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

By Mr. Hay--The petition of the Town Council of Stratford praying that the Bill be-- fore the Hous® respecting the amalgamation of the Port Dover and Lake Huron, the Stratford and Huron, and the {(teorgian Bay and Wel-- lington Railway Companies as the Grand Trunk, Manitoulin, Georgian Bay, and Lake Erie Railway Company may not pass.. 4 The Speaker took the chair at 3 o'clock. PETITIONS. The following petitions were presented :-- By Mr. Creightou--Of Dennis Allen et al., also of Jonn Taylor «¢ a/., severally praying that the Bill before the House respecting the Toronto (Gravel Road and Concrete Company may not pass. Mr. Rosevear--Of the Town Council of Port H°P¢. praying for amendments to the Mun-- cipal Act respecting the right to charge a fee for admittance to public parks. Mr. Creighton--Of Adam Ainslie et al., of S{denham, praying for amendments to the Mumicipal Act respecting the general system. Mr. Ross --Of the Township Council of West Wawanosh--To amend the Assessment Act. Mr. Creighton--Of,Town Council of Meaford to same effect. By Mr. Lyon--The petition of the Saulte Ste. Marie Railway Company praying for an Act to amend their Act of Incorporations. REPORTS OF COMMITTEES. Mr. FRASER presented the tenth report of the Private Bills Committee. Mr. HARDY presented a report relative to the classification of clerks. PRIVATE BILLS. The Bill relative to London East was amend* ed in Committee, read a third time, and passed: DISTRIBUTICN OF REPORTS. Mr. CREIGHTON moved " That, in the opinion of this House, it would be in the public interest to have the Public Accounts and De-- partmental Reports printed as soon as possible after the expiration of the years to which they respectively relate, and to have the same circu-- lated immediately upon being printed, whether the House shall be in session at such time or FOURTH PARLIAMENT--SECOND SEssION. not." This question had been frequently brought under the notice of the House, and had always been voted caown. But the argu-- ments that had heretofore been used against it could not be used now. Last August, when they were at their homes, they had received a report. And more than that, this report was sent out with a he on the face of it. He did not object to the report being sent out, but he wanted to show that the argument of un-- constitutionality had been done away with by hon. Ministers themselves. _ Some of the rifiorts were brought down in time, but others were very late, notably the Educational Report, which was usually about two years be-- hind time. He hoped that hereafter they would adopt a more sensible rule, and send out the reports as soon as they were ready, whether the House was in session or not. Mr. FRASER thought it a pity that his hon, friend was so much out of temper, and that he had made a motion so much out of season. It was his hobby, however, to make that motion apnually. The sending out of a report in August was not inconsistent with the position taken by the Government in 1878. 'The posi-- tion they took then they took now --that it was a well understood constitutional rule that reports shou.d be submitted to the House be-- fore being sent abroad. The report referred to by his hon. friend as being distributed out of session was a re{:ort., not addressed to the Lieut.--Governor, but to the Treasurer, and therefore was a report which could properly be sent out to the country before being submitted to the House. There was no reason why they should -- break the well--known _ constitu-- tional rule in the matter, 'The leader at Ottawa ot -- hou. _ gentlemen -- opposite had not made a word public of a most impor-- tant bargain, involving many millions of dol-- lars, before Parliament met, although such an exceptional matter as that might well have been made public before the assembling of Par-- liament. The report of the Minister of Educa-- tion was not two years old when brought down as alleged, but one year only. _ That was un-- ;voidaile. however. Mr. CROOKS said that cireumstances pre-- vented the iummf,l of the Education Report before some months after the expiry of the vious year.. There were many diificulties pre Y¥ A Y in the way of bringing down that report sooner, ONTARIO LEGISLATURE. Wednesday, Feb. 16. *"Mr., MERKIEVLTHL saiu he objected to the tone used by the hon. gentleman on the op-- posite side of the House in this discussion. He T M q o t O Adliccs «B ko M#l_fuu." /s recognized the high ability of the Minister of Pubfil:; Works, but if there was one thing in which he made a mistake, it was in the tone which he usually used in address-- ing the House. Mr. Fraser had made out no case whatever ugainst the motion. Me did not say that the Minister of Education was¢o blame, because the House