Hon. S. C. MEWBURN (East Hamilton) presented the first report of the Select Standing Committee on Canadian National Railways and Shipping. He said: Mr. Speaker, with the consent of the House, I move, seconded by Hon. Mr. Reid, that the Select Standing Committee on Canadian National Railways and Shipping be granted leave to sit while the House is in session, and that they be authorized to have the proceedings and such evidence as may be taken, printed from day to day, for the use of the members of the committee; and that Rule 74 relating thereto be suspended, in accordance with the report of the committee submitted this day.
Mr. SPEAKER:
In the absence of notice, this motion requires unanimous consent. Is it the pleasure of the House to adopt the motion?
Motion agreed to.
Orders in Council establishing regulations under section 17 of the Proprietary and Patent Medicines Act.-Hon. Mr. Calder.
Right Hon. C. J. DOHERTY (Minister of Justice) moved for leave to introduce Bill No. 72 to amend the Winding-up Act.
Mr. JACOBS:
Please explain.
Mr. DOHERTY:
The Bill is introduced at the instance of the Statistical Branch of the Department of Trade and Commerce.
It contains two provisions, one providing for the preparation by the liquidator under the Winding-up Act of a statement of assets and liabilities, the second requiring him to furnish detailed information, including that statement, for the use of the Statistical Branch.
Motion agreed to, and Bill read the first time.
Right Hon. C. J. DOHERTY (Minister of Justice) moved for leave to introduce Bill No. 73 to authorize the ratification and carrying into effect of the protocol of the sixteenth day of December, 1920, accepting the statute for the Permanent Court of International Justice of the thirteenth day of December, 1920.
Mr. MACKENZIE KING:
The minister might explain this Bill.
Mr. DOHERTY:
The Bill contains two clauses. The first provides for the ratification of the protocol referred to, and the other confers power to do such things as may be necessary to carry it out. The Assembly at Geneva unanimously assented to the proposed plan for the creation of a Permanent Court of International Justice, under the provisions of the Treaty and the Covenant of the League, in virtue whereof a plan had been prepared; and it was provided that the Council of the League should submit such a plan for adoption by the pations who are members of the League. While there was some difference of opinion upon the question, the view was entertained by a large portion of the representatives- I may say, the Canadian representatives shared in that view-that it was not competent for the representatives in the Assembly to assent on behalf of their respective countries to the adoption of the plan submitted. They were all satisfied with it, but took the view that the provisions of the Covenant required submission of the plan to the members of the League themselves, that is to say, the various nations, and adoption by them. Pursuant to this view, a protocol was drawn up for signature by the different nations through their representatives, which protocol was made subject to ratification by the nations signing. Canada has signed the protocol subject to ratification. While, of course, the power of ratification is in the Crown, acting on the advice of its constitutional advisers, at the same time it is considered proper and desirable that the executive should not take upon itself to ratify without the authorization of
Parliament, and this Bill is submitted containing the provisions I have stated,-first, to authorize the ratification of the protocol, and second, to authorize the doing of the necessary things to carry it out. There will be found, annexed to the Bill as a schedule, the resolution of the Assembly, the protocol itself, which has been signed, and the statute, as it is called, containing the plan constituting the Court. That plan was, in the first place, prepared under the direction of the Council, and was accepted by the Council with certain amendments unanimously agreed to by the Assembly.
Mr. CAHILL (Pontiac) :
What extra
expense will this involve?
Mr. DOHERTY:
None.
Mr. JACOBS (George Etienne Cartier):
May I ask what would happen should the Canadian Parliament fail to ratify this protocol?
Mr. DOHERTY:
If we should fail to
ratify the protocol Canada would not have approved the constitution of the Court, and would therefore not be entitled to invoke its jurisdiction or appear before it.
Mr. JACOBS:
It would not necessarily mean the resignation of the Government, I hope?