The following text may have been generated by Optical Character Recognition, with varying degrees of accuracy. Reader beware!

The Act merely gave them power over tavern liconses for reyvonue purposes, therefore showing that they had only limiu-«f power, Now Mr. Bethune said--and I am reading from The Mail report, I will quote from Ts GroBE afterwards ---- The point raised by the hon. member for East Toronto had been discussed in the United States in reference t? the Maine and other laws, and it was decided that it was quite competent for any community to protect itself in regard to future regulations to the extent provided in the Bill. So long as the Legislature did not prohibit -- entirely this traftfic it had a right to protect the health and interests of this Province by any regulations con-- sidered expedient. The Bill was simply a re--en-- actment of provisions which appeared in 2 Vic, Mr. Cameron then said :-- BUT A HALTING SUPPORT-- inasmuch as if he had united his party, he could have said at Ottawa, " The Ontario Government have been exercising this juris-- diction tor 15 or 16 years ; they have legislat-- ed upon it ; they have taken all the revenue; they have appointed all the officials except the judges. Before you bring muddle and trouble into the administration of the law-- before you bring about chaos--wait till you get a decision from the Privy Council saying that you have jurisdiction. Or if you pass an Act of Parliament, pass it so that it will comse into operation only when it is declared to be intra vires." (Applause.) That would have been the course for the gentleman to take if he bad not been halting in his sug port.' As to Mr. Bethune's opinion on the question of Provincial Mr. FRASER--I don't see amything base about it. _ I think it is quite a proper thing for a gentleman who proposes to form a coalition ---- teM)r. MORRLI '--I did not propose it. (Laugh-- r. Mr. FRASER-- Well, if he sa{s he didn't form a coalition, I take back that insinua-- tion. I didn't think he was prepared to say that a coalition of that kind would deserve the name he has given to it. _ Howeverthat may be, what I say is that the Leader of the Opposition gave us JURISDICTION IN LICENSE MATTERS. if there is anything more than another in this Province upon which the changes have been rung more than other, it is that the late Mr. Bothune was in doubt about juris-- diction resting with the Province. I say that the record proves just the reverse. I say that Mr. Bethune will not be found to have said a single wordl that indicates the Pro-- vince has not jurisdiction, (A&)plauso.) But that the only opinion expressed against Pro. vincial jurisdiction was f»v the hoa. leader of the Opposition's then leader, Mr. Cameroun. The Bill involved in some of its provisions a grave constitutional question to which he was not awarse the attention of the Attorney--General had been divrected. _A that moment there was an apbplication before the courts to quash a by--law of the township of Darlington, which prohibited the issue of more thaun four certificates to taverns within that township, and the question raised was asto the constitutionalit y of limiting thenumberof taverns. By the Confederation Act the Province was entitled to impose license fees for the purpose of revonue, but the Act did not state for any other purpose. _ It was clearly seen that for the financial purposes of this Province, we were at liberty to imnose such a _ tax upon _ liquor as should be for the public interests, but after obtaining the license fee it was questionable whether the jurisdiction did not end. 'Then the Bill was an interference with trade. He found that vessels that were licensed to sell liquor while in motion were prohibited from selling while at the whart. Jf the House had merely jurisdiction over this traffic for the purposes of revenuse, it had not power to prohibit a vesse! from selling at any place where such vessel might lm' pen to be, as that would be interfering with the r zht of tratfic in that which foll under the jurisdiction of the Dominion Government. Whatever the result of the application to quash the by--law he had re-- ferred to it is impossible to tell. As it was, a rule nisi had been granted to show cause why the by--law should not be quashed on the ground cited in the application. The Bill presumsd to license, and then prohibited the licensed party from selling. 1t was a question as to whether the Dunkin Act was in foree or not. 'There was no doubt that under the _ Municipal Act of the old Province of _ Canada before the Legislature repealed it, they had a right tolimit the sale of ll?uor, but the moment that Act was repcaled it left only those powers \{hlch were conferred under the Confederation Act. Then Mr. Crooks said :-- _ Mr. MEREDITHH--The hon. gentleman knows that Mr. Bothunse was against the Province having jurisdiction, MR. BETHUTNXE'S OPINION,. Hon. C. F. FRASER--I have Mr. Bethune's words here so strong@ly as to leave no doubt about the matter. When the Crooks Act was boing discussed as to jurisdiction on the 25th of February, 1834, Mr. Cameron said :-- _ Mr. MORRIS--I desire to give as emfyhatlc and positive a contradiction as onegentleman can give another to these base insinuations. in some way so that they could say to the Liberals, " That can be all arranged. Give yourselves notrouble about that. We have seen Sir John and there is a way out of the qtestiomers. . Oo.~ ~ nz 1 k e tuppad 3.3 \*' overpowering indignation he turned to me to tell me that Mr. 'hlake'n opinion was that branch railways should pass into the powerof the Dominion and only such as were not at all connected with im-- portant lines should be left to Provincial | Jurisdiction, and +na, 100. 