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

anxious that the stock sold at the Provizccial Farm should be disposed of conditional upon its being retained within the Province, and he read resolutions passed by farmers' institutes in favour of this, He coutended that the farmers in the Bast werse very desirous of having the stock rslained in the country, hce. .. 4 Mr. RAYSIDE suggested that a sale of stock -\_mu!d be held in the eastern section of the Pro-- vince. Mr. GRAHAM suggested that a drawback be given on animais purchased by Ontario farmers, and that freight should be paid on the animals goid on the farm. _ m . us _ Ailr. MacKENZIE thought that if the farmers wanted good stock, they could pay for theim,. He had no opposition to holding a .J. in the castern section of the Province, Mr. MURRAY thought the resolution had been gotten up with a view ot finding fault with the Government. -- Ho was not averse, however, to a trial sale being held in the east. Mr. WILMOT contended that the resolution was not a fault--finding one, and if they desired to attack the Agriculitural Farm they would not do so on the imported stock question, for the caitle were a very nice lot. Mr. McCOLMAN said the psople of East Grey were very dosirous of having the surplus stock kept in the Province, and they considered that they have a preferential vight of purchasing. Mr. CARNEGIE thought the suggestion to pay the froight was a very reasonable one, as the farmers in the immediate noighbourhood of Guelph had great advantages over those distant. Mr. BALFOUR said the western part of the Province shared the tfeeling of the east, that the stock should be keps in the Province, and he should vote for thoe resolution. V o NMr. MoKAY advocated the adoption of some piinciple by which all parts of the Province would be put on an equality, which would also protect the Government, against imposition by Americans securiny the cattie,. Hon. A. M. ROSS--The motion which has been made is based upon an incorrect state-- meut, that the stock which has been sold has goue largely to the United States, and the critic.sm of the Government has been from that standpoint altogether. This i=, as I have said, incorrect,. _ We have only had two large sales of stock, and these were in 1881 and 1883, and I find that while in the former year over 100 lots were sold, only cight woere purchas. ed to go to the United States, being seven sheep and one buil, ln 1883 196 lots were sold, and of these 196 iots only seven went outside the Pro-- vince of Ontario. K« The motion EeP OR ENt was then withdrawn, Mr, GRAY moved for a return of covnies of all correspondence between the Minister of Edus cation, or any other officer of the Education Department, anml William Armstrong, late drawing master in the Model School, Turonto. Carried. Mr. KERNS moved for a return of the cost of entorcing the Canada Temperance Act in the county oi Halton for the years 1882 3--4, with statement of the receipts showing how much was paid by the Province by the County Council,and the amount recovered from fines and druggists' liconses. Also a statement of _ the expenditure suowing the sum puaid to the Polico Magistrate for his ealary and expenses ; the sum paid to the Liceuse Iuspectors for their salaries and ex« penses ; the amounts paid to Boards of License_ | iniutsintidedt Mb tbabin tivat rubmdbtie® o e coane Sutvent Commussioners for their fees and expenses, and any other expeuses that have been piuid. 'The number of convictions that have been quashed ; by what GCourt ; for what eause ; the amount of costs in each case, and by whom paid. He ex-- plained that there was a difference of opinion in the county of Halton as _ to how the ; cost was defrayed for adininistering the| Canada 'Femperauce Act. Thore were many | who belteved that the county had not been call>, ed upon to muke any contributions, but that the fines ard fees covered the cost. Many on the other hand belisved that the county had been called upon to contribute a considerable sum tor that parpose,. -- Tue appointment of an additional license inspector had added materially to the costs, and the expense had been further increased by she number of convictions by the Police Mavistrate which had been quashed, Under the circumstances, and in view of the fact that a large number of couuties had now | adopts ed the Scott Act, he thought it was uf the utmost importauce that the fulls est information should be given respecting the cost of administering the Act in Halton. Me did uot ma ke the motion from a party stand-- point, and did not consider it a political question, and he therciore trasted that the returns would be brought down as early as possible. . 4 uids db ied c -- Sup P t s hoi ) on Te o i 2C wl A ts L4A Nir. MEREDITH--Wbether it was the in-- tention of the Government to continue to enforce the Scott Act in couutios where it bad been carried, _ Mr, MOWAT--Put the question in the regular form, d The motion was than passed, EDUCATIUNAL CORRESFPONDENCE. W SECOND READINGS, LIFE INSURANOC®E.. Mr. GIBSON (Hamilton)--To amend the Act to secure to wives and chiidren the benefit of life insurance, HMe explained that the general Bill of last year on this subject was not clear as to tho rights of women and children under endorse-- ments of. life insuranco policies, The second clause was to correct what was obviously an inadvertent error in the Act, some of the clauses having been changed in the order in which they were placed in the Act before it was passed. As to the first section, which provides for substituting a clause instoad of the seventh section, the difficulty arose in the Act not making clear the question of the children of what wife were to be understood as referrod to in the endorsement of an insurance policy--whether it would appiy to the children of a second wile. -- Ho might say with reference to this that the matter was not very clear in his own mind whether the clauso would remain in its prosent shape, but it was peculiariy a matter which ought to be settled by a Spccial Com-- milloo. i flls Mr. MEREDITH suggested that the Special Committee should consider whether it was not advisable to have a larger power of revocation in the case of life insurance policies, Mr. ERMATINGER agreed with his hon. friend as to the advisability of considering this question,..