mr. Ferrier's motion a thousand to twelve hundred persons are for the second reading of the Bill (No. 9) arriving daily in Winnipeg, and there is no-Deceased Wife's Sister Marriage Bill.The hotels are viz., to leave out "now" and after "time" place to receive them. full, and many are camped in tents around to insert "this day six months." the city, exposed to the inclemency of the HON. SIR ALEX. CAMPBELL said: weather. It has occurred to me that it might be possible to place the barracks Although I moved the adjournment of the under the control of the local authorities. debate the other night on this Bill, I had I do not know how far it is possible to do no intention of doing so with reference to so, but if it can be done, it will render my making an address to the House a very great service to the population flow-myself. It was rather with the view of It is to the interest adjourning the debate for the purpose of ing into Manitoba. of the country that the settlers who arrive enabling others to speak; but I desire there should be treated with care and at- now to say one or two words, not so much tention if possible. I also ask what the on the measure itself as on some of the Government intend to do with this build- circumstances which have attended its presing. My opinion is that in the course of ence here, and I will take advantage of my next summer it will be in one of the most motion to make these observations. aristocratic quarters of Winnipeg, and that the first place, I desire to say a word or it should be sold when it can be disposed two with reference to the objection taken of to advantage. The land could be by my hon. friend the Senator from kept and converted into a Champs de DeLanaudière (Mr. Bellerose), and which In induced him to make the motion which since, and under which we are now sitting, is immediately before the House-that is, did not realize the expectations which the motion that the Bill be not now read, but were held out on that occasion, by the that it be read this day six months. The Government, with reference to it. All hon. gentleman explained to us that he was that I need say upon that point I think is driven by conscientious motives into this: that the time at which these expresmaking that proposition, on account of sions of belief were uttered has gone by his conviction that this Parliament had and we are now to deal, not with what not jurisdiction to deal with this subject, was then expected, but with what has and he proceeded to enforce that view not since taken place. We cannot now interby means of the Confederation Act, pret the British North American Act of which governs our powers and controls 1867, by referring to what was said by inour deliberations, but by reference dividuals either speaking for themselves to a circumstance that had taken place or on behalf of the Government of a time before that Act had become law. anterior to that Act, but he must interpret That circumstance was a debate which it by reference to the language which it took place at the time in the Legislative contains. I do not understand for my Assembly of the old Province of Canada, own part that the Hon. Sir Hector Langeand in which certain declarations were vin, who uttered these sentiments has demade by a gentleman who was then a parted in any way from the pledge which member of the Government, speaking for he then gave, or that he or Sir George himself and on behalf of the Government. Cartier, who attended the London conIn those remarks he held out the expecta-ference, in the least drew back from the tion that the legislation which was then in position which they took. But my hon. contemplation, for the purpose of confed- friend from DeLanaudière (Mr. Bellerose) erating the Provinces, would, with refer- must bear in mind that the British North ence to this subject, not contain provisions America Act may have received a differwhich are now used for the purpose of ent interpretation from that which Sir enabling the House to deal with questions Hector Langevin expected from it at the of this kind. I think I am stating the time that he assented to it in London. It hon. gentleman's proposition correctly. would have been very difficult probably to The speech to which he made immediate have used any other language than that reference, was delivered on that occasion which is found in it, and the right to deal by a gentleman who is a member of the with marriage and divorce must be vested present Government-Sir Hector Lange- somewhere, either in the Parliament of vin-and in the course of his remarks the Dominion or in the legislatures he is reported to have stated that the of the separate provinces. My hon. Act of Confederation (he was speaking friend from DeLanaudière (Mr. Bellerose) before it became law) would contain must not forget that there are other provprovisions with reference to Marriage inces besides Quebec where the same conand Divorce, but, as regards the first ditions do not obtain, and where it might part of the subject, only so far as to be much more difficult to keep legislation indicate that a marriage in one upon this subject within what I might call part of the Dominion should be valid in discreet limits than in the province of all parts of this country. He said it would Quebec; and that in the London Conferalso contain some other provisions of a ence all these provinces were protected. kindred character, which he described, Therefore it was not exclusively the desire but would not make provision for such or wish of Quebec that could be considlegislation as is now contemplated. When ered or