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

Mr, PAASILIK said it was vor{ desirable thet betting at celections should. be> prevented, but he did not think the Bill under discussion would have the effect desired. The Bill only ra-- lated to the betting of electors, but it was well known that young men who had no vote, and whose names could not be found u{von the assessment rolls, were in the habit of betting a good deal upon the result of. elections, and the Bill vourd not affect such bets. Ho did not think that an elector betting-- upon the success of a man for whom he had. Mr. WOOD asked if there was not already a penailty attached to botting. Mr, CAMERON said there was no ponalty in the statute law; there might, however, be in common law. - ogfouito effect,. _ His hon. friend had been able to find no legislation of this kind. In ore of the States there was legislation declar ing betting to be illegal, but making the vote void. He thought it required more considera-- tion before the dlo;:(é this Bill to Km into law, and he L:fi?d his hon. friend would withdraw this Bi late betting on a large scale. Betting of all kinds was i'd it was extremely important that it should be put down; but we must take care that our legislation did not have an opposite eflect, _ His hon. friend had been throughout intended to vote was a corrupt practice, and he informed the House that there were laws already providing for corrupt betting at clections, For instance, if a man had determined to vote for a certain candi-- date, and a bet was offered that he would vote for another candidate, that would be a cortupt practice, for which the law already provided ; and his hon. friend the member for East Tororto was incorreét when he stated that betting was not prohibited by statute law, If it had been the intention of the mover of the Bili to make all betting and wagering Ulegal, he bet would théniii be prevented from voting. The only effect of the Bill would beto stimu-- No dautiet rielintel ~Aoviages > tadWd {s S 4t I duce the desiged result. He understood, from the obser¥vativns of the hon. gentleman, | that his special object was to prevent . wholessle " betting _ at elections, ---- Ho--, had mentioned a. case where a man | bet $700. He (Atty.--Gen.) did not think this Bill would prevent betting of that kind. A man who went into betting in that large way would not be deterred by the loss of his vote. 'The only effect of the Bill ----it it had an{;?fl'oct at all--would be to' picvent small bets, in regard to which the hon. gentleman had not complained that any ] great evil existed. There had been some this country, in regard to the illog:ll of wegering genor::fy. The law in ti'ng- land, with regard to betting at elections E".b:bt.lt; if a bet was made as a vell tors Ti en it was a corrupt practice, an would have the effect of .voisi.ng the e;o'oficn. ' He was afraid that so far from this Bill hav--" ing the effect professedly desired it wou'd be found to have an opposite effect, ~It would' he was afraid, give an impulse to betting. In the case of the man who betted $700, his ressons for betting would be very much stronger, for every man with whom he could to make all betting and wagering miegal, he (Mr. Fraser) '0015 have lupporntgd it.a u"l'he measure, however, was not calculated to re: press the evil complained of, but to make it very much worse, and therefore he had great pleasure in supporting the ameniment to the original resolution, and giving it his cordial approval. f Mr. MERRICK believed betting had a serious effect on elections. He thought the Bill would have a beneficial effect, because the fact that a bet made would invalidate a vote would deter many from betting, If the Bill were sent to Committee,amendmeats could be made in details. Mr. CaAMERON regretted to see the hou, member from Stormont having so little regard for his own views as to chango them on ac-- count of anything said lg the member for Grenville. _ He (Mr. ameron) thought the arguments of that hon. gontloman woery far--fetched. His own opinion was Curvom Decome that & M "-"f;:li:u arisen in the country in favour of aom% measgure as this. » Mr. FRASER said it was very desirable uexcine th ne [ g)_ _ __ O . L favour of some such common had this "That every person who voted for a candidate «* for any other reason than that his opinions'! ' were in accord with m candidate's shoald. | have this action discountenanoed, and he be-- _--| lieved