~: v7. lo dusimriod is sil 1o #9: 30rk. f Hon. O. MOWAT said the law aimed at guarding families in such a way that creditors may not be abio to have the advahtage of insur= ance money. Powor of revocation would give power beyond that. It would enable a man to give croditors a claim upon his __lnlprance._!'ilich THE SCOTT ACT. The Bill passed its socond reading and was re-- ferred to the Special Committes to which Bill No. 68 had previously been referred. ENPLOYERS' LLABILITY. Mr. MEREDITH -- Respecting employers, liability to muke compensation for personal in-- juries suffered by workmen in their service. He explained the stops which had led to the passing of a somewhat similar Isill in the Imperial Par-- liament in 1880. What he proposed to eract was that to a workman By reason of any defect in the condition of the ways, works, machinery, or plant connected with or used in the business of the employer ; or _ _ k4 t 20300 10 Aiacas Bd r dsA ts P d ht is <as t Aiv w 2 By reason of the neglizence of any person in the service of ths employer who has any superintend-- ence entrusted to bim whilst in the exercise of guch superintendence ; or § MA Re en e enR t By reason of the negiigence of any person in the service of the employer to whose order or direc-- tions the workman at the time of the injury was bound to conform and did conform, where such injury resulted from his having so conformed ; or By reason of the act or amission of any person in the sorvice of the emplover done or made in obsdience to the rules or by--laws of the employer, or in obedience to particular instructions given by any person del_eg_uu;(} with the authority of the em-- l B id mils, vs l ce twam lt 4+ Pl:y reason of the neglect of any person in the service of the employer engaged in & branch or departmoent of such source separate or distinct from that in which the workman was engaged ; or ployer in that behaif ; or By reason of the negligence of any person in the sorvice of the employer who has the charge or control of or has any duty to perform in respect of any signal, poinis, switeh, track, locomotive, enzine, or train of or upon & railway or any other engine, boilor, or other macninery ; The workman, or in case the injury resu'ts in death, the legal personal represeniatives of the workinan, and anuy person enutled in case of : death, shall have the same right of compensation | and remedics against the employer as if the work-- | man had not been a workmanof or in the service of the employer or engaged in his work,. A workman shall not be entitled under this Act to any right of compensation or remedy against the employer in case under the first subsection unless the defect arose from or had not been dis-- covered or remedicd owing to the negligence of the employer or some one entrusted by him with seeing that the ways, works, machinery, or plant were in propercondition,or unless theinjury resuit-- ed from some defect in the rules or by--laws of the employers, or in a case whoere the workman knew of the defect or neglisgence which caused his injury and failed to give information to the employer or one of his superiors, unless he was aware that his ecmployer or such person already knew of the de-- feet or nexligence. The amount of coimpensation recoverable shall not exceed the equivalent of five years' earnings previous to the injury of a person | in the same grade of employment as the injurced workman. An action for recovery stail not be 'lll;iil\tui:ulhle unless notice that injury has been sustained is given within six weeks and the action I is commenced within six months of the causing of the accident. | the subject matter otf them was we caunot ascer-- | -- tain, as none of them seem to have passed beyond first readings and nave not been printed. We wers preparing to take the necassary steps our> selvos to put the House in possession of this matter, and I have had a Bill draited and abso-- lutely in print following more closely even the provisions of the English law than that of my hon. friend, but there has been KO DEMAXD | by any of the operatives of this country for a | eweeping measure such as the one suggested now. \ Tuere bas been uo sugzestion in thal way, and | there are some provisions in the Bill--with all the sympathy which I have tor many of them-- that require to be considered by the workmen themselves, bafore thay wou'ld consent to such a law being enacted. I zow mention that particu-- lar provision contained in section s'x which says | it shall not be lawiul for an empioyer to azree Hon. C. F. FRASER said:--Before this mo-- tion is put I desire to say a few words about this matter. There is no fault to befound with the way in which the hou, gentleman has stated the case, but there are some reasons which, I think, will lead this House to see that this measure should not be passed too soon. This is not a new imnatter, either to the Government of to myseif, Some months ago I weut to the trouble, with a view to considering the provisious of a Bill on this subject, of procuring a copy of the reports of the Committees in the English Parliament in 1976 and 1877. I procured a copny of the Bill as it was introduced into the English Parliament, rnd I also secured a copy of the Bill as it went through the Committes of the whole House, and of course we lhave in the linglish statutes of 1880 the Act as it passed. In England the most grave and careful consideration was given to the Bill. The measurs which was finally passed was one passed after the most serious consideration, not only by committees in the House who took evidencs, but by discussion out-- side of a most protracted character,. 'Tnen the Act which they did pass was not passed as a finality. The Act at prasent in foree expires on the 31st December, 1887, so that what they have in England will coase at that time unless it is ngain _ enacted,. Therefore the English Par-- liament -- have -- only -- given | a -- tentative law. It may bo, oi course, that the law wili hereaiter be made {permavent,@§ but so§ far they have not made it permanent, and there is nothing to show that they intend doing so. Thero have beon attempts since 1880 to introduse Bills dealing with this samo subject, but what WHERE PEBRSONAL INJURY IS CAUSED