Right Hon. ARTHUR MEIGHEN (Leader of the Opposition):

Does the minister not

see the importance of ascertaining the facts as to costs? In view of the statement he has made, are we to remain helpless unless Alberta sees fit to make the test?

Executions at Winnipeg

Mr. STEWART (West Edmonton):

This is hardly the place to carry on a discussion about this matter. The Board of Railway Commissioners for Canada is the body which is competent to hear evidence with respect to tests. The arrangement last year was for the movement of train load lots. I doubt whether the movement that is taking place at the present time is in train load lots, moreover the movement last year, in addition to being in train load lots, was to be made during the months of May, June and July, the summer months, when it was anticipated that the rolling stock would be idle and the power requirements would not be so great. At the present time the statement of Sir Henry Thornton is that there is difficulty about securing supplies and he is bringing forward this movement. I understand that the other day the order was increased by

25,000 tons, but I have no first-hand knowledge of that.

Mr. MEIGHEN:

Is the hon. member (Mr. Bennett) right in assuming that the Minister of the Interior is still Acting Minister of Railways, and how long are we expected to have an outside minister in charge of a heavy department? Is the present arrangement going to continue and how long?

Mr. STEWART (West Edmonton):

The

Minister of the Interior is not the Acting Minister of Railways.

Mr. E. J. GARLAND (Bow River):

Following up the question which has just been asked, will the minister tell me if the government is prepared to order a special investigation into the question of special rates for coal?

Mr. STEWART (West Edmonton):

Before the railway board?

Mr. GARLAND (Bow River):

Yes.

Mr. STEWART (West Edmonton):

Yes.

Mr. J. S. WOODSWORTH (Winnipeg North Centre):

May I ask the Minister of

Justice (Mr. Lapointe), with regard to the executions which are to take place in Winnipeg to-morrow, whether he has had called to his attention the statement made by the Attorney General of Manitoba when this matter was being discussed a few days ago on the floor of the legislature. He said that hanging men by the neck was a relic of barbarism and there was nothing more brutal or inhuman. In view of the strong protest made in opposition to capital punishment.

especially in this case as to the place and method, may I ask whether the ends of justice would not be advanced by commutation to life imprisonment?

Hon. ERNEST LAPOINTE (Minister of Justice):

In the course of my consideration

and analysis of these two capital cases, I have received representations that if the executions were to take place, they should take place somewhere other than the gaol of Winnipeg. I have also had other representations of quite a different character. Under our constitution, criminal law and procedure are under the jurisdiction of the federal parliament, but the constitution of criminal courts and the administration of justice generally are under the control of the provinces. In this matter there are provisions in our criminal courts determining the mode of execution when there is a sentence of death, and also that the execution must take place within the walls of the gaol where the offender is being con-lined. Neither the Minister of Justice nor the Attorney General of Manitoba has any authority to alter that. The provincial authorities have only to comply with the provisions of the statute. My hon. friend calls my attention to the remarks of the Attorney General of Manitoba with regard to the mode of execution and the advisability of changing it; and he himself suggests that we should alter our decision on account of those remarks. So far as I have been able to find in the Department of Justice, there has not been a general demand, I might even say an appreciable demand, with regard to the advisability of changing the mode of execution in capital cases. Still, I agree that it is a most important matter,, and the suggestion of the Attorney General of Manitoba deserves and shall have most careful and serious consideration. Obviously, however, my hon. friend's request could not be acceded to. To accede to it would mean to paralyse the administration of criminal law and justice throughout the country because of a suggestion that a change in the mode of execution might be desirable. Such a change, I may say, even if admitted as advisable on principle, would imply serious practical difficulties, and it would have to be ascertained and made clear that those difficulties could be solved before I for one would recommend a change to this parliament. I may observe incidentally that the mode of execution in this country is the mode which has always prevailed in Canada and it is still the old English practice.

Right Hon. ARTHUR MEIGHEN (Leader of the Opposition):

I do not rise in respect

of the main question asked. I agree with

FEBRUARY 8, 1926 S05

The Address-Mr. Sutherland (S. Oxford)

the minister; but inasmuch as, under the code, the place of execution is, as the minister says, the place where the prisoner is confined, it surely is possible-I know it has been done-to alter the place where the prisoner is confined and thereby alter the place of execution. As this place happens to be right under the windows of the university, where there are many students, it would seem well to consider whether the alteration could not be made.

Mr. LAPOINTE:

I do not think it could

be done. The sentence of the court mentioned where the prisoner was to be confined, and he has been confined where the sentence stated.

Sir HENRY DRAYTON (West York):

I wonder if the Minister of Finance can tell us when the lonely volume of the Public Accounts will be supplemented so that we may have something to do during the long adjournment.

Hon. J. A. ROBB (Minister of Finance):

I expect the other volume to be ready today. If so, I will ask permission to have it tabled.