Hiram Augustus CALVIN

CALVIN, Hiram Augustus

Personal Data

Conservative (1867-1942)
Frontenac (Ontario)
Birth Date
April 6, 1851
Deceased Date
January 13, 1932

Parliamentary Career

June 10, 1892 - April 24, 1896
  Frontenac (Ontario)
November 7, 1900 - September 29, 1904
  Frontenac (Ontario)

Most Recent Speeches (Page 2 of 4)

February 27, 1902


You did not. You did the right thing. It was the right thing for you to do under the circumstances.

Topic:   SUPPLY.
Full View Permalink

May 22, 1901

2. How is it that the functions of warden in the St. Vincent de Paul penitentiary are actually and have been exercised since the 17th February last by the inspector of penitentiaries ?

3. Is it to the knowledge of the government that the said inspector of penitentiaries is absent from said penitentiary more than half of the time each day ?

Full View Permalink

May 21, 1901


I desire to enter an objec-ton to the argument made by the hon. member for West York, concerning the value of property in the city of Quebec. The inference which he has drawn from the dilapidated state of the property in the neighbourhood of the coves, is not justified. The depreciation of the value of that property has arisen from causes over which no merchant in the city of Quebec has any control. The forests of the country have been lessened, and the method of exporting wood has been changed, as a result of which that property has become almost absolutely valueless for the purposes to which it was put thirty years ago. Those gentlemen who visited the city of Quebec a few days ago saw the

disadvantages under which the city had laboured on account of the decay of that [DOT] industry, and the same remark will apply to the decay of the industry of wooden shipbuilding. Notwithstanding these hinderances, those gentlemen saw the prosperity which is evident throughout the town itself, the fine streets, the new buildings, the factories that were seen not only In the upper town, but in St. Roch and St. Sauveur. They could see that this city had prospered mightily in spite of the drawbacks. Now, as regards the price of this property, I do not pretend to be an expert, but I know Mr. Price, and Mr. Chau-teauvert, and nearly all the other gentlemen whose names have been mentioned by the right hon. Prime Minister. They are men in whom I have eveiy confidence, and I am delighted to see that this property is being purchased.

Some resolutions reported.

On motion of the Prime Minister, House adjourned at 12.45 a.m. Wednesday.

Wednesday, May 22, 1901.

Topic:   SUPPLY.
Full View Permalink

April 1, 1901


I would like to ask the hon. Minister of Marine and Fisheries (Sir Lillis Davies) if this makes any difference in the provisions or working of the Act relating to shipping through the St. Lawrence and on the great lakes ?

Full View Permalink

April 1, 1901


I would like to know whether, in this list of casualties is included damage to the canals of the Dominion. 1 think that the method employed at present of dealing with that sort of damage is most unfair to those using the canals. Now, the canals are built by the government. They may be good canals like the Soulanges canal, which was built by our friend Mr. Munro, or it tnay be a work with glaring defects, such as the Welland canal. I need not go into particulars, they may be shown by competent men who are using the canals. That is the condition as regards the construction of the works. Now as to the craft that use them. A steamer that goes through that canal, before she is allowed to turn a wheel, must have her hull inspected and her machinery inspected, and the same government that builds those canals makes her owners pay for the inspection. Then before she is allowed to proceed on her voyage she must be manned by a captain who has to receive and pay for a certificate of competency from this government, by a mate, who likewise has to obtain a certificate from the government and to pay for it, by an engineer and an assistant engineer who likewise have to receive certificates from the government and to pay for them; though indirectly it is, the owner of the vessel that has to pay for all that expense. The employees of the canal are the servants of the government. I do not know that they have to pass any examination or to pay any fee before they are appointed, I do not think they do. Those are the circumstances. Now a vessel damages a lock, or bridge, or some other portion of the government's property in the canal, the owner of that vessel is obliged to pay every dollar of expense at such prices as the government may name. He has nothing to do with the naming of the prices, he cannot go on and repair the work himself. He has to pay the government for every dollar of that work at their own prices, and without having an investigation.

Full View Permalink