Bill (No. 87) To incorporate the Arnprior and Pontiac Railway Company.-Mr. Hod-gins.
LEWIS moved for leave to introduce Bill (No. 88) respecting assaults and offences against the person.
Explain.
Mr. LEWIS.
Mr. Speaker, this Bill has reference to crimes that now, unfortunately, are too prevalent throughout the whole of Canada. There is no one within sound of my voice but will admit that there has been a strange laxity in the punishment of offenders against the person while those frequently found pilfering a small sum of money with which to purchase something to eat are punished too severely. The purpose of the Bill is to increase the punishment of tramps or others who commit offences against the person and to take proper care of persons dangerous to be at large. We must recollect that twenty years have elapsed since the Criminal Code was first made law in this country. Times have changed, our circumstances have altered and our population has increased. Throughout this fair Canada of ours crimes against the person of a very objectionable character are rampant. The murderer, the burglar, ravisher, the assaulter, gets off with a small punishment. Unfortunately there is a practice prevailing which is not calculated to mitigate this condition. A tramp who is arrested in a certain county is allowed his liberty by the magistrate on condition that he goes into another county within so many hours.
In the recent Stratford case, where the negro broke into the house and murdered a woman after assaulting her, the negro had been arrested three times within one week before the murder, but had been allowed to go by different magistrates on condition that he removed into another county. The seventh clause of this Bill prohibits a magistrate from allowing a criminal, a vagrant, an idle or a dissolute person to go free on condition that he leaves the county. It also provides that where a vagrant, an idle or a dissolute person has been convicted a second time he shall be sent to a prison or penitentiary provided by the province in which he is charged, there to be detained at hard labour until the inspector certifies that from his course in the penitentiary or from his having learned a trade there, he is, in the opinion of the inspector, able and willing to earn an honest living and not be a menace to -his fellows. Where a prisoner, after being liberated, in that way, commits another offence, then in addition to the punishment for that offence, he shall be sentenced to from five to ten years in the penitentiary. Tallack, on the Law of Crime, distinctly lays down that the first act of violence predisposes to a criminal disposition, and that where a person has 1 Mr. SPEAKER.
been convicted three times he should be treated as incorrigible and kept where he will not be a menace to his fellow men. Clause 6 authorizes the nolice to search tramps, idle and dissolute persons for weapons and prescribe punishments
Motion agreed to, and Bill read the first time.
BRODEUR (Minister of Marine and Fisheries) moved for leave to introduce Bill (No. 89) to amend the Government Harbours and Piers Act.
He said: The object of this Bill is to
provide for the leasing of breakwaters, wharfs and piers which are under the control of the Department of Marine and Fisheries, to municipal corporations or railways or shipping companies. The existing law provides that municipal corporations may become the lessees of wharfs. There is no provision as far as shipping companies and railway companies are concerned, and it has been thought advisable that they should have the power to lease wharfs. As a matter of fact such a power exists before the wharfs and piers and transferred to the Department of Marine and Fisheries. There is a provision in the Public Works Act declaring that these wharfs and piers may be leased to shipping and railway companies and to municipal corporations. The present Bill is simply an extension of this power granted under the Public Works Act to the Department of Marine and Fisheries.
The second clause provides for the commuting of wharfage rates. The collection of the small wharfage fees on some of these . minor wharfs becomes a very serious difficulty for the department. We think that if we had the power to commute the fees with the shipping companies it would give us a larger revenue than we now receive.
Motion agreed to, and the Bill read the first time.
1. Who is the collector of customs at Oshawa harbour, and what is his salary?
2. What revenue has been collected at the port of Oshawa each year since it was taken over by the government, and from what sources was the revenue derived?
3. In addition to the salary of the collector, what other expenses have been incurred by the government each year in connection therewith since taking over the port?
i. What representations were made to induce the government to invest in the harbour ?
1. George F. Blarney is Collector of Customs at Oshawa. Salary $1,200 a year.
Mr. HUGHES.
Will the balance of the question stand?
Mr. SPEAKER.
Yes.
Mr. COWAN-by Mr. Taylor-asked: 1. Did the hon. the Minister of the Interior on or about the 18th of October, 1908, receive from W. W. B. Mclnnes a telegram in the words or to the effect of the words following: ' Indian reserve at Kitsilano is within city limits. Have assured electors government would consent to transfer reserve to city for park purposes if other parties consenting. Please wire me if you will consent.' 2. Is so, did the minister reply to the above telegram in the following words: ' Yours of 18th received. Will be glad to arrange as desired regarding Kitsilano reserve provided arrangements can also be made with Indians and provincial government.' 3. If not, what is his reply? 4. Is the government still willing to transfer Kitsilano reserve to the city of Vancouver if arrangements are made with the Indians and the provincial government?
1. Yes.
2. Yes.
3. Answered by No. 2.
4. In view of the more recent action of the provincial government in contesting the right of Indians to the land comprised in reserves in that province, it is not considered advisable that any promises should be made at present as to future action by the Dominion government as guardian of the rights of the Indians.