Mr. SPEAKER:

Mr. Golding moves that the following bills, Nos. 94 to 160, inclusive, be read the first time.

Bill No. 94 for the relief of Royal Tessier.- Mr. Brown.

Bill No. 95 for the relief of Aurore Leblanc Proulx.

Mr. Brown.

Bill No. 96 for the relief of Margaret Susan Bradshaw Hodgkinson.-Mr. Emmerson.

Bill No. 97 for the relief of Lydia Donalda MacDonald Fletcher.-Mr. Brown.

Bill No. 98 for the relief of Charles Edward Varney.-Mr. Brown.

Bill No. 99 for the relief of George Louis Bush.-Mr. MacLean.

Bill No. 100 for the relief of John Hall Jones.-Mr. Maybank.

Bill No. 101 for. the relief of Madeline Daisy Harvey Bell.-Mr. Emmerson.

Bill No. 102 for the relief of Georges Moshonas.-Mr. Brown.

Bill No. 103 for the relief of Ann Agnes Hyson Kellogg.-Mr. Merritt.

Bill No. 104 for the relief of Anna Ostronoff Smilestone.-Mr. Casselman.

Bill No. 105 for the relief of Doris Alice Davis Stackhouse.-Mr. Casselman.

Bill No. 106 for the relief of Olive Maud Prouse Palmer.'-Mr. Maybank. [DOT]

Bill No. 107 for the relief of Mary Mueller Pierotte.-Mr. Maybank.

Bill No. 108 for the relief of Anthony Malt. -Mr. Maybank.

Bill No. 109 for the relief of Roderick John Elder.-Mr. Maybank.

Bill No. 110 for the relief of Francis George Dennis.-Mr. Maybank.

Bill No. Ill for the relief of Zenon Alary.- Mr. Maybank.

Bill No. 112 for the relief of Gladys Muriel Watson Hooper.-Mr. Maybank.

Bill No. 113 for the relief of Pearl Woodward McGregor.-Mr. Maybank.

Bill No. 114 for the relief of Lily Bromberg Seidlitz.-Mr. Merritt.

Bill No. 115 for the relief of Clarence David Cowan.-Air. Black (Chateauguay-Hunting-don).

Bill No. 116 for the relief of Kathleen Helena Henry Bates.-Mr. Maybank.

Bill No. 117 for the relief of William John Mitchell.-Mr. MacLean.

Bill No. 118 for the relief of Nathan Labo-vitch, otherwise known as Nathan Labow.- Air. Emmerson.

Private Bills

Bill No. 119 for the relief of Fannie Bly Blanshay.-Mr. Cleaver.

Bill No. 120 for the relief of Annette Lea Marion Macnab.-Mr. Rose.

Bill No. 121 for the relief of Gerald Franklin.-Mr. Casselman.

Bill No. 122 for the relief of Ivor Edna Nancy Mosher Clarke.-Mr. Cleaver.

Bill No. 123 for the relief of Mary MacRury Tait.-Mr. Casselman.

Bill No. 124 for the relief of Ernest Stanley Powell.-Mr. Boucher.

Bill No. 125 for the relief of Anastasia Stack Kormylo.-Mr. Croll.

Bill No. 123 for the relief of James Christie Miller.-Mr. Croll.

Bill No. 127 for the relief of Francis Needan Quirk.-Mr. Merritt.

Bill No. 12S for the relief of Virginia Wallace Knoiwlton Tousa-w.-Mr. May-bank.

Bill No. 129 for the relief of Elsie Pearl Craig Maclnnis.-Mr. Maybank.

Bill No. 130 for the relief of Celia Calp Hccht.-Mr. Merritt.

Bill No. 131 for the relief of Joseph Marcel Rouleau.-Mr. Merritt.

Bill No. 132 for the relief of William Arthur Smythe.-Mr. Casselman.

Bill No. 133 for the relief of Nellie Sapphire Tanham Herring.-Mr. Maybank.

Bill No. 131 for the relief of John Guerin Bowles.-Mr. Cleaver.

Bill No. 135 for the relief of Molly Margaret Evelyn McCuaig Stead.-Mr. Boucher.

Bill No. 136 for the relief of Robert Kirkpatrick Scott;-Mr. Brown.

Bill No. 137 for the relief of Emma Hull Mack.-Mr. Brown.