did not get the Educationat Report at an earlier season, but if the report coxH(()i not be got ready earlier than July of each year, he did not see why it should not be distributed to members as soon as it was ready. There need be no violation of con-- stitutional rule, aud he thought that the House should sutwrt the motion. Mr. MILLER sympathized with the object of the resolution. It was, he said, a great dif-- ference between the practice in England of sub-- mitting the Parliamentary reports there, because of the great political importance attach-- ed to some of the British ieports. It was impossible for members, hard at work from morning till night in session, to find time to digest the reports of the Departments. He would like to have them in summer when he might find some spare moments to read them up. MHe hoped the Government would re-- consider their decision in the matter. Mr. SINCLAIR said he believed that in-- stead of blame the Government deserved praise for their promptness in bringing down reports, and he could not see the utility of breaking through the customary rules of the House. In this case there was no grievance whatever. 'The reports were all brought down during the session, except the report of the Minister of Education ; and the Minister of Education had given good -- sasons for not bringing his report earlies. e would move in amendment that as the reports were now brought down at as early a date as possible, there was no ne-- cessity for departing from the constitutional rule. Mr. LAUDER could not see why these tables should not be submitted to the House sooner. They knew that the Education De-- partment required time to prepare it, but it did not require a whole year, To say that the distribution of these statistics was a violation of any constitutional rui« was, in hbis opinion, simply ridicalous. !l .ay statute prevented this desirable cor~se fcom being pursued it should be changec., and the reports given to the country immediately they were 1-en(¥y. Mr. CREIGHTON said that in speaking on his motion he had not intended to speak in a personal manner, but merely to show that the arguments once used against the motion could not be used now. He did not think it was a {:arty matter at all, and he thought it would e wrong for the Government to vote down uis motion, as he believed it would be in the hbest interest of the country to have the reports dis-- tributed at as »arly a date as possible. c k The House divided on the anendment, which was carried on the following division :---- ¥ras.--Messrs, Appleby, Awrey. Ballantyne, Baxter, Bishop, Blezard, Caldwell, Cascaden,Chis-- holm, Cook, Crooks, Deroche, Dryden, Ferris, ¥Field, Praser, --eeman.(Gibson (Hamilton), Gibson (Huron), Graham, Harcounrt, Hardy, l[awle(y. Hay, Hunter, Laidlaw, Livingstone, Lyon, McCraney, McKim, McLaughlin, Mowat, Murray, Nairn, Neelon, Pardeo, Patterson, Paxton, Peck, lNobin-- son (Cardwell), Robinson (Kent), Robertson (Hal-- t\(\m). Ross, Sinclair, Springer, Striker, Waters, 'ood --48. NAys.--Messrs. Baker, Bell, Boulter, Broder, Calvin, Creighton, French, Jelly, Kerr, Lauder, I ans T.ana MeVahon. Mc Master. Mflvck! Mere- Wood --48.. NAys.--Messrs. Baker, Bell, Boulter, Broder, Calvin, Creighton, French, Jelly, Kerr, Lauder, Lees, Long, McMahon, Mc Master, Mack, Mere-- dith, Merrick, Metcalie, Miller, Monk, Morgan, Near, -- Richardson, Rosevear, Tooley, White, Wigle--27. Mr. Baskerville paired with Mr. Bonfield. RAILWAY AID. Mr. MILLER moved for a return showing :-- (1) The total amount of serip issued for this Province under authority of the * Railway Aid Act," the * Railway Subsidy Fund," or any other Act or Order granting aid to railways out of the finds of the Province. (2) The amount redeemed and the amount outstanding on the ist day of January, 1881. (3) The names of the railways to which serip has been issued, anid the amount granted to each road, especially 2 3 a a§cse@diece t l 12 i 6 w ts i nchinaitatis:--Annieale in t t3 i 1 showing the amounts redeemed and the amounts outstanding. _ (4) The present value of serip due each road at the date above--named, caleu-- lating the payments as capitalized at 5 per cent. -- Carried. THE AGRICULTURAL AND ARTS ASSsO-- CIATION. _ Mr. GRAHAM moved that, in the opinion of this House, after the expiration of the cur-- rent year, it will not be in the interest of the public to continue the annual grant of $10,000 o ooo dn ns 1] dn uie *AE AnFawii puluw 344 4. 220442A 60 cce hy trubai tcrin t -- _A 1 to the Agricultural Association of Ontario, He said it might seem strange that a practical farmer like himself should move for the aboli-- tion of a grant ostensibly used for the'benefit; of P i qoug hi ho n BA Ik hsY ED us1 Po® 1 farmers. _ He contended, M h;)\\e'vcr, that it did