Mr. BORDEN:

The Bill was passed with the exception of the third section. It has been suggested by my right hon. friend that the Bill might be amended with advantage by striking out the word 'three' in the eighth line of subsection 3 of sectioi 7 of the present Bill and substituting therefor a larger amount. I have communicated with the commission, and I find that all the purposes which were in mind would be fulfilled by another amendment along the line suggested. I therefore move to strike out the third section of this Bill and to substitute the following section:

Subsection 3 of section 7 of the said Act is amended by striking out the word ' three ' in the eighth line and substituting therefor the word ' six.'

Sir WILFRID LAURIER:

That makes

it $6,000.

Mr. BORDEN:

Yes.

Section as amended agreed to.

Bill reported, read the third time and passed.

Mr. BORDEN:

The basis for this legislation is chapter 32 of the Statutes of Canada, 1912. That is the Act providing for the extension of the boundaries of the province of Manitoba. Section 7 reads as follows:

The province shall continue to be represented in the Senate of Canada by four members; provided that such representation may, after the completion of the decennial census of June, nineteen hundred and eleven, be from time to time increased to six by the Parliament of Canada.

There is a similar provision in the Alberta and Saskatchewan Acts. The resolutions with regard to those provinces are also on the Order Paper.

Sir WILFRID LAURIER:

I did not know that this matter was coming up to-day, so I shall have to speak from memory, as 1 have not here some .authorities which 1 had collected.

Mr. BORDEN:

We can let the resolution stand.

Sir WILFRID LAURIER:

I will give my right hon. friend my objections, and he can give me his answer now or later on. In so far as the provinces of Alberta and . Saskatchewan are concerned, there is, in my judgment, no reason at all to question the authority of this Parliament to make the proposed 'addition to their representation in the Senate. That authority is to be found in the British North America Act of 1871. I have not the Act before me, but I know the provisions fairly well. It provides that we can create new provinces under such conditions as Parliament shall determine. In the Acts creating the provinces of Alberta and Saskatchewan we incorporated a provision to the effect that those provinces should be represented by a certain number of Senators, four I think, and that on a subsequent date after the next census, then that representation could be increased to the number of six.

Therefore, in so far as those provinces should be represented by a certain number of Senators, four I think, and that on a subsequent date after the next census, then that representation could be increased to the boundaries of Manitoba we inserted a provision jto the effect that the representation of the province of Manitoba in the upper chamber might be increased from its present number to six. But if this Parliament *had not the authority then, the proposed resolution-could not give that authority, and I do not find in the Act of 1871 any provision to increase the representation 'in the Senate except when we create a new province. Extending the boundaries of a province does not give us the authority. My contention is that the authority which my right hon. friend is trying to exercise must be found in Imperial legislation, and that Imperial legislation is contained in the Act of 1867 or in the Act of 1871. There is another Act, that of 1886, to which I shall refer later on, but for the present I rest my objection altogether on .the Act of 1871, which is .in these words:

The Parliament of Canada may, from time to time, establish new provinces in any territories forming for the time being part of the Dominion of Canada, but not included in any province thereof, and may, at the time of such establishment, make provision for the constitution and administration of any province, and for the passing of laws for the peace, order and good government of such province, and for its representation in the said Parliament.

This is the authority by which we can create new provinces. The terms are so broad as to moke it beyond question that we have the power to give to the new provinces almost any powers. In regard to alteration of the boundaries of a province, the next section says:

The Parliament of Canada, may, from time to time, with the consent of the legislature of any province of the said Dominion, increase, diminish or otherwise alter the limits of such province, upon such terms and conditions as may be agreed to by the said legislature, and may, with the like consent, make provision respecting the effect and operation of any such increase or diminution or alteration of territory in relation to any province affected thereby.

I apprehend that under such conditions we can alter the limits of .any province with the consent of the province itself. But I see nothing in this which goes so far -as to say that in making these alterations we have .the power of amending the Confederation Act to the extent of modifying the representation of the province either in this House or in the Senate. The point

[Sir Wilfrid "Laurier 1

I wish to make is this, that so far as the provinces of Alberta and Saskatchewan are cone erne d we have the authority, and my right hon. friend is quite within his rights in asking that their representation in the Senate shall be increased; but so far as the province of Manitoba is concerned, I do not know that this Parliament has that power, which, I think, is vested completely in the Imperial Parliament.

Mr. BORDEN:

My right hon. friend has brought to my attention .a question which was under consideration before .the Bill was introduced, .and I may say to him that it was submitted to the Deputy Minister of Justice, who has advised that it is competent for this Parliament to .increase the representation of Manitoba in the Senate to six. I will explain briefly the reason for that, .and I shall be glad to go into it more elaborately when the Bill is in committee. Just now I will only indicate what the position is according to the opinion of the Deputy Minister of Justice, which seems to me well founded. The British North America Act, 1886, contained this recital:

Whereas it is expedient to empower the Parliament of Canada to provide for the representation in the Senate and House of Commons of Canada, or either of them, of any territory which for the time being forms part of the Dominion of Canada, but is not included in any province:

Be it therefore enacted

and so forth, that:

1. The Parliament of Canada may, from time to time, make provision for the representation in the Senate and House of Commons of Canada, or in either of them, of any territories which for the time being form part of the Dominion of Canada, but are not included in any province thereof.

