Mr. OLIVER:

I did not know that there were pensions payable in respect of the Northwest Rebellion except for disability.

Mr. REID [DOT] Our Pensions Act has reference only to soldiers who have enlisted for service overseas. There are men who have been wounded or injured on home guard duty, and any pensions that are granted to these men appear in this item, and not under the regular pensions vote.

Mr. OLIVER:

Mr. OLIVER:

It seems there is some difficulty in getting a' pension for this woman, because her son had a predisposition to tuberculosis. Supposing that under the literal interpretation of the recommendations of the committee last year, this woman would not he entitled to compensation I sill think that the business of a judge is to render justice and not merely to interpret the law. His interpretation. I still think that the business of a ing justice, and I think, much more than in the case of the judge, the business of the commission is to render justice and not merely to interpret the law. However, I wish to say that without prejudice. I am merely taking a position which I think is in accord with the general view of the people of the country.

There is another point that this committee raises that will have a serious hearing, particularly when compulsory service is instituted. It is a very serious matter. We have found serious cases under the voluntary system, and they will be very much more serious, I am afraid, under the compulsory .system. These are cases where people have financial obligations, and they have no means of carrying them when they have no resources other than the pension. I will give a few instances. I am quite aware that they are outside of the ordinary matter of pensions. We have never considered these cases as being entitled to pen, sions, but in Great Britain, under the Compulsory Service Act, they are taking into account .such cases as these. Under our proposed Compulsory Service Act we will also be warranted in taking note of such cases as the following:

Hannah Lord.-This woman's pension is $32 per month. Previous to the enlistment of her husband, they purchased a lot for $600 upon which $400 has been paid. Interest and taxes for two years are still unpaid.

Amy Bloomer.-This woman's pension is $34 per month. Previous to the enlistment of the soldier they purchased a lot for $2,400, upon which they erected a store and bam for $2,600. There is a mortgage against this property for $2,000, interest overdue $95, taxes about $94. There is no income from this property at present, nor will there be any until times "piclo up" in this city. The total income of this widow is $50,'including the pension. The $16 per month will be reduced as years go by. The widow stated to our committee that unless some help could be obtained until times get good again, she will lose her equity in this property.

Mary E. Marsden.-This woman's pension is $56 per month. She owns a house and lot valued at $5,000 against which there is a mortgage of $1,200. The widow states that she can just live on the pension she receives, and can pay the taxes after severe sacrifices, 'but cannot see how it is possible to redeem the property before foreclosure.

Mr. OLIVER:

I wish to say a word in connection with this allowance for days of absence. I do not propose to make any motion on the subject, but it is only fair that there should be an understanding as to the different positions of members of the House coming from different sections of the country. Those of us who come from a considerable distance-from west of Lake Superior, from the Maritime Provinces, and from some constituencies in the more remote portions of Ontario and Quebec-are unable to carry on our private business while attending to the public business of the session. It appears that the members who are situated within a night's or an afternoon's railroad run of the city of Ottawa are in a position to carry on their private business while ostensibly attending to their duties in Parliament. Those of us who are not so fortunately situated have nJo right to find fault with tiho-se who-are, provided the exercise "of their liberties does not reflect upon us and do us substantial injury. As a matter of fact, the business of this House is and has been delayed session after session by the fact that such a large proportion of members live within a comparatively short distance of the capital and make it a matter of business to be absent from the House the latter end of the week and the beginning cf the week thereafter. So that during the greater part of the session, instead of doing business five days in the week, we are doing business three days in the week, and sometimes hardly that. That has the effect of lengthening the session unduly; it compels the men who reside at a distance to remain 'here weeks and months longer than they would be required to remain if everybody stayed here and attended to business during the five or six days of the week. The penalty of a fine of $15 for each day's absence was imposed for the purpose of holding members to their work. We relieved them of that fine to the extent

of fifteen days-and it is this fifteen days that has done the damage so far. Now we propose to make that fifteen days thirty days. On the one hand we declare that the interests of the country and the treasury shall be protected by a fine of $15 against each member who is absent from a day's sitting, and then we provide that the fine shall not be paid in respect of fifteen days. Now we provide that the fine -shall not he paid in respect of thirty days. The position is entirely illogical. While it would, perhaps, be ineffective to make any determined opposition to this- vote, I take the responsibility, following the remarks of the member for Shefford (Mr. Boivin), of placing before the House the serious disadvantage to which a large proportion of the members are subjected by reason of the undue exercise on the part of other members of the privilege and advantage of attending to their private business while the session is in progress.

Mr. OLIVER:

I presume that is why

my hon. friend insists on putting through the Military Voters' Bill and the War-Time Elections Bill.