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

THURSDAY. MARCH 23, -"""-----.-.V IN "SNAP VOTE Independents Force First Division of Session on Minor Point 55 FOR AND 26 AGAINST Opposition emanating from the "Independent" party of the Ontario Legislature, which sits on the back row of the Opposition benches, equi- distant from Liberal and Conserva- tive Leaders, forced the first division of the session in the Legislature yes» terday. M. M. MacBride, South Brant, de., mended a vote of the members upon the second reading of a camper" tively unimportant bill introduced by w. A. Crockett, Labor member for South Wentworth, which would com. pet municipalities to extend certain sanitary relief to suburban areas. Apply to Whole Province. Although Mr. Crockett's aim was to remedy certain conditions which he described as very bad in the township of Barton, adjacent to 'Hamilton, the mandatory powers (extended to the Provincial Board ot lHealth, which was to supervise {drainage and water requirements, (would, ot course, extend to every (municipality in the Province. The . final vote to give Mr. Crockett's bill second reading and send it to committee was 55 for and 26 against. When the vote was counted up, every single member on the Govern- ment side was found supporting the measure, together with a. dozen or so Opposition members, noteworthy among whom were: Charles Mc- Crea, Sudbury (Conservative); F. iWellington Hay, Liberal Leader; T. iMarshall, Lincoln (Liberal): Z. Mr 1geau, Sturgeon Falls (Liberal), and 'c1y. J. Bragg, Durham (Liberal). ' Four Conservatives, Messrs. McCrea, . lRankin. Nickle and Joynt, voted iwith the Government. The Inde- pendents---Messrs. MacBride. Hal- crow, McNamara, and Lang, the lat- est addition, voted solidly against the bill. Opposition as voiced by the "Nays" was not so much to tho principle of the measure as to the . haste with which its proponents de- sired to have it put through. T Sees Some Merit in It. . i Hon. G. H. Ferguson, Conserva- tive Leader, said he saw some merit in it, in spite of its drastic nature, and he thought possibly Hamilton . and the township could be enduced to get together. Hon. Thomas Crawford took a, somewhat similar position. After Mr. Crockett explained that the idea was not exactly to give suburban areas something for nothing, K. K. Homuth (Labor), South Waterloo, said that if the townships were. will- ing .to pay something for the rity connections, the bill might well tro to committee. ', Mr. MacBride, R. It. Hall (Parry iSound), Hon. Walter Rollo and G. 'G. Halcrow (Hamilton), however. opposed the principle of the bill in varying degrees of vigor. Attorney-General Haney urged committee consideration, and :,point- ed to the safeguard in the bill of reference to the Ontario Railway Board. In committee, he thought. the Railway Board might be given {even further Jurisdiction in connec- tion with its operation.