Scribd Logo
Carica

Benvenuto in Scribd!

  • AGBC Brief, Supporting Documents, 2 of 2 - Legislative History

    Caricato da

    borninbrooklyn
    334 visualizzazioni305 pagine
    Supporting Documents Regarding Legislative History of Anti Polygamy Laws in Canada

    Copyright

    © Attribution Non-Commercial (BY-NC)

    Formati disponibili

    PDF, TXT o leggi online da Scribd

    Hai trovato utile questo documento?

    Questo contenuto è inappropriato?

    Segnala questo documento
    Supporting Documents Regarding Legislative History of Anti Polygamy Laws in Canada

    Copyright:

    Attribution Non-Commercial (BY-NC)
    Scarica in formato PDF, TXT o leggi online su Scribd
    Segnala contenuti inappropriati
    334 visualizzazioni305 pagine

    AGBC Brief, Supporting Documents, 2 of 2 - Legislative History

    Caricato da

    borninbrooklyn
    Supporting Documents Regarding Legislative History of Anti Polygamy Laws in Canada

    Copyright:

    Attribution Non-Commercial (BY-NC)
    Scarica in formato PDF, TXT o leggi online su Scribd
    Segnala contenuti inappropriati
    di 305

    ,.

    ~v" ;~l f; 20 \U ,,;:;,#


    Q
    No. Sv~~::~~er Registry

    ~OU"'i S~~'~ME COURT OF BRITISH COLUMBIA


    IN THE MATTER OF:

    The Constitutional Question Act R.S.B.C. 1996, c. 68

    AND IN THE MATTER OF:

    The Canadian Charier of Rights and Freedoms

    AND IN THE MATTER OF:

    A Reference by the Lieutenant Governor in Council set out in Order in Council No. 553
    dated October 22, 2009 concerning the constitutionality of s. 293 of the Criminal Code
    of Canada R.S.C., 1985, c. C-46

    SECTION 293 LEGISLATIVE HISTORY BRIEF-


    SUBMITTED BY THE ATTORNEYS GENERAL OF
    BRITISH COLUMBIA AND CANADA

    SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS
    Volume 2 of 2

    CRAIG E. JONES
    Ministry of Attorney General
    1301 - 865 Hornby Street
    Vancouver, Be V6Z 2G3
    Telephone: 604-660-3093
    1
    Facsimile: 604-660-6797
    ~~~~~~~---.
    INDEX, VOL. 2

    TAB7-

    A. Criminal Code, S.C. 1953-54, c. 51, s. 243

    B. Report of Royal Commission on Revision of Criminal Code (Ottawa, February 22,


    1952) at 1-14, 42

    C. Draft Bill, An Act respecting the Criminal Law, 6th Session, 21st ParI., 1952

    D. House of Commons Debates (April 7, 1952) at 1192

    E. "Suggestions Incorporated in the Draft Bill", Matters for the Commission, R.G. 13,
    Acc 89-901067, Box 22, File 155002, Part II (National Archives)

    F. "Appendix I", Report of the Royal Commission and Appendix, R.G. 13, Acc. 89-
    901067, Box 22, File 155002, Part Vat 3 (National Archives)

    G. Debates ofthe Senate (May 12, 1952) at 198 (1r); (May 13, 1952) at 206 (dist'n of
    copies); (May 13, 1952) at 207-16 (2r); (May 14, 1952) at 217-19 (2r); (May 15,
    1952) at 269-75 (2r and ref to com); (May 20,1952) at 288 (com meeting); (May 21,
    1952) at 289 (rep of com); (June 20, 1952) at 479 (rep of com)

    H. "Minutes of Evidence" in The Senate of Canada: Proceedings of the Standing


    Committee on Banking and Commerce To whom was referred the Bill (H-8), intituled:
    An Act respecting the Criminal Law (June 11,1952) at 5-7 and 35

    I. "Re Criminal Code - General Remarks", Brief on the 1952 Bill, R.G. 13, Acc 89-
    901067, Box 22, File 155002, Part 2 at 34 (National Archives)

    J. Debates ofthe Senate (November 24,1952) at 6-7 (1r); (November 25,1952) at 21-
    23 (2r and ref to com); (December 16,1952) at 146-57 (rep of com); (December 17,
    1952) at 161-68 (rep of com concurred in and 3r)

