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

'iii-ij-ij-," DISCUSSION _ OF IRON a BILL _ MEI) BY MIEI That there should be a general dis- cussion by members of the Ontario Legislature on the bill introduced last week "to encourage the mining of iron ore." so that public opinion may be formed on this important subject, was the thought emphasized in the House yesterday afternoon by Premier Fer- guson. Wants Whole Subject Brought to Public Attention FOUR-MINUTE S E S S I 0 N At this Monday sitting there was but a scattering ot members in the Assem- bly. Mr. Ferguson remarked on this. He had. he said. intended to ask for second reading of the "iron ore" bills, but because many members were absent he would not proceed with that inten- tion. For, he explained. he wished a detailed discussion on the matter. in- volving consideration of iron mining generally. so that this subject would be particularly brought to public atten- tion. This bill would repeal the Iron Ore Bounty Act of 1924. which provided tor the payment of a bounty of one-half of 1 per cent. tor every unit ot metal- lic iron contained in every ton of ore ---the bounty to be payable on low- grade ore when the same had been con- centrated. treated or benettejated in Ontario by mechanical means and de- livered at any blast furnace or other works for the production ot pig-iron or steel and for use in the same and on iron ore in the natural or unbene- tlciated condition when delivered at any blast furnace or other works tor the production of pig iron or steel in the Province of Ontario and for use in the. same. In the new bill tor which Premier Fer- guson asks keen public consideration, it is provided that "unit" shall mean 1 per cent. and that "ton" shall mean 2,240 pounds nvoirdupois. Since there was no second reading of this measure the proceedings ot the House were brought to a sudden con- clusion. In fact. the general business of the day took up but four minutes. Some notices for private bills were pre- sented at the opening ot the sitting and then amusements for the choosing ot committees were read out. The act of claimed. Feb. 11W. 1924 has not been pro- ' The fact that bucketing is an uppermost gqucstlon in the present conference leads to the impression that this evil has been suspected in connection with the operations now before the criminal courts. It does not enter into the charges, however, as tar as known, these being based on "eonspttaey to defraud the public." Bucketing is dealt with definitely in the Code, where the penalty is also provided. But the section leaves it open to the person charged to prove bona f1de intention to purchase or sell the securities mentioned in the agreementrbe- ltween broker and customer. While the onus is on the accused. it is evident that when the "section was framed it could have left less to iehanee and argument. As long as it is con- Fceded that bucketing is an evil and illegal prac- 'tice, there seems little reason for leaving the ',,wortiinsr, of the Act such that it may be tiifti- cult to enforce it. 'fo ABOLISH BUCKETINC AGAIN Therefore, if a. law against bucketing drawn up twenty or more years ago is not satisfac- tory. it would seem that laws can be framed so that they mean little. This is the reason the public will watch with concern for the out- come of the present attempt. Of course, the conferees ot today have the benefit of greater experience with stock market methods than those ot two decades ago. Bucketing may now be regarded as more serious. Undoubtedly, if it is desired to abolish it, this can be done. The Provincial legal representatives in ses- sion in Toronto are reported to be determined to secure legislation which will abolish bucket- ing in brokerage offices. This is good news, and the public will watch with interest, and some anxiety. for the results. There is a clause in the Criminal Code already which is supposed to make bucketing illegal. It has been there for some years, and it it is not effective it is apparent that the mere drafting and passing of a law is not sufficient.