Bill No. 138 for th-e relief of Kathleen Annette Rolfe McLaughlan- Mr. Benidickson.

Bill No. 139 for the relief of Catherine Winfred Howard Bailey.-Mr. Casselman.

Bill No. 140 for the relief of Evelo Browning Couch Harvey.-Mr. Maybank.

Bill No. 141 for the relief of Hazel Margaret Robertson MoLurnon.-Mr. Nixon.

Bill No. 142 for the relief of Marie Azilda Yvette Rowley.-Mr. Croll.

Bill No. 143 for the relief of Joseph Adelard Emilien Lemay.-Mr. Boucher.

Bill No. 144 for the relief of Edward Arthur Robinson.-Mr. Maybank.

Bill No. 145 for the relief of Marie Marthe Fabiola Germaine Trempe Barlow.-Mr. May-bank.

Bill No. 146 for the relief of Thelma Ann Tongue Grant.-Mr. Maybank.

Bill No. 147 for the relief of Jean-Jacques Lahiere.-Mr. Maybank.

Bill No. 148 for the relief of Edgar Thomas Lucas Graham.-Mr. Maybank.

Bill No. 149 for the relief of Edith Pearl Roe Gardner.-Mr. Maybank.

Bill No. 150 for the relief of Dqrothy Marie Christensen Korning.-Mr. Stuart (Charlotte).

Bill No. 151 for the relief of Frank Edward Quartz.

Mr. Benidickson.

Bill No. 152 for the relief of Eileen Campbell Burfind Morris.-Air. Maybank.

Bill No. 153 for the relief of Elma Eva Inch Evans.-Mr. MacLean.

Bill No. 154 for the relief of Gertrude Rheaume Marchild-on.-Mr. Brown.

Bill No. 155 for the relief of Godfrey John Kool.-Mr. Maybank.

Bill No. 156 for the relief of Eric John Hollingsworth.-Mr. Maybank.

Bill No. 157 for the relief of Pamela Sarah Atkins Berends.

Mr. Maybank.

Bill No. 158 to incorporate Compagnie de Fiducie du Canada.-Mr. Fournier (Maison-neuve-Rosemont).

Bill No. 159 to amend an Act to incorporate The Royal College of Physicians and Surgeons of Canada.-Mr. McGarry.

Bill No. 160 to consolidate and amend the acts relating to Alliance Nationa-le.-Air. Marier.

Air. GOLDING:

I a-m not having anything to do with the divorce bills.

Mr. RALPH MAYBANK (Winnipeg South Centre):

Air. Speaker, there are a number of divorce bills standing in the names of members other than myself, and I have no desire to take away from them the right to move first reading of those bills. On the other hand I am- quite prepared to move them all and have it tacitly understood that as chairman of the committee the duty of doing so devolves upon me; therefore-if it is agreeable I move the first reading of all the bills which stand either in my name or in the names of other hon. members. In the list appearing on the order paper there are one or two bills which are not divorce bills. I am not including these bills in my motion, because I do not think I have any right to do so.

Air. SPEAKER:

Moved by Air. Alaybank, seconded by Mr. Alcllraith, that Bills Nos. 94 to 160 inclusive be read the first time.

Alotion agreed to and bills read the first time.

Private Bills-Divorce

Mr. SPEAKER:

Moved by Mr. Maybank that Bills Nos. 94 to 160 inclusive be now read the second time. Is it the pleasure of the house to adopt the motion?

Hon. J. L.- ILSLEY (Acting Prime Minister): Excuse me; I do not think that is quite right. The last number that Your Honour read is 160, and that includes two or three bills which are not divorce bills.

Mr. M. J. COLDWELL (Rosetown-Big-gar):

Mr. Speaker, I wish to make a formal protest against this manner of dealing with divorce. I think it is really a public scandal in this country that we should have this very large number of divorce bills before us for first and second reading. I know that in the future we are going to be faced with a grave problem, due largely to the war. In my opinion the time has come when this house, together with the provinces, should consider what can be done in order to remove these divorce bills from the 'House of Commons. It is true that they are considered by a senate committee, but we are called upon to pass judgment on, and to dissolve the marriages of tens and sometimes several hundreds of people. I believe these cases may increase as time goes on because of the condition to which I have just referred. Personally I do not feel like taking the responsibility of passing acts of parliament of this kind simply as a matter of routine, and that is precisely what we are doing. We are relying on a committee in the other place to come to a decision, and then we have to take the responsibility in this house of passing bills to dissolve marriages. I know that this has been going on for a number of years. It is an expensive and roundabout way of getting the relief which I think is sometimes warranted. I am not opposing the dissolution of marriages under certain conditions, but I do think that this way of dealing with this problem is, as I said before, a public scandal in this country. The time has come when the House of Commons and parliament generally should consider ways and means of removing these matters from the house, and1 of establishing a proper procedure, and perhaps even reviewing the grounds so that we may not be saddled with a responsibility which I personally dislike assuming.