1815 .A Hon. C. F. FRASER--Because these are strong views that I have read. I mean to say that I am surprised to find Mr. Bethune's name quoted in connection with this ques-- tion, and when the date 1874 was mentioned I decided to look up the matter, Now I will qulultu from THx Guoxsz report,. Mr. Bethune said :-- That there wasa close analogy between the United States and this country with regard to this constitutional point, and quoited from Storey's Commentaries on the Constitution of the United States to show that the State Legislaturo bad power to intericte in the liquor lm'u(flv. e was of opinion that 'this Logisliature "Wad nower L3 legi late in this mannor, and said that if they hol the right to repealthe Municipat Aci of 1860 they had P."m'er to pass laws in accordance with that low. Hosnoko of the extont to which adnl. terats'a was carried both in this citv and in tho [p [ . 03 Nner good. He left the true trail, if I may keep up the simile, and went aftar the rabbit, (Laughterand applause.) I thought he was about to make a capital point «yhen he worked himself into a little indignation about high way robbery and turned on me. With a somewnat overpowoering indi_qnatlon he turned to me to tall ma 11 i\ yao)"GibAvIUI Because the Act, of Confederation stated that the Province could issue licenses tfor revenue t{;ur- poses, it did not follow that they were con ned merely to issuing licenses for that pur]fmsc. 1t they could repeu'i the Municipal Act 0 1856, it was because they had power to pass laws incon-- sistent with that Act. He referred to, and quoted from, Storey's Commentaries on the Constitution of the Unitod States to show that the Legisiature had power to deal with the llqim)r trafile, and con-- tended that this Legislature iad similar powers. He did not assert that the fact of the House lmss- in'g the Bill wouldgivuhem the jurisdiction claim-- ed, but he thought noth'ng haud 'been done that would impair the power the Houase had asserted by the Act 1858--9. He thought that the Bill did not Eu far cnough. The Hounse had certainly power _ to cep the liquor trafii> within proper bounds. He was told t}mt in this city there were taverns whore all kin ds of liquor weore manufactured from whiskoy by the addition of deleterious drufs.' It was wolliknown that in some cases delirium tremens was the result of the administration of those drugs. HMe was told that in this city there were places where brandy and gin were manufac tured from whiskey by means of drags. The bot-- tles were imported from England, and the articles put in them. | It was very doesirable that the Gov-- ernment should legislate to meet this species of frand. He had in the country come across whiskey of the vilest description, He thought that the Government should enact that the liquor should be subject to analytical examinations, with a view to the destruction of the spurious article. Such an enuactment would be a public boon. _He also ad-- vised that tavorns should be compelled to close at an carly hour each day in the week. Half the evils of intemperance would be swoept away if such & provision were added to the Bill. That is the entire report of The Mail of what Mr. Bethune said. There is not a single word in it to show that Mr. Bethune had any doubt as to where the jurisdiction rested. Mr. Bethune hbad strong views on the sub-- ject, but they were all in favour of the Pro-- vince lx:wingjurisdictiuu in the matter,. a¥ s o s m rmrr nurnll c BXA SWR Wasn \Mr. MEREDITH -- Why does the hou. gentleman say Mr. Bethune had strong views ? [ w S Mr. MEREDITH here read from a speech from Mr. Bethune on a subsequent occasion in which he contended that the Province had noi power to limit the number or prohibit the issue of shop licenses. He asked how this could be reconciled with Mr. Fraser's opinion. Hon. C. F. FRASER pointed out that Mr. Bethune clearly drew the distinction be-- tween licensing hotels and prohibiting shop licenses. I am willing, s:xi«.i he, to take up the words altogether, and put them along-- side, and say that his o inion is still favour-- able to Provincialjuris([iction. I think we have settled his position. That may very fairly be called protty strong opinion. Iwill now discuss the question \Vhicql 1 CALLED nrosszay, and to which the hon. leader of the Op-- nos&won added a word and called high way robSery, He was going on to muake a point Whey he acted just as a badly--trained dog would if a rabbit crossed a trail which was | not altogether good. He left the true trail, | if I may keep up the simile, and went after l !vhe rlbblt.fl.nughterand aininfnanemi FaL sllll I couas'y, and of thoe dosirabliity of havy-- ing wontrel ovor persons mixing (doeleterious liquors of this kind. The noxt best thing to prohi-- bition was the prevention of mdulteration, and hs advocated the sarly closing of saloons every day in the week. This would result in the reduction of the daily drunkenness and crime which were re-- voaled in the Police Court. So that when the Crooks Act was up for the first consideration and on the important stage of the second reading, Mr. Bethune gave it as his opinion that the provisions of the then propoased Act were within the Pro-- vincial jnrisSicLion. And he did not, at least I know of no time where he has expressed such an opinion against Provincial jurisdic-- tion as has beenu attributed to him. At some other time 1 don't say that he did not, and it is only fair to state that I have not searched further than through the debate from which I have read. io e oayp ie was going on to make a z acted just as a badly--trained a rabbit crossed a trail which es mae LC ¥r 10L [ Aantyq (j. "C5"@CCoqd wIcQ im-- °s should be left to Provincial , and that there were not 50 miles