    K. "Minutes of Evidence" in The Senate of Canada: Proceedings of the Standing


    Committee on Banking and Commerce To whom was referred the Bill (0), intituled:
    An Act respecting thfl Criminal Law (December 15, 1952) at 64 and 89

    L. House of Commons Debates (January 13, 1953) at 931 (1r); (January 23, 1953) at
    1272-78, 1287-1303 (2r and ref to special committee); (February 5, 1953) at 1636
    (1st rep of special committee); (May 1,1953) at 4641 (2d rep of special committee);
    (May 4, 1953) at 4707 (3d rep of special committee)

    M. "Minutes of Proceedings", Special Committee on Bill No. 93 (Letter 0 of the Senate):


    'An Act respecting the Criminal Law' and all matters pertaining thereto (February 24,
    1953) at 51

    N. House of Commons Debates (November 16,1953) at 32 (1r); (December 15, 1953)


    at 939-57 (2r); (February 26, 1954) at 2483-86 (com, excerpt); (April 8, 1954) at
    3920-27 (3r); (June 15, 1954) at 5973-79 (concurr in Senate amts)
    O. Debates of the Senate (May 4, 1954) at 437 (1 r); (May 5, 1954) at 439-48 (2r); (May
    11, 1954) at 454-64 (2r); (June 10, 1954) at 584-86 and 604 (rep of com-amts
    concurred in); (June 10, 1954) at 586-87 (3r); (June 16, 1954) at 639 (amts
    concurred in by Commons); (June 26, 1954) at 731 (ra)

    P. Proclamation, October 2,1954, C. Gaz. 1954.11.3297

    TAB a- Criminal Code, R.S.C. 1970, c. C-34, s. 257

    TAB9-

    A. Criminal Code, R.S.C. 1985, c. C-46, s. 293

    B. Criminal Code, R.S.C. 1985, c. C-46 as amended to March 19, 2010, s. 293
    ACTS OF THE

    PARLIAMENT OF CANADA
    PASSED IN THE SESSION HELD IN THE

    SECOND AND THIRD YEARS OF THE REIGN OF HER MAJESTY

    QUEEN ELIZABETH II
    aEING THE

    FIRST SESSION OF THE TWENTY-SECOND PARLIAMENT

    Begun and holden at Ottawa, on the Twelfth day of November, 1953,


    and prorogued on the Twenty-sixth day of June, 1954.

    HIS EXCELLENCY THE RIGHT HONOURABLE

    VINCENT MASSEY
    GOVERNOR GENERAL

    PART I

    PUBLIC GENERAL ACTS

    EDMOND CLOUTIER. C.M.G.. O.A .• D.S.P.


    QUEEN'S PRiNTER AND CONTRbLLER OF STATIONERY
    OTTAWA. 1954

    HeiIlOnline-- I 1953-1954pt. I 11953


    2-3 ELIZABETH II.

    CHAP. 51.

    An Act respecting the Criminal Law.


    [Assented to 261Jt June, 19541

    H ER Majesty, by and with the advice and consent of the


    Senate and House of Commons of Canada, enacts
    as foIlows:-
    SnORT TITLE.

    J.. This Act may be cited as the Criminal Code. Short title.

    INTERPRETATION.
    2. In this Act, D.fioilions.
    (1) "Act" includes "Aol."
    (a) an Act of the Parliament of Canada,
    (b) an Act of the legislature of the late province of
    Canada,
    (c) an Act of the legislature of a province, and
    (d) an Act or ordinance of the legislature of a
    province, territory or place in force at the time that
    province, territory or place became a province of
    Canada;
    (2) "Attorney General" means the Attorney General "Altcm.y
    or Solicitor General of a province in which proceedings G.o.rol.'
    to which this Act applies are taken and, with respect
    to the Northwest Territories and the Yukon Territory,
    means the Attorney General of Canada;
    (3) "bank.note" includes any negotiable instrument "D.~~.
    (a) issued by or on behalf of a person carrying on ooto.
    the business of banking in or out of Canada,
    (b) issued under the authority of the Parliament of
    Canada or under lawful authority of the govern-
    ment of a state other than Canada,
    365 intended

