William Manley GERMAN

GERMAN, William Manley, K.C.

Personal Data

Party
Liberal
Constituency
Welland (Ontario)
Birth Date
May 26, 1851
Deceased Date
March 31, 1933
Website
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/William_Manley_German
PARLINFO
http://www.parl.gc.ca/parlinfo/Files/Parliamentarian.aspx?Item=511d8a61-1106-4b86-a494-9cfa7e47f4f6&Language=E&Section=ALL
Profession
barrister

Parliamentary Career

March 5, 1891 - April 5, 1892
LIB
  Welland (Ontario)
November 7, 1900 - September 29, 1904
LIB
  Welland (Ontario)
November 3, 1904 - September 17, 1908
LIB
  Welland (Ontario)
October 26, 1908 - July 29, 1911
LIB
  Welland (Ontario)
September 21, 1911 - October 6, 1917
LIB
  Welland (Ontario)
December 6, 1921 - September 5, 1925
LIB
  Welland (Ontario)

Most Recent Speeches (Page 4 of 246)


June 25, 1924

Mr. GERMAN:

He drew it out for

the same reason that my hon. friend or I or any one else would draw out a deposit- because he wanted it in a safe institution and did not wish to have it tied up in a bank that might become bankrupt.

Topic:   HON. MR. MURDOCK AND HOME BANK
Full View Permalink

June 25, 1924

Mr. GERMAN:

That is all right as an

ethical proposition. It is mighty easy to be wise after the event, but if my right hon. friend found that his wagon was likely to break down I am sure he would get ouf before it did break down. I say therefore that there was no reason in the world why the minister should not draw out his monesn It was his own money. He is not a legal gentleman like my right hon. friend the leader of the opposition and my hon. friend from West Hastings; they in their superior knowledge- and virtue, perhaps-would not have withdrawn their deposits, but he in his innocence of business matters withdrew his money. Now, even supposing he got the information in council-and I am accepting for the moment the very supposition that he got the information from thL source-I would be prepared to stand up and say that he was justified in acting as he did, because the withdrawal of his deposit would not under ordinary circumstances injure other depositors; in this instance the failure of the stockholders injured the depositors. As soon as Mr. Murdock found out there was likely to be injury to other depositors by reason of his action he said, "Very well, I will pay the money back." He made a supreme endeavour to do what he thought was right. He has been criticised by my hon. friend from West Hastings for not paying back the money sooner. Mr. Murdock saw notices in the newspapers, but he said, "I take no stock in newspaper reports." He thought, like most of us, that the reports were merely political tactics, and therefore he paid no attention to them, but when he found that other depositors were likely to be prejudiced, then he, like the honest man he has shown himself throughout these proceedings, said, "Very well, Mr. Clarkson, I will return you the money, although I do not feel that I am legally bound to do so."

Without taking up your time any longer, Mr. Speaker, I submit that the report of the majority of the committee is the report that

should be adopted by this House. And I know mighty wed that it is the kind of report that will be adopted by 90 per cent of the people of this country.

Topic:   HON. MR. MURDOCK AND HOME BANK
Full View Permalink

June 25, 1924

Mr. GERMAN:

I beg my right hon.

friend's pardon?

Topic:   HON. MR. MURDOCK AND HOME BANK
Full View Permalink

June 25, 1924

Mr. GERMAN:

At any time after that.

Topic:   HON. MR. MURDOCK AND HOME BANK
Full View Permalink

June 25, 1924

Mr. GERMAN:

The right hon. gentleman says he did not say so, nor did anyone else. His name, it is true, was not mentioned in express terms. I was at the committee when the hon. member for West Hastings suggested calling a large number of witnesses, whom we thought it was absolutely unnecessary to call because the facts were not in dispute, but were admitted. Mr. Murdock was there and every member of the committee knew he was prepared to make a statement and desired to do so. That went on for a few days until this calling of witnesses to establish something that was not in dispute became rather wearisome to the members of the committee, to the majority of them at any rate. We said "Mr. Murdock is here and he admits all these things; call him." The offer was made that Mr. Murdock should go into the witness box and give his evidence, but the hon. member for West Hastings (Mr. Porter), said "No, I will not consent to that

3638 COMMONS

Mr. Murdock and Home Bank

until I have had fifteen or twenty minutes to consult with my companions." Apparently a consultation was necessary before my hon. friend could decide as to whether or not Mr. Murdock should be allowed to go into the witness box and give his evidence. Later on the minister did give testimony and his statement was a truthful one; it impressed every one who heard it as being true, and I believe that is the opinion of the people throughout the country.

