Casey, tioned in the Speech from the Throne and | Burpee (Sunbury), Rouleau, Wood, Wright (Pontiac), Mr. OUIMET said that as he believed appelate jurisdiction of the Supreme Court should be limited to the laws enacted by the Federal, Parliament, he moved the following amendment : "That the SPEAKER do not now leave the chair, and as the passing of the Bill would have the effect: Gordon, Goudge, The amendment was negatived on the Hagar, following division: Higginbotham, Holton, Trow, Irving, Vail, Messieurs Kerr, Krik, Laflamme, Bèchard, McQuade, Laird 1. "Of virtually depriving each Province, in a very great proportion, of administration of justice,' the control of which is, by the Constitution, reserved exclusively to the Local Legislatures and Governments, at least in so far as relates to laws respecting Property and Civil Rights and Civil Procedure in each Province. 2. "Of removing that administration of justice to judges indiscriminately' taken and selected from the whole' of Canada, whereas by the Federal compact the Judges of each' Province (except the Province of Quebec) are to be selected from the respective Bars of those Provinces 'so long as' their laws remain 'unconsolidated; and as to the Province of Quebec, in particular, its Judges are always to be selected from among the Members of the Bar of that same Province.' 3. "Of submitting the laws relating to 'property,' to 'civil right' and to civil procedure in the Province of Quebec, the causes and the 4. "Of submitting and attributing to the said Supreme Court the management and control of matters which are 'not common' to the 'whole' country. "Resolved that it is not expedient to have a Court of Appelate Jurisdiction in cases involving questions of property, civil rights and civil procedure." Hon. Mr. MACKENZIE asked if the amendment was in order. Mr. SPEAKER it was not exactly the same as that which had been previously moved because it did not go quite so far as the other amendment. But it was in the nature of an instruction to the committee directing it to do what it had ample power to do, namely, to alter the character of the Bill to a certain extent. Hon. Mr. BLAKE said the amendment was either intended as an instruction to the Committee or it was an attempt to defeat the whole Bill because a small portion of it was thought to be objectionable. It was exactly the same objection that was taken to the objection by the hon. member for Joliette. The better course for the hon. member to pursue was not to press the amendment at this stage, and thus stop the progress of the Bill entirely, but to submit it either when the House was in committee or in concurrence, and thus strike out the clauses which gave the court power to deal with subjects within the jurisdiction of the Local Legislature and Local Courts. By adopting any other course the hon. member would not obtain a correct expression of the House for all the hon. members who were in favor of a Supreme Court Bill would vote against it notwithstanding the fact that some of them might be in favor of restricting the jurisdiction of the court. Sir JOHN A. MACDONALD thought the hon. member for South Bruce had put the case very correctly. The motion was perfectly in order but it would not have the effect intended by the mover. He advised the hon. gentleman to submit his amendment at a subsequent stage. Mr. CUIMET withdrew his amend ment. The House then went into Committee on the Bill (Mr. CASGRAIN in the chair). The first four clauses were adopted. Mr. Ouimet. On the fifth clause, respecting the precedence of Judges, Mr. MILLS asked what authority this Parliament had to establish any order of precedence as between the Judges of the Provincial Courts and those of the Supreme Court. Hon. Mr. Judges of the Provincial Courts were officers of the Dominion Government as well as the Judges of the Supreme Court. FOURNIER said the Mr. MOSS pointed out that the Bill did not provide what rank the Judges of the Court of Error and Appeal of Ontario would be entitled to. Mr. MILLS-It seems to me that we should strike out the clanse. Mr. MOSS-That may be, but if we are to retain it we should provide for those Judges. Hon. Mr. BLAKE observed that if the Judges of the Supreme Court and of the Provincial Courts were to come into contact, it might be worth while to settle the important question of which was to walk in and out first, but it was not probable they would ever come in contact. Mr.MACLENNAN said that a Chief Justice of a Province who had precedence over the Pusine Judges of the Supreme Court by virtue of the seniority of his appointment would lose that precedence by appointment as one of the Pusine Judges of the Supreme Court. Hon. Mr. BLAKE said it had been decided that a Judge appointed under such circumstances did not lose his precedence. Sir JOHN A.. MACDONALD said that he did not see any legal necessity for this clause, but he took it that socially the GOVERNOR as representative of the fountain of honor should see tɔ it that thẹ Judges of the highest courts had their proper rank. Hon. Mr. BLAKE-I think if we get the question down to a social one it should disappear from an Act of Parliament. The clause was adopted. Also the sixth clause. On the seventh, the blanks for the salaries of Judges were filled up with $8,000 for the Chief Justice and $7,000 for each of the Pusine Judges, Mr. PALMER thought the amount was too high, and would prefer to see the salary of the Chief Justice reduced to $7,000 and the others to $6,000. For a number of years these Judges would have very little to do, and if it was found that if their duties were greater than anticipated the suggestion of the hon. member for the salaries could very easily be increased. West Toronto that procedure should be Sir JOHN A. MACDONALD called simply by appeal. attention to the fact that the House had already adopted a resolution fixing the salaries at $8,000 and $7,000, and it was not competent for the committee to change these amounts. On concurrence