    HeinOnlillC ~. 1 1953-1954 pt. I 365 1953


    66 Chap. 51. Criminal Code. 2-3 ELIZ. II.

    (g) procures a female person to enter or leave Canada,


    for the purpose of prostitution,
    (h) for the purposes of gain, exercises control, direction
    or influence over the movements of a female person in
    such manner as to show that he is aiding, abetting or
    compelling her to engage in or carryon prostitution
    with any person or generally,
    (i) applies or administers to a female person or causes
    her to take any drug, intoxicating liquor, matter, or
    thing with intent to stupefy or overpower her in order
    thereby to enable any person to have illicit sexual
    ·intercourse with her,
    (j) being a male person, lives wholly or in part on the
    avails of prostitution, or
    (k) being a female person, lives wholly or in part on the
    avails of prostitution of another female person,
    is guilty of an indictable offence and is liable to imprison-
    ment for ten years.
    Presumption. (2) Evidence that a male person lives with or is habitually
    in the company of prostitutes, or lives in a common bawdy-
    hOmle or house of assignation is prima facie evidence that
    he Uves on the avails of prostitution.
    Corrobora- (3) No person shall be convicted of an offence under
    tion.
    subsection (1), other than an offence under paragraph (j)
    of that subsection, upon the evidence of only one witness
    unless the evidence of that witness is corroborated in a
    material particular by evidence that implicates the accused.
    Limitation. (4) No proceedings for an offence under this section
    shall be commenced more than one year after the time
    when the offence is alleged to have been committed.

    PART VI.

    OFFENCES AGAINST THE PERSON AND


    REPUTATION.
    INTERPRETATION.

    1 Sli. In this Part,


    "Abandon." (a) "abandon" or "expose" includes
    "Expose," (i) a wilful omission to take charge of a child by a
    person who is under a legal duty to do so, and
    (ii) dealing with a child in a manner that is likely
    to leave that child exposed to risk without protec-
    tion: .
    UChUd/~ (b) "child" Includes an adopted child and an illegitimate
    child;
    430 ( 0)

    HejIlOllline-~ 1 1953-1954pt. 1430 1953


    1953-54. Criminal Code. Chap. 1)1. 67

    (c) "form of marriage" includes a ceremony of marriage "Fo,m of


    that is recognized as valid mania.e,"
    (i) by the law of the place where it was celebrated, or
    (ii) by the law of the place where an accused is
    tried, notwithstanding that it is not recognized as
    valid by the law of the place where it was cele-
    brated; and
    (d) "guardian" includes a person who has in law or in "Guardln•. "
    fact the custody or control of a child.
    DUTIES TENDING TO PRESERVATION OF LIFE.
    186. (1) Everyone is under a legal duty Duty of
    (a) as a parent, foster parent, guardian or head of a ::~ri~l~ to
    family, to provide necessaries of life for a child under the ".,....<1...
    age of sixteen years;
    (b) as a husband, to provide necessaries of life for his
    wife; and
    (c) to provide necessaries of life to a person under his
    charge if that person
    (i) is unable, by reason of detention, age, illness,
    insanity or other cause, to withdraw himself
    from that charge, and
    (ii) is unable to provide himself with necessaries of
    life.
    (2) Everyone commits an offence who, being under n Offen",.
    legal duty within the meaning of subsection (1), fails
    without lawful excuse, the proof of which lies upon him, to
    perform that duty, if
    (a) with respect to a duty imposed by paragraph (a)
    or (b) of subsection (1),
    (i) the person to whom the duty is owed is in destitute
    or necessitous circumstances, or
    (ii) the failure to perform the duty endangers the
    life of the person to whom the duty is owed, or
    causes or is likely to cause the health of that
    person to be endangered permanently; or
    (b) with respect to a duty imposed by paragraph (c) of
    subsection (1), the failure to perform the duty endangers
    the life of the person to whom the duty is owed or
    causes or is likely to cause the health of that person
    to be injured permanently.
    (3) Everyone who commits an offence under subsection Punishment.
    (2) is guilty of
    (a) an indictable offence and is liable to imprisonment for
    two years j or
    (b) an offence punishable on summary conviction.
    (4) For the purpose of proceedings under this section, J)oaumpo
    (a) evidence that a man has cohabited with a woman or ho.s.
    has in any way recognized her as being his wife is prima
    facie evidence that they are lawfully married;
    431 (b)