Mr. MAYBANK:

Mr. Speaker, as the

mover of the motion to give second reading to these bills, may I be permitted to acquaint the house with certain circumstances relating to them. In the first place, all of these have been moved by me as a matter of duty which has been placed upon me as chairman of the committee. In the second place, I can associate myself with the remarks which

have been made by the hon. gentleman who has just taken his seat. Although I moved the first reading of these bills I concur entirely in the strictures he has made upon this system of granting divorces. As a matter of fact I very much dislike seeing laws passed in that way respecting individuals. I would much prefer to have each individual case examined; but I do desire the house to know the circumstances under which I move first and second reading of these bills. Being chairman of the committee I do it simply as a matter of duty.

Mr. MAURICE LALONDE (Labelle) (Translation):

Mr. Speaker, I wish to say

just a few words of endorsement about the remarks made by the hon. member for Rose-town-Biggar (Mr. Coldwell).

Last year, fairly strong protests were voiced in this house concerning the manner in which divorce bills were passed, and a group of hon. members did raise strenuous objections. This year, the same procedure is being followed. Therefore, I wish-on my own account of course, because I leave it to my hon. fellow-members to do so if they like-to protest against the way in which the house passes divorce bills and breaks up marriage ties in a manner that could be termed scandalous, as was said by the hon. member for Rosetown-Biggar.

Of course, the sponsor of those bills is in no way to be blamed; he is doing his duty, but I think a formal protest in this house, is necessary at this time. That is all I have to say for the present.

(Text)

Mr. ILSLEY:

Mr. Speaker, I think I should say a few words about the observations of the hon. member for Rosetown-Biggar (Mr. Cold-well). Almost every year a protest is made by a leader of one of the opposition parties or by one or more private members against the existing system of granting divorces by act of parliament. Although I have heard these protests made on literally dozens of occasions- and they are always made solemnly and in such a way as to command the assent of nearly everyone who listens to them-I have never heard a real suggestion as to how the situation can be remedied.

Mr. COLDWELL:

Before the war we

placed bills on the order paper with regard to divorce, and we are prepared to do it again.

Mr. KNOWLES:

A specific suggestion has been made by the former leader of the Progressive Conservative party, the hon. member for Peel (Mr. Graydon), as well as by members of this group, namely, that these cases be referred to the exchequer court.

Private Bills-Divorce

Mr. ILSLEY:

Well, Mr. Speaker, I do not remember any bill having been introduced to turn the exchequer court into a divorce court, and I doubt whether the suggestion is a practicable one. The situation is just this: that a majority of the members of the House of Commons are not prepared to vote against these bills when they come before the house. They feel that they cannot go that far. On the other hand if they are not prepared to vote against the bills I do not know what procedure can be set up except that which is followed at the present time. I do not understand my hon. friend's suggestion. Is it that there should be a different procedure set up in this parliament?

Mr. COLDWELL:

No. I think this is a matter for a court to decide, not the House of Commons. *

Mr. LALONDE:

What does the hon. member suggest should be done in a province where there are no divorce courts?

Mr. COLDWELL:

I suggest that the

dominion and the province get together with a view to reaching an agreement.

Mr. LALONDE:

Not in Quebec.

Mr. ILSLEY:

Then is it the suggestion that a dominion court be set up to try divorces from one particular province? I want to get down to something definite. I have heard these suggestions year after year, but so far I have heard nothing definite.

Mr. MacINNIS:

Was there not a bill introduced in this house some years ago setting up a divorce court in the province of Ontario? If it can be done for Ontario it can be done for the province of Quebec,

Mr. ILSLEY:

Is that the suggestion of the party to which the hon. gentleman refers?

Mr. MacINNIS:

The minister asked for suggestions, and that is one.