they might be changed. Mr. PALMER said he did not propose to move an amendment now, but merely to place his views before the Government. Mr. SCATCHERD said the first proposition of the Government was to fix the salaries at the amount mentioned by the hon. member for St. John, but it appeared that the policy of the Government on that point was changed after the Bill had been presented to the House, although he had no recollection of any petition having been presented to that effect. The hon. member for St. John had spoken of the proposition of the late Government, but that was a Conservative Government. This Reform Government appeared to reform in the direction of increasing salaries, although in doing so they had to change their deliberately formed policy. Mr. PALMER said if he had understood that, he would not have made the observations he had made. He did not see that it was necessary for a Reform Government to assert itself by increasing salaries. The clause was carried, as were also clauses 8, 9 and 10. The words "of emolument" were inserted after the word "office" in the 11th clause, thus prohibiting any Judge from holding any other office of emolument under the Government. The 12th and 13th clauses were adopted, five Judges being constituted a quorum. On the 14th clause, >> Mr. MOSS asked whether there was any practical necessity for retaining the words in the Act "proceedings in error. The proceeding that the Act contemplated was exceedingly simple. It was in reality by appeal in every case. No writ of error was provided for by the Act. Mr. PALMER read an amendment which he proposed to move in concurrence, in order to provide that every case which was now appealable to the Privy Council would be appealable to the Supreme Court. Sir JOHN A. MACDONALD approved Mr. Palmer. CCC Hon. Mr. BLAKE was also of a similar opinion. He suggested that a clause be inserted to provide that all matters, whether of appeal or error, should be appealable by way of appeal simply, and that the words 'proceedings in error" should be struck out wherever they occur. Hon. Mr. FOURNIER accepted the suggestion, and the clause was adopted. The words "proceedings in error" were struck out of the 14th clause, and it was then adopted. The fifteenth clause was amended on the suggestion of Mr. Moss, so as to provide that in the case of the absence or illness of the Chief Justice one of the other Judges might convene the court. On the sixteenth clause, Mr. IRVING moved in amendment :-“That no error or appeal shall be brought from any judgment or order of any court of any of the Provinces subsequent to the commencement of the said Act to HER MAJESTY in Council, but every decres and order of all courts of final resort within the several Provinces in respect of any subject matter or proceeding wherein ap peal now lies from any such court to HER MAJESTY in Council shall and may be appealable to the Supreme Court. He said the object of this amendment was to shut off appeals to the Privy Council from any Provincial Court without the case being first brought to the Supreme Court. He referred to the statutes of WILLIAM and of VICTORIA and compared them with the Confederation Act to show that Parliament had power to adopt the amendment he proposed. Hon. Mr. FOURNIER said it would be necessary to abrogate Provincial Laws in order to carry out the proposition of the hon. gentleman, and he was not prepared to deal with that question now. might be a question for the Supreme Court to decide whether this Parliament could adopt such a proposition. It. Mr. MACKAY (Cape Breton)supported the amendment and argued that one great object of the court, namely, to obviate the expense of appealing to the Privy Council would be defeated. The amendment was lost, and the cause adopted. Hon. Mr. FOURNIER agreed to amend the 17th clause by providing that cases involving an amount of $500, instead of $1,000, might be appealed to the Supreme Court. Mr. LAURIER moved in amendment: That in the Province of Quebec this section shall apply to all cases of Insolvency or Bankruptcy and all cases of a commercial nature and cases relating to the general Laws of Canada and in other cases where one of the inferior courts shall have rendered a different judgment from that of a higher court, or when the judgment in appeal in that Province shall be given unanimously confirming or reversing such judgment. pose of amending the Act 31 Vic., Ch. 55, so as to repeal the export duty on stave-bolts and oak logs.—Carried. The resolution was read the first and second times. Hon. Mr. CARTWRIGHT introduced a Bill based on the resolutions, which was read a first time. APPOINTMENT OF HARBOR MASTERS. Hon. Mr. SMITH moved the second reading of Bill to amend the Act 36 Vic., Cap. 9, and 37 Vic., Cap. 34, respecting the appointment of harbor masters. He explained in reply to a question by Hon. the Government to supplement the reMr. MITCHELL, that the Bill empowered Hon. Mr. FOURNIER suggested that the amendment be placed upon the jour-muneration to harbor masters for extra nals and it could be considered subsequent Iy.-Agreed to. con Mr. MILLS gave notice that on currence he would move an amendment to the 17th clause to exclude appeals in cases arising under Provincial Laws. While he was anxious to see this court established as an Appeal Court for Canada, he did not desire to see it hold control over the laws of the various Provinces. They ought to be left to manage their own affairs in their own way, and if not satisfied with the decisions of their Judges they could amend their laws as they thought right and proper. The clause was passed. The remaining clauses to the 40th, with the exception of the 29th which was struck out, were passed and the committee rose and reported progress. The House adjourned at 11.15 p. m. HOUSE OF COMMONS, BILL INTRODUCED. Hon. Mr. FOURNIER introduced a Bill to continue for a limited time certain Acts therein mentioned. The Bill was read a first time. THE DUTY ON STAVE-BOLTS AND