knew that the Icelandic system of education had been so diffused that the people were intelligent; and all who came here were, no doubt, quite prepared to judge matters from their standpoint, which they had the advantage of approaching in their own language. It was quite evident that the proceedings connected with all these municipal arrangements must necessarily be in English, which was unknown to these people; the elder people would not take it up, no matter how intelligent they were, and the circumstances would throw the whole control of these municipalities into the hands of a few persons who understood the language and the working of this machinery. A few men would run the whole machine. Instead of diffusing liberty, and doing what the hon. gentieman desired to do in all the legislation he inaugurated and advocated giving to each person a voice in the making of the laws in which he was interested—and, no doubt, the hon. gentleman was actuated by a sincere desire to bestow upon all these people an equal chance with respect to their municipal arrangements-it was perfectly certain, and it could not, indeed, be otherwise, that, with machinery like this, the e matters would fall into the hands of a few persons whom he would not call designing people, though this might be the case. These persons would elect themselves or other officers; and this it was impossible, with such machinery, to prevent. If the plain, simple arrangement of voting viva voce, without all this machinery, were adopted, however, these people would better understand what they were about. These matters would be conducted in a foreign language, and, however intelligent these people might be, they would not be able to comprehend what was being done, and the few who would understand it, would naturally control the many. This was an objection more serious than any other, and it ought to be taken into serious consideration.

MR. LANGEVIN said he regretted the fact that the hon. the Minister of the Interior had not made an answer with regard to what he had suggested. The hon. gentleman might

have said whether it would be considered or not. He had first referred to the ballot paper, and had informed the hon. gentleman as to the difficulties that were met with in our party elections, and other frauds perpetrated on account of these ballot papers not being numbered. They were numbered in the local elections of the Province of Quebec, and, consequently, the same frauds did not exist. The hon. gentleman said they had the envelope in the Federal elections, and that they intended to detect the fraud if attempted in this case, because there would be no envelope, and because the returning officer would have to place on the back of the paper his initials and when the voter returned from the ballot compartment, the returning officer would see whether his initials were on the back of the ballot paper or not, in order that he might know whether it was a genuine paper or not. Very well; but he would refer the hon. Minister of the Interior to the 21st clause, which provided that no person who had received his ballot paper from from the the returning officer should take the same out of the voting place, and any person who did so, should forfeit his right to vote at that election, and the deputy returning officer should note the fact of his having done so, on the poll book. If an attempt to defraud was made, it would be done in this manner: An elector would come out with a ballot paper, but he would not deposit it; he would leave the place and give his ballot paper to another individual, who would take it to the committee room where the scheme was being worked The ballot paper would be marked in accordance with the wish of the person who

perpetrated the fraud; this marked paper would be given to a voter who would be instructed to deposit it in a ballot box, and to bring back his ballot paper; this would be done, the fresh ballot paper would be marked, and handed to another voter, and so on. This fraud had been exposed in the newspapers, and the hon. gentleman must see that, by this provision, it would not be avoided. this fraud could not be perpetrated if the ballot papers were numbered and initialled by the returning officer.

But

The number would be on the margin, and when the voter came back with it the returning officer would see that the number was that of the ballot paper which he had given him according to the book in which these matters were recorded; hence the fraud mentioned could not be committed under this system. He called attention to this point, because he thought that it was a very important matter. If the election was fraudulently conducted, the councillors would be chosen illegally, and consequently the officers of these municipalities would be managed by those who had no right to to do so. He thought that the Quebec system should be adopted, so far as the ballots were concerned. He would like to know whether the hon. gentleman would consider the suggestion.

MR. MILLS: I will do so.

MR. MASSON said that, if the system mentioned were not adopted, a very high penalty would have to be imposed if such frauds were perpetrated.

MR. MILLS: Certainly.

MR. COSTIGAN said that the 22nd clause should in some respects be changed, in order to protect the people. He did not think it was right to give to every returning officer the power of marking any voter's ballot alone. This was not done in connection with the Dominion elections; and he considered that this system ought to be made as perfect as possible. In the Dominion elections, it was provided that in such cases where the elector was unable to mark his own ballot, he might appeal to the deputy returning officer, who must

mark the ballot in accordance with the wishes of the elector and in presence, he believed, of the candidates or their representatives. There must be some check on the deputy returning officer to see that he carried out the intentions of such elector; for, owing to the fact that this person was unable to read, he would else be entirely at the mercy of the deputy returning officer, who might take advantage of this circumstance to mark the ballot quite contrary to the wishes of the elector. Such a temptation should not be left open, and such ballots should be

marked in presence of the candidates or their agents. The Dominion Election Law also provided that the voting by ballot should be secret, and this was the whole principle of the ballot system; but under this section, as far as this law was concerned, the officer was perfectly free to publish to the world how an elector, who had his ballot paper so marked, voted. If the system was to be carried out in its entirety, so that secrecy might be preserved, provision would require to be made therefor in the clause. Protection would need to be given to the clector that his vote would be deposited according to his wishes, and the fundamental principle of the ballotthat of secrecy-carried out.

MR. MILLS said that, when a ballot paper had to be filled up by the returning officer, it should be so marked in dates and their agents. in the presence of the different candi

MR MASSON: I think that is a bad

way of preserving secrecy.

MR. MILLS: I think under the Dominion law it is provided that where an elector is not able to mark his own ballot-paper, he asks the deputy returning officer to do so in presence of the candidates' agents, all of whom are sworn not to divulge the manner in which the vote has been given, and in this way the possibility of fraud on the part of a returning officer is prevented.

MR. MILLS said he proposed to candidate shall have more than two amend the 27th clause by adding “no agents at any polling place.

MR. MASSON: There might be two agents present for each candidate.

MR. PALMER: And that would not

prevent each candidate from being present also.

