Henry Lumley DRAYTON

DRAYTON, The Hon. Sir Henry Lumley, P.C., K.C., K.B.

Personal Data

Party
Conservative (1867-1942)
Constituency
York West (Ontario)
Birth Date
April 27, 1869
Deceased Date
August 28, 1950
Website
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Henry_Lumley_Drayton
PARLINFO
http://www.parl.gc.ca/parlinfo/Files/Parliamentarian.aspx?Item=6cab8398-dae1-4e94-b6be-0177cdcd9b99&Language=E&Section=ALL
Profession
barrister, crown attorney

Parliamentary Career

October 20, 1919 - October 4, 1921
CON
  Kingston (Ontario)
  • Minister of Finance and Receiver General (August 2, 1919 - July 9, 1920)
  • Minister of Finance and Receiver General (July 10, 1920 - December 28, 1921)
  • Secretary of State of Canada (January 24, 1921 - September 20, 1921)
December 6, 1921 - September 5, 1925
CON
  York West (Ontario)
  • Minister of Finance and Receiver General (July 10, 1920 - December 28, 1921)
October 29, 1925 - July 2, 1926
CON
  York West (Ontario)
  • Minister of Railways and Canals (June 29, 1926 - July 12, 1926)
  • Minister of Finance and Receiver General (June 29, 1926 - July 12, 1926)
September 14, 1926 - May 30, 1930
CON
  York West (Ontario)
  • Minister Without Portfolio (July 13, 1926 - September 24, 1926)
  • Minister of Immigration and Colonization (July 13, 1926 - September 24, 1926)

Most Recent Speeches (Page 2 of 2350)


April 10, 1928

Sir HENRY DRAYTON:

And that gives a right of search up to twelve miles; that is my recollection. With regard to the three mile limit, the minister professes ignorance of the reason for that arbitrary limitation having been established. Surely he must know what that reason was. Every country has the right to protect its coast, and three miles was fixed upon for the reason that, at the time that limitation was established, three miles was the range of cannon. One argument advanced by the United States in relation to the twelve mile limit was that the range of shore cannon had tremendously increased, and they felt that the limit should be correspondingly extended. At any rate, whether right or wrong, the three mile limit was fixed for the reason I have stated. But my hon. friend has not answered this pertinent question: What are territorial waters so far as Canada is concerned? The minister confesses that he is unable to answer the question, and I sympathize with him in his view that the question is one for the Justice department. But has not the Minister of Justice been taken into my hon. friend's confidence in connection with the bill? I speak subject to correction, because I have been away so much, but I remember that in connection with the customs investigation Mr. O'Connor was consistently of the view that most of these waters were enclosed to us-mare clausum, over which we had sovereign rights. He thought the Bale de Chaleur was one of these, as well as the Northumberland straits. He prepared an argument in support of this view-an argument for which, by the way, he was not paid. Nor was he allowed to sue for payment. Is the minister adopting Mr. O'Connor's opinion without having paid him for it? At any rate, I think seriously we are entitled to know exactly what we are doing. Take for example lake Ontario, Where there is considerable activity: I am sure the minister desires to take action there. Well, is that a territorial water of Canada?

Topic:   CUSTOMS ACT AMENDMENT
Subtopic:   PREVENTION OF SMUGGLING
Full View Permalink

April 10, 1928

Sir HENRY DRAYTON:

My hon. friend does not quite get the point. This is not an ordinary matter of business at all; it is not any question of having time within which to get in your profits and look after your business and all that sort of thing. This money does not belong to the trader at all; it is received by him in trust. The money belongs to the country and should be paid at once; these accounts should not be allowed to run along at all. We have emphasized this principle time and time again. I know my hon. friend has a great many things to take care of, but I would make a suggestion to him. I do not know exactly how this is being enforced now; I do not know whether it is being enforced in the way the income tax can be looked after, simply by a certificate of non-payment with an execution issued offhand. There should be no need of going to court at all; there should be no delays of that kind. This money should be collected simply on the certificate of default, with no court standing between the people and their money. There is a great distinction between this money and ordinary commercial debts; here we have simply a trustee who collects for the people and who has no right to hold the money he collects; he should pass it on at once.

Topic:   SPECIAL WAR REVENUE ACT AMENDMENT
Full View Permalink

April 10, 1928

Sir HENRY DRAYTON:

People have been making these parts here; the sales tax does not apply unless there is a sale, and so long as they use them of course there is no sale.

Topic:   SPECIAL WAR REVENUE ACT AMENDMENT
Full View Permalink

April 10, 1928

Sir HENRY DRAYTON:

Explain.

Topic:   CUSTOMS ACT AMENDMENT
Subtopic:   PREVENTION OF SMUGGLING
Full View Permalink

April 10, 1928

Sir HENRY DRAYTON:

My hon. friend knows that by his orders in council and regulations he does certain definite things, which may put out of court this or that man in connection with certain matters. I am quite sure that my hon. friend the Minister of Justice (Mr. Lapointe) will agree absolutely with me on this principle, that whatever our powers may be, we ought not to pass legislation affecting existing rights unless the parties affected are heard, or unless they are compensated for the rights taken away. My proposal is that when we take up this legislation again the Minister of the Interior be armed with a list of all these things so we can intelligently consider what we are really doing, and whether we are violating any rights that may exist.

Topic:   VALIDATION OF ORDERS IN COUNCIL
Full View Permalink