OAK LOGS. Hon. Mr. CARTWRIGHT moved the reception of the report of Committee of the Whole on the resolution for the pur Hon. Mr. Fournier. duties imposed on them. It was not proposed in this Bill to increase their salado so when it was deemed necessary or ries, but to empower the Government to advisable. Hon. Mr. MITCHELL withdrew his objection to the Bill. Mr. MACDONNELL asked what had been done with regard to the placing of buoys. Hon. Mr. SMITH said the harbor masters would be required to superintend the placing and taking up of buoys. The Bill was read a second time and referred to Committee of the Whole, Mr. BURPEE (Sunbury) in the chair. Hon. Mr. HOLTON said this Bill was suitable to the circumstances of the minor ports in the Maritime Province, but not at all to the circumstances of the minor ports or harbors of the St. Lawrence. He suggested to the Minister of Marine and Fisheries that the committee should rise in order that the hon. gentleman might have an opportunity to consult with members of the Montreal Harbor Commission, with a view to inserting a clause giving to the Government instead of to the Harbor Commissioners of Montreal, the power of appointing Harbor Masters in the minor ports along the St. Lawrence. Hon. Mr. SMITH adopted the suggestion and the committee rose and reported progress. QUEBEC TRINITY HOUSE. Hon. Mr. SMITH moved the second reading of the Bill respecting the Trinity House and Harbor Commissioners of Quebec. of the Bill, but owing to the noise in the vicinity of the reporters' table he was inaudible. Sir JOHN A. MACDONALD was, its affairs. On the information thus reunderstood to suggest certain modifications ceived he recommended that the debt of the Harbor Trust should be consolidated, and that the Government should agree to capitalize the amount at five per cent. interest, and take the management of the Trust into their own hands. That was not agreed to, and the negotiation failed. The year before last the negotiation was again resumed, and a committee from the Harbor Trust, the Quebec Board of Trade, Hon. Mr. MACKENZIE said the Government were taking the same course with regard to the Quebec Harbor Board that they had with regard to the Montreal Harbour Board; that is, as the Board would have the disbursement of a large amount of public money, the Gov-and the shipping interest, came to Ottawa ernment thought it only right that they should have the appointment of the majority of the Board. for the purpose of entering into some arrangement which would put the Trust upon a better footing and provide better facilities for shipping. The proposition agreed to was that the Government should buy up the Harbor Bonds, that a new Trust should be constituted, and that an additional charge should be placed upon certain goods coming into and leaving the Port of Quebec, and upon that proposition was based the law of 1873. The law gave the Government a minority on the Board, but still the minority was sufficiently large to protect the public interests. Now, in view of the failure of the to return to it. History would repeat itself and it would be found in the course of time that the Quebec merchants would again throw the responsibility of the failure of the Harbor Trust upon the Government, because they had the appointment of a majority of the members, and the Government might again have to buy up more worthless bonds of the Trust. Only from a party point of view could he see any advantage in this measure. It would give the Government a little more patronage, but it would increase their responsibility in a way that they might yet have to pay dearly for. Hon. Mr. MITCHELL made a state ment of the position of the Quebec Harbor Trust. He said when it was originally created it received power to borrow money, and did so to the extent of $700,000. It likewise received power to levy a duty of five cents per ton upon all vessels coming into the Port of Quebec. The object of raising this money and imposing this charge was to enable the Board to provide better facilities for shipping. Instead of providing these facilities, the Harbor Trust spent the money in purchas-old system why did his hon. friend wish ing existing wharves, and in building a separate dock at the mouth of the River St. Charles. In fact they provided very few additional facilities to the shipping. The result was that the rent received for these wharves did not pay the interest upon the bonds. That state of things continued for a considerable time; and for two or three successive years negotiations were carried on with the Harbor Trust and the Quebec Board of Trade with a view to improving the condition of affairs. The Harbor Trust wanted to get their bonds paid which were in arrears, and the Board of Trade wanted the additional facilities for shipping which were promised when the five per cent. duty was levied. In fact an agitation had begun among the business men to have this duty abolished seeing that the facilities promised had not been provided. It was represented to the Government that as they had the appointment of the majority of the Harbor Trust they were responsible for the unfortunate state into which its affairs had fallen. The result was that surveyors were appointed to inquire into the condition of the Trust, the extent of the facilities to shipping which had been provided by it, and into the financial state of Hon. Sir John A. Macdonald. Hon. Mr. SMITH took issue with the argument of the hon. member for Northumberland, that the tax was local in its operation. Every man in the Dominion. especially those in the western Provinces, were interested in the question. Every shipowner in this country and many shipowners in England who send their vessels to Quebec, were interested in the tax. sons would, of course, prefer that the Government should have control of the Board which would have the power of levying the tax on shipping, and he was surprised that the hon. member for Northumberland should have contended that the Those per |