her exclusive usages that could be that speech was made, language was used provided for; but it was necessary to concalling attention to the existing state of sider the feelings, views and prejudices— the laws in the old province of Canada, if I may so say-of all the provinces of and either Sir Hector Langevin or another the Dominion, and in consequence the member of the Government said that the language which is found in the British law as it stood then established would North America Act may have been used. remain; and therefore my hon. friend I dare say, from what I know of the frank from DeLanaudière (Mr. Bellerose) states disposition of my deceased hon. friend, that the legislation which has resulted Sir George Cartier, and from my know ledge of Sir Hector Langevin, that it has left for consideration that the whole been used in a sense which they them-act is one giving all power not selves-speaking for for Lower Canada, expressed to the general legislature, and and Lower Canadians-may pos-on that principle there was an intended, sibly not have expected; but of and as far as it could be made, a marked that I cannot speak positively. I think, departure from the principle on which the undoubtedly, as regards the Act itself, constitution of the United States was every one will say that the right to deal framed. There, wherever the constituwith this subject is left with the Parlia- tion is silent the power belongs to the ment of the Dominion. It says in so States; here whenever the constitution many words that the question of marriage does not expressly give power to the Local and divorce is an attribute of this Parlia- Legislatures it is vested in this Parliament. ment, and it says equally clearly that the Then I say the power to deal with marsolemnization of matrimony, as distinct riage and divorce is not given expressly to from marriage and divorce, is an attribute the Local Legislature, therefore it is left of the local legislatures. But irrespective with this Parliament, and I say moreover of that my hon. friend, if one may judge that the power to deal with marriage and from his remarks, seems to suppose that divorce is left expressly with this legislasome stress must be laid upon the words ture, and I do not think that upon the "civil rights" which always were given to matter itself the right of jurisdictionthe local legislatures. The matter then there can be any serious doubt, at least stood in this way, that not only the there is none to my mind. I desire, howsolemnization of matrimony, but civil ever, to speak always with deference to rights, were given to the local legislatures. the judgment and the views of others. This is true of civil rights in a general This very question was submitted to sense, but they are limited by those powers the high authority of the English Law which were given to the general Parlia- Officers of the Crown some eight or ten ment; because there are a score of attri- years ago, and with reference to it, these butes given tothe general Parliament which involve civil rights in one direction or another, as for instance the regulation of trade and commerce, census and statistics, military and naval service, navigation and shipping, currency and coinage, banking and savings banks, bankruptcy and insolvency, naturalization of aliens, copyrights; all these subjects involved civil rights and where the expression "civil rights" is used as showing the powers given to the Local Legislatures, you must take it subject to the other language used, and subject to the general effect of all the language found in the Act. If we take it in that sense then the meaning of the language that jurisdiction in matters relating to civil rights is given to the Local Legislatures must be taken as it may be limited by reference to all the attributes that are given to the Federal Parliament, and therefore, with proper deference to the views expressed by other hon. gentlemen upon this subject, I do not think that the expression "civil rights" adds anything to the argument, and notwithstanding the expression "civil rights" and notwithstanding the expression" solemnization of marriage "the question of divorce is left to this Parliament. Then this other fact is Law Officers of the Crown, who are almost always gentlemen of high legal authority, on this particular question of jurisdiction used the following language: "Marriage and Divorce' which by the 91st section of the same Act are reserved to the Parliament of the Dominion, signify in their opinion, all matters relating to the status of marriage, between what persons and under (if at all) destroyed. There are many reasons of convenience and sense, why one law as to the status of marriage shall exist throughout the Dominion, which have no application as regards the uniformity of the procedure whereby that status is created or evidenced. Convenience, indeed, and reason would seem alike in favor of a difference of procedure being allowable in provinces differing so widely in external and internal ciris composed, and of permitting the provinces cumstances, as those of which the Dominion to settle their own procedure for themselves; and they are of opinion that this permission has been granted to the provinces by the Imperial Parliament, and that the New Bruns wick legislature was competent to pass the Bill in question." what circumstances it shall be created and So that there the opinion of very eminent men of the legal profession is given in express terms that this power of dealing with marriage and divorce rests with this Parliament and the power of dealing with |