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

Premier Drew spoke before or- ders of the day on a matter of "serious import" and based his action on the tahling of correspon- dence between himself and Pre- mier King. He revealed that he had brought up the matter at the meeting of Premiers last Novemhu and again in January this yeah and he had written first on Feb. 25 when a decision of the Privy Coun- cil upheld the C.T.A. In that letter he had explained that authorities to sell beverages. had been granted by the Hephurni Government in 1934-35. that none, had been granted by the present! Government, that those authorities; were now rendered illegal, and; that his Government must cancel! them if the act were to continue; On the other hand, he then ex-l plained in the letter. the L.C.A.! provided for a local option rate which required three-fifths for re-3 peal of dry enforcement (as comog pared to a bare majority in the,' C.T.A.) and much more effective laws respecting drunkenness and selling. Providing penalties only for tltei selling or keeping for sale of] liquor. the C.T.A. permits a person! who has bought liquor legally, "T instance. in a neighboring non-, C.T.A. area. to consume it openly ini a motor car or "on the courthouse steps." Premier' Drew declared. and because of its overriding authority prevents enforcement ot the L.C.A. with its regulations covering drunkenness. supplying to minors. consuming publicly, permitting drunkenness and other offenses. He described the Dominion decis- ion as resulting in a "farce." Regrets Ottawa Decision Despite a submission by the On- tario Government that uniformity of liquor administration should be permitted in the Province, with nth-olive provisions for tho control of drunkenness. the Dominion Government has declined to repeal tho Canada Temperance Act which bars effective law enforcement from parts of tho Province. Pre- mier George Drew announced ICS- tvrday. "I understand that at least six other Provinces have indicated their desire that this act should be repealed. I can only express the utmost regret that the Domin- ion Government has not seen tit to extend this measure of co-opera- tion so that our own control laws may apply in our own Province." After explaining the situation the Premier said: King Decision Against Temperance ActRepeal Attacked by Premier i Premier Drew opened his presen- 'itation of the issue hy reading all .the correspondence between him- 'iselt and Premier King. His first let- Iter referred to the Privy Council ideeision. that the act applied to (Huron. Peel and Perth Counties: land Manitoulin District, that the; itirst three had liquor authorities; (totalling 29 fall granted in 1934-1 335). and that these were "now a |nullity" in view of the council's jdeeision. _ The letter then recalled that he that! raised this problem at two Pre- 'imior's meetings: that the act had lheen enacted when no Province had liquor laws of its own; that Orr. Bonds Corrvwondenee tario must be guided by Fedora" decision as to whether tho act should continue; that. it was of ut- most importance that uniformity of liquor administration prevail; that Ontario laws provided for a local opt.on vote. but with stronger cm- phasis on tho nmd of morn than I: bare majority to obtain public sup- port: that Ontario's law provided for far mort' than only selling or keeping liquor for sale: that On. tario must aid in enforcing Fedora: lows. yet ineonsistenlly now faved conditions which its own laws laws. m inoonmstonily now lat-en conditions which its own laws would not permit: that tho Federal over-riding authority would con- tinue this anomaly it the C.T.A. wore continued. Mr. King, the Premier then read, had acknowledged the lottor and stated it would ht, brought before his colleagues. On Mart'h 15, three weeks later. Premier Drew had written again. stressing the posi- tion that Ontario must either cancel the now illogial authorities or re- train from that immediate action if Ottawa intnndod to ropeal the act. Mr. King's Reply _ On Saturday. he continued, he, had received Mr. King's reply. In; i' the latter said: i "The Government has now had opportunity to give preliminary) consideration to the representations you have made on behalf of . . . Ontario. The Government has also had before it representations Oli, other interested parties urging; more active administration and on-! loreement of the C.T.A. by the Fed-1 oral authorities and laying great emphasis on the fact that the ex- isting legislation is in a field where the jurisdiction of Parliament has been recently upheld by the courts. In view of these conflicting repre- sentations . . . Sit' have concluded that we should not ask Parliament to repeal this statute without more detailed and careful consideration than it is possible to give it at the .present time." hack " Because he felt members should) know the effect of the Federal de-, cision, he had made the letters public.' said Premier Drew. Reasons for the introduction of the C.T.A. tlack: of Provincial liquor laws) had dis-i Lappeared. The continuance of such) tan act, originally requested by the! 'Provincos. would only "cause the) lutmost confusion and greatly ham.! |per the proper enforcement of such acontrol laws as are from time to: ltime in existence in any Province.'; i Already the Legislature had disr; cussed cooperation in enforcement) 10f Federal laws. ho continued/ (Where the Federal legislated in any "field, its legislation "over-rides the' Provincial jurisdiction and is the 'taw which is applicable." So On- 1ario, with drastic liquor laws. was gnaw asked to enforce a law which iwould permit any person who legal- ily bought ltquor sitting on the courthouse steps in Brampton and consuming it there. or stopping his car on the street. in Little Current and publicly consuming beer bought legally. Results In Farce The C.T.A. was enacted many years two, he said. but today the motor car and bus transportation made it possible to move easily from C.T.A. areas to other areas and) purchase legally. Nothing prevent-) ed any one having possession of! liquor purchased legally; nothing ins the C.T.A. governed its consump-l tion or the consequences of that,' consumption. That. he said, was, the "farce which results from re-l tention of the Canada Temperance) Act." I