that this Bill would have that .ten-- __| dency. . If the Hon. Attorney--General thought the principle of the Bill correct, as he apparently did, why did he not allow the measure to pass, or else embody some such provisgions ll;.;m election law? , sipifinitt "hil tnhabdacd ad 14 Mr. FRASER replied in the affirmative, but reminded the hon, gentleman that peti. tioners could make any charge they chose in Mr. FRASER indignantly denied that he _ was unsfutod 1;on a:loount (;;f any char of corrupt practices, n the' contrag:y the expression of the Court and counsel that decided the matter was, no kind of cormfit practices had been proved against him. He was entirely freed from the cfinge by the petitioners as well as the coun-- sel. He thought, to say the least, it was vYory uncourteous to make a charge of that description in the House, ,_ Mr. RYKERT asked if ho was not charged in the petition with corrupt practices, Mr. RYKERT said be had only referred to corrupt practices with which the hon. gontleman was charged, in consequence of which he was nnseated, P P Ks akiw in' a00, v."" NEppuel 16. He thought that the tendency of this Bill would be to lessen corruption, and he was of the oglnlon that the members of that House should not vote down a moasure which would tend to suppress corruption. Mr. RYKERT 'thought that Mr. Mowat, if he considered the principle of theBill good, should eliminate--its objectiouable features and support it. But that he would not do, as he saw the other members of his party were not with him, and therefore he o posed it altogether, In referring to Mr. Fpnnr'l objections to the Bill, he made an allusion to the oormg: practices with which that gentle« man had been charged, * Mr. FRASER asked if the hon. entlentan intended to charge him in the Hgouae with > corrupt practices. Mr. DEROCHE thought the Bill was a good one, and that it was his duty to lntpport 16. _ He thought that the tendency of this 1>5 Lolo on ue & & Mr, LAUDER did not see how they could, make the distinction between the principle and carrying of it out. Hon, Mr., McKELLAR said it warre: freshing to hear hon. _(fentkmén opposite speak against bribery and corruption Daring the summer, whileuthe electi;:ns hv.v(;re gc;:ng' on. every hon. gentle 0o oken which v'}u mdufigifif?n% mobt n?ni&u's actions, assisted in the East by the hon member for Léeeds, It was indeed refroshing to hear these gentlemen, who had aided in the vilest attempt to corrupt the constitu---- encies of the country, uttemlvt to raise & cry for purity at clections. Theso gentlemen might be told by their acts, not by their pro-- testations. If they were actuated by a sin-- cere desire to promote purity at elections they should vote against the party at Ottawa j which was kecping bribery and corruption in ! vogug, He belicved that there was at the last election an t of that CGovernment, with money in mat every constisuency. Mr, CALVIN had not.heard any member state that the Bill was not a step in the right direction, and if it were a step in the right direction he thought it ought to go before a Nelect Committee, so that they might have the advantages of the deliberations of that Committee, He was in favour of the Bill, but he had not given the matter sufficient consideration to give it a definite support. Ho, however, thought the Bill ought to be dofendcd, as it aimed a blow at the corrupt practices common at election, and therefore fie ' intended to support it. l Hon, Mr freshing .to speak again! the summe: Mr. LAUDER thought the hon. member for Grenville was exercised by some local in-- Huence to oppose this measure, although he Acknowledges:, as the Premier had dons, that the principle was correct, Atty--Gen. MOWAT said that he had not done so either, although he disapproved of betting. Mr. FRASER denied that he had approved of the principle, upon a special kind of betting--a piece of. clap trap to koodwink the mle and em-- barrass the Government. king at the ullna"firllin this view, ho would vote against: the Bill. Mr. FITZSIMMONS charged the mombers of the Government with inconsistency in op-- posing this Bill, He believed it was appro-- ved of by the country, and that it would bave a good eifect, In 'his riding the Rs-- formers had been guilty of bribery at the iast clection, surpassing anything he had ever known before. Dr. CLARKE approved of declaring all betting Megal, but this was mercly an attack yosi atures | ot d:y, | w § posed rasger's .