The hon. member made another statement regarding Mr. Murdook which I believe on reflection he will consider should not have been made, and which every member of the committee feels should not have been made *-that Mr. Murdock in having the $4,000 deposited in the Royal Bank in the way in which it was deposited was doing something in secret, was trying to cover up the fact that the money was so deposited. The facts are-as stated by Mr. Murdock himself, and by his private secretary, Miss McCool-that this money was in Mr. Murdock's hands in his office. He was engaged with an attorney from Toronto in connection with an injunction proceeding in which the government was interested. He called his secretary and said "Take this money and deposit it in the Royal Bank so that you can draw it; deposit it in the same way that you have always done." She said "I have no power of attorney to draw money out of the Royal Bank." "Very well," he said, waving his hand, "go and deposit it in your name as you have done before:" and the evidence shows she had deposited the money in her name on prior occasions. My right hon. friend (Mr. Meighen) shakes his head as to that. Let me read just what was said and I will make the quotation as short as possible. This is the evidence given by Miss Sadie McCool:

By Mr. German:

Q. I believe you are the private secretary to the Hon. James Murdock?-A. Yes, sir.

Q. On the 15th of August you took $4,000 in money from him to deposit in the Royal Bank?-A. Yes.

Q. It seems you deposited it in your own name in trust?-A. Yes.

Q. Will you explain to the committee why you did that?-A. I came in from lunch and Mr. Murdock called me into his office where he was eating lunch. He had an appointment with a man and he said, " I have not time to go out, will you take this money and deposit it in the Royal Bank so you can draw it like you are drawing on my other account?", and I replied, " I cannot do that without a power of attorney unless I put it in my own name in trust."

Q. What happened then?-A. He said, "All right," and waved his hand, and I went out.

I will now quote the evidence of Mr. Murdock himself. This is his statement:

I will give it in another way. I was sitting in my affice with $4,000 in 400 ten-dollar bills in an envelope,

[Mr. German.?

which I expected to place in a safe depository. As a legal gentleman from Toronto was waiting to see me in connection with an injunction in which he had been engaged by the government, and this was the only time I could see him-right between the two meetings of the cabinet-I rang the bell and called in my secretary and handed the envelope to her with the money in it, and said, "Go and deposit that money in the Royal Bank so that you can draw on it as you have been doing on the other account."

By Mr. German:

Q. Had she been drawing in other banks?-A. She had a power of attorney since about September, 1922, just before I went overseas to Geneva in 1922.

Q. She had a power of attorney to draw on your account?-A. Yes, and you will notice that eighteen of those cheques out of the twenty are drawn by her.

By the Chairman:

Q. Is that all you wish to say, Mr. Murdock?-A. I think that is all.

By Mr. Hanson:

Q. You did not tell her to put it in her name in trust?-A. I told her to put it in the Royal Bank so she could draw on it as she had been doing before.

Q. The other deposit was in her own name?-A. Yes.

Q. You know now that this was not in your name? -A. I do, and I knew before she went out of the room that this would not be in my own name.

How anyone can attempt to say, in view of that evidence, that Mr. Murdock was trying to keep this matter secret or do anything different from what he had been doing in the past I cannot understand. I cannot even think that my hon. friend (Mr. Porter) has any such idea himself, but being led away, perhaps, by his feelings he said something more than he really intended to say. There was another remark made which I think was equally uncalled for.

Topic:   HON. MR. MURDOCK AND HOME BANK
Full View Permalink