2. Any Act passed by the Parliament of Canada before the passing of this Act for the purpose mentioned in this Act shall, if not disallowed by the Queen, be, and shall be deemed to have been valid and effectual from the date at which it received the assent, in Her Majesty's name, of the Governor General of Canada.

It is hereby declared that any Act passed by the Parliament of Canada, whether before or after the passing of this Act, for the purpose mentioned in this Act or in the British North America Act, 1871, has effect, notwithstanding anything in the British North America Act, 1867, and the number of senators or the number of members of the House of Commons specified in the last-mentioned Act is increased by the number of senators or of members, as the case may be, provided by any such Act of the Parliament of Canada for the representation of any provinces or territories of Canada.

As I understand the view of the Deputy Minister of Justice, as it has been expressed

in a short memorandum, it is that under the authority of the Act of 1886, when territories not previously included in any province and not represented in the Senate or House of Commons, are added to a province it is competent to make provision for their representation either in one House or the other and that, inasmuch as a very large territory was added to the province of Manitoba by the Act of 1912, it is considered competent, under the provisions of the Imperial Act of 1886, which I have just quoted, to provide for additional representation and that sucli provision may be made by this House. That is, shortly speaking, the view entertained by the Department of Justice.

Sir WILFRID LAURIER:

The opinion

of Mr. Newcombe is certainly entitled to great weight and authority and therefore I will defer an expression of my own view with regard to it until I have had an opportunity of looking at it more carefully. I suppose that my right hon. friend will pat it on the Table of the House so that we can have it?

Mr. BORDEN:

Yes.

Sir WILFRID LAURIER:

But I would

observe that the Imperial Act of 1886 was passed to empower this Parliament to give representation to the Northwest Territories. That Act was passed shortly after the rebellion of 1885. One of the grievances of the native population of the Northwest at that time was that they were not represented in this House. We passed a Bill to provide for their representation, not only in this House but in the Upper Chamber also. The Imperial Act was passed to validate whatever was done, or might be done, in this respect by the Parliament of Canada. The expressions quoted by my hon. friend from that Act are very broad and are to the effect that the Imperial Parliament authorizes what has been done and what may hereafter be done by the Parliament of Canada. This provision is certainly very broad, but it cannot be. extended, in my humble opinion, beyond the things which were contemplated at that time. If we were to give it such extension as has been suggested oy my right hon. friend, this Parliament would be able to give increased representation to the province of Quebec, and also to the province of Ontario in the Upper Chamber. We increased the territory of the province of Quebec last year and now it is the largest province in the Dominion, we made Ontario also a very large province and to-day, if this interpretation is to be taken in such a broad sense as my right hon. friend has

stated to be the opinion of Mr. Newcombe, you could increase not only the representation of Manitoba, but the representation of Ontario and Quebec and alter completely the whole basis of representation in the Upper Chamber. By the Act of Confederation the Upper Chamber was given a certain basis of representation while this Chamber was given another basis of representation. In this Chamber the representation was based on population, but in the Upper Chamber the basis of representation was arbitrary.

It was fixed by law and it was supposed to be permanent. Nobody contemplated, or could have contemplated, when Ontario was given a representation of twenty-four in the Senate, when Quebec was given a representation of twenty-four in the Upper Chamber, when the Maritime provinces were limited to a representation of twenty-four, which representation could not be increased because their territory could not be increased, that, in consequence of a possible addition to the territory of Ontario or Quebec, the basis of the representation of these provinces in the Upper Chamber might thereby be altered. The consequences seem to be extremely grave in their character and I doubt if the Deputy Minister of Justice has given that part of the case the attention which it deserves, because if my opinion on his interpretation is right, it means that to-day we can increase the representation not only of Manitoba, but of Ontario and Quebec. That seems to me to be altogether beyond anything that was ever in the contemplation of the makers of the Constitution. I quite realize that when we gave-representation to the Territories we should give them representation in the Upper Chamber. That was quite proper and the Imperial Parliament authorized and ratified it, but that it should be taken to mean an extension of our jurisdiction such as my hon. friend seems to suggest, is in my opinion, rather a forced interpretation to give to the Act.

Mr. BORDEN:

I can hardly agree with my right hon. friend that the interpretation which he has invoked is one that can be profitably employed, because I think I can show him that all of the evils which he has portrayed so vividly and forcibly could arise under legislation that he himself admits to be valid. There is no dispute, as 1 understand his point of view, that Parliament possesses that power in regard to Alberta and Saskatchewan.

Sir WILFRID LAURIER:

That is true.

Mr. BORDEN:

You can never argue effectively as to the construction of a statute t>y contending that the powers thereby conferred may be abused.

Mr. A. K. MACLEAN:

Except for this reason, that once an Act is passed constituting either a territory or a province, that Act becomes part of the British North America Act and this Parliament has no power to amend it.