MR. LANGEVIN: What is the use of having more than one?

MR. MILLS: I have no objection alter the number to one.

Section, as amended, agreed to.

MR. POPE said that, supposing a man became insolvent, he would have to vacate his seat?

MR. MILLS: Not because he is insolvent, but because he has no qualification.

MR. POPE: What is the qualification of the Ontario Act.

MR. SMITH: $200 freehold and $200 leasehold.

MR. BOWELL said that the qualification was not affected at all by insolvency. If a person qualified as a householder, his insolvency would not take away that qualification.

MR. COSTIGAN said, with reference to the last part of this section, which stated that the party must swear that he was the person whose name was on the list shown him, it was impossible for a man who could not read to take

that oath. He had seen parties disfranchised on that account. No man who could neither read nor write would be willing to swear that certain signs shown him were his name. He had seen one or two cases where men of property had been disfranchised and prevented from depositing their votes because they refused to take this oath.

MR. SMITH: That is the case in all municipal elections.

MR. MILLS said in every case where the ballot was adopted, if a person voted who had no right to vote, the law of secrecy was held not to apply to him. He could be examined, and could not plead the Act for secrecy. True, a man who had voted improperly would not be a very good witness for the candidate whom he opposed.

MR. BOWELL said, with reference to the 49th clause, a week was not sufficient between the election of the council and its first meeting.

MR. MILLS said he thought it was quite sufficient. It was only a township election.

MR. POPE (Compton) said, in a new community like this, the treasurer, clerk, and collector would probably be the same person. By the Act, they were bound to elect three persons.

MR. MILLS said there was no obligation to do so. There would not be sufficient supervision over the treasurer if both were the same party.

MR. WHITE: Is there any provision limiting the amount of taxation that may be imposed by the Council, as in Ontario?

struck off.

MR. MILLS said, if the person had no right to vote, the law of secrecy did not prevent his name being struck off. He could be examined under oath as to the candidate for whom he had voted.

MR. LANGEVIN said, in the first instance, previous to depositing his vote, the man had been sworn, and afterwards he was convicted of the offence "of having wrongfully voted. If in the first instance he took a false oath, he would not scruple doing so when under examination, and swear he had deposited his vote for one candidate while he had voted for the other, and thus strike an additional blow at the candidate whom he had defrauded

in the first instance.

hon. gentleman was aware that he had not provided fully for the municipal machinery, as it was provided in the

Ontario Statute. In fact that Statute filled some three hundred pages of a large volume. He wished to avoid setting out in detail all the various duties of the officers. He deemed it better to follow the system adopted in Manitoba in this case and confer this power upon the municipalities.

limit the amount of taxation. MR. MASSON said the Bill should

MR. MILLS said the difficulty in determining the limit was due to the value of property. In a section of the country, for instance, where land was only worth 50c. per acre, the limit of taxation would hardly be sufficient to build a bridge. It would be very difficult to adopt a limit at present.

MR. WHITE said if the value of property was so very low, people would be less able to pay taxation. It appeared to him to be absolutely necessary that some limit should be imposed on the council there as well as in other parts of the Dominion as to the extent of taxes they might be empowered to raise. The municipalities of Keewatin were clothed, under this Act, with very extensive powers. MR. MILLS said he did not see how they were to meet it. If they adopted a limit here, the result would be that some sections could not impose a sufficient tax to pay a teacher's salary. The Bill provided for schools as well as municipal machinery.

MR. LANGEVIN said he thought vacancies in the council should be filled as they were in Lower Canada, by the choice of the remainder of the Councillors. There was no necessity for new elections, with all their expenses to fill such vacancies.

MR. MILLS: We would not allow a

MR. DESJARDINS said that in banks, vacancies were filled by the remaining directors.

MR. GIBBS (South Ontario) said he had seen a whole week wasted in the election of a reeve.

MR. MACKENZIE: Leave all to the people that you can.

MR. LANGEVIN: There ought to be a limit. Suppose a vacancy occurred one month before the expiration of the year, would you compel the people to fill the vacancy by election ?

MR. MACKENZIE: Certainly.

MR. LANGEVIN: And necessitate a double election ?

MR. MACKENZIE: Yes.

MR. LANGEVIN: If the vacancy occurs three months before the term of the council expires, there should be no election.

that way.

MR. MASSON said that reference was frequently made to the Ontario Municipal Act, but the Quebec Act was just as good. In many instances the laws of Quebec were superior to those of Ontario. It was exceedingly absurd to require a municipality with 80 electors, in order to fill a vacancy for three months, to go through all the ordeal of an election by ballot. The whole thing was absurd. The hon. gentleman was pushing matters to such an extent as to oblige all members who did not support the Government to oppose the Bill.

MR. MILLS: Suppose there were three vacancies, what would then be done?

MR. GIBBS (South Ontario): Suppose there was only one vacancy, and two votes on each side, how would it be decided? There would be a deadlock. We in Ontario would not for a moment entertain the system that is carried out in Quebec.

MR. POPE (Compton) said that the Quebec system worked very well. He had seen it in operation not once or twice but fifty times.

MR. MACKENZIE: That happens very rarely.

MR. MASSON: I know it is very rare, but it is occurring now.

MR. MACKENZIE: Not that I am aware of.

MR. GIBBS (North Ontario): The question as to filling up a vacancy should be left to the council. It would be absurd, if only for one month of a term, an election was ordered. It should be at the discretion of the council to order a new election.

MR. GIBBS (South Ontario): I would not give them power.

MR. MILLS: It is hardly worth while to make exceptions of all sorts. MR. MACKENZIE: Such cases occur very rarely.

Progress ordered to be reported.
House resumed.
Progress reported.

House adjourned at
Fifteen minutes before
Two o'clock.