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

Outside of Hon. Paul Leduc. Min-- ister of Mines, who sponsored the amendments, John J. Glass, St. \Andrew, was the only Liberat to SUCCESSION LAW SCORED AS SNOOPING The Hepburn Government's Suc-- cession Duties Act amendments passed committee stage of the Legislature yesterday--but only af-- ter Colonel Fraser Hunter (Liberal, St. Patrick), had warned that the people in his opinion would not support any administration which subscribed to the principle of such "snooping" legislation; and after Arthur Ellis (Cons., South Ottawa), had failed in a motion to have the bill referred back to the Legal Committee for consideration. Joined with Colonel Hunter in Liberal opposition to the tegisla-- tion was W. E. N. Sinclair, South Ontario, who claimed that such law should be lecislated by the House and not by the officers of the Suc-- cession -- Duties Department, and who described it as so much "pin-- pricking regulations." s A second amendment, moved by Wilfrid Heighington (Cons., St. David), was also blocked by the Gov-- ernment forcos. This amendment would have provided for an appeal to the courts from Treasurer's deci-- sions in respect of estates exceed-- ing $15000, or where the duty in-- volved was 8250 or more. Amendment Passes Commit-- tee Stage Over Con-- servative Protests POLIC Y DEFENDED The Oppssition, salid Mr. Henry, was solidly behind the Government in its attempts to collect back duties where fraud had beeu prac-- ticed, but it was just as determin-- edly against the present poli:icy which had made of the Succession Duties office "a persecution office to hound the widows and depen-- dents of deceased persons, going int> all their private affairs, even seeking to include in estates gifts of a few hundred dollars in value given for purely personal adorn-- ment. "The amendment," objected Hon. Paul Leduc, *might send hundreds --yes thousands, of cases to the courts and cause endless delays." Hon. Mr. Nixon could not see why the act should so suddenly become "so vicious" when for years, under Conservative administration, very little criticism had been raised against it. Was it, he wondered simply because a Liberal Govern-- ment was administering it at the present time? "It seems to be." said he. "a pol-- icy of getting the last doll--r out of very estate, whether in justice a * not." "I won't accept that remark," cracked Hon. Mr. Nixon. "It's not true. Those who make fair and proper returns have no cause to fear this law, but those who try to cireumvent this law--employing the best possible advice in some cases to attain their ends--are not going to get away with it. The siip-- shod methods which obtained in the day of my honorable friend (Mr. Henry) as Treasurer no long-- er obtain, I can tell you." "The lawyors would get more out of the estates than the Crown," declared Provincial Secretary Harry Nixon, who was leading the House at the time. "That's the very reason," inter-- posed Opposition Leader Henry. "Because you people have had charge of its administration for the last two years." N t March 4 More Interpretations Than Lawyers, Says George S. Henry a CIIIII]G1 Pn : NNeCeneeeNe Wel o CComenti ces NE 0 Wilfrid Heighington (Cons., Si. David) charged that the primary . tendency of the legislation was to "soak those who showed any symp-- toms of thrift in their makeup" and | to penalize those who contribured | largely to the build--up of Ontario's The separate school question raised its head in the Legislature last night when Opposition Lead-- er George Henry charged that there were more interpretations of last year's legislation "than lawyers in the Province." In the closing fifteen minutes of a two--hour address, Mr. Henry plunged into the school issue and pictured the Premier as confused and not knowing which way to turn to get out of the "morass in which he finds conditions." "Joker" Denied. address the House in support of the Minister. Colonel Hunter claimed that the bill, in principle, was "thoroughly wrong." It allowed officers of the department to "snoop into private affairs" and it actu-- ally, in his belief, set up one class against another. "Any one, appar-- ently, who wants to make some sav-- ings, is regarded under this law as a criminal," he declared, _heateol_y. SAYS PREMIER I$ CONFUSED Hon. Paul Leduc, Minister of Mines, who guided the separate school -- legislation through the House, was accused of trying to in-- sort a "joker" in the bill on the last day of the session. This was a clause which would have had the effect of compelling all Roman Catholics to _ support separate xc}:ools whether they wanted to or not. The charge was indignantly de-- nied by Mr. Leduc, who asserted there was no compulsion. The Minister shook his head vigorously as Mr. Henry repeated the accusa-- tion. "No one knows who drafted the bill," said Mr. Henry. "I do not think the law elerks had anything to do with it. In any case the draughtsman was never proud enough to show his face. There have been dozens of appeals against the act, and yet the Government stands by and does not seek to clear the air. "In fact, when law officers of the Crown attempt to interpret the statute, they are told to keep quiet on pain of losing their heads industries.