    HeinOnlille--11953-1954pt. I431 1953


    80 Chap. iiI. Criminal Code. 2-3 ELIZ. II.

    ABOR'l'ION.
    Procuring
    miscarriago.
    237. (1) Everyone who, with intent to procure the
    miscarriage of a female person, whether or not she is
    pregnant, uses any means for the purpose of carrying out
    his intention is guilty of an indictable offence and is liable
    to imprisonment for life.
    Woman
    procuring her
    (2) Every female person who, being pregnant, with
    own mis- intent to procure her own miscarriage, uses any means or
    carringe. permits any means to be used for the purpose of carrying
    out her intention is guilty of an indictable offence and is
    liable to imprisonment for two years.
    ":Mcans" (3) In this section, "means" includes
    defined.
    (a) the administration of a drug or other noxious thing,
    (b) the use of an instrument, and
    (c) manipulation of any kind.
    Supplying 23 s. Everyone who unlawfully supplies or procures a
    noxious drug or other noxious thing or an instrument or thing,
    things.
    knowing that it is intended to be used or employed to
    procure the miscarriage of a female person, whether or
    not she is pregnant, is guilty of an indictable offence and
    is liable to imprisonment for two years.

    VENEREAL DISEASES.
    Vonoreal 239. (1) Everyone who, having venereal disease in a
    dioon.se.
    communicable form, communicates it to another person is
    guilty of an offence punishable on summary conviction.
    Defence. (2) No person shall be convicted of an offence under
    this section where he proves that he had reasonable grounds
    to believe and did believe that he did not have venereal
    disease in a communicable form at the time the offence is
    alleged to have been committed.
    Corrobora- (3) No person shall be convicted of an offence under this
    tion.
    section upon the evidence of only one witness, unless the
    evidence of that witness is corroborated in a material
    particular by evidence that implicates the accused.
    "Venoreal (4) For the purposes of this section, "venereal disease"
    di8~nse."
    means syphilis, gonorrhea or soft chancre.

    OFFENCES AGAINST CONJUGAL RIGHTS.


    ·'Bigamy." 240. (1) Everyone commits bigamy who
    (a) in Canada,
    (i) being married, goes through a form of marriage
    with another person,
    (ii) knowing that another person is married, goes
    through a form of marriage with that person, or
    (iii) on the same day or simultaneously, goes through
    a form of marriage with more than one person; or
    444 (b)

    HeinOnline -- I 1953-1954 pt. 1444 1953


    1953-54, Criminal Code, Chap, 51. 81

    (b) being a Canadian citizen resident in Canada leaves


    Canada with intent to do anything mentioned in
    subparagraphs (i) to (iii) of paragraph (a) and, pursuant
    thereto, does outside of Canada anything mentioned in
    those subparagraphs in circumstances mentioned there-
    in,
    (2) No person commits bigamy by going through a Matt." 01
    form of marriage if def~nc~,
    (a) that person in good faith and on reasonable grounds Belief that
    believes that his spouse is dead, 'l.~~':'
    (b) the spouse of that person has been continuously Absenco for
    absent from him for seven years immediately preceding savon
    the time when he goes through the form of marriage, yo"e,
    unless he knew that his spouse was alive at any time
    during those seven years,
    (c) that person has been divorced from the bond of the Divor..,
    first marriage, or
    (d) the former marriage has been declared void by a Annulmont,
    court of competent jurisdiction,
    (3) Where a person is alleged to have committed bigamy,· Incompetency
    it is not a defence that the parties would, if unmarried, no defonco,
    have been incompetent to contract marriage under the law
    of the place where the offence is alleged to have been
    committed,
    (4) Every marriage or form of marriage shall, for the Vnlidity
    purpose of this section, be deemed to be valid unless the p",umcd,
    accused establishes that it was invalid,
    (5) No act or omission on the part of an accused who is Ac\ 0i
    charged with bigamy invalidates a marriage or form of ~;:;~ss~~n d~~s
    marriage that is otherwise valid. not.!n.
    ,'uhdat.e.
    241. (1) Everyone who commits bigamy is guilty of an Punishment,
    indictable offence and is liable to imprisonment for five
    years,
    (2) For the purposes of this section a certificate of mar- C"tifiqntc
    riage issued under the authority of law is primajacie evidence ofmrunogo,
    of the marriage or form of marriage to which it relates
    without proof of the signature or official character of the
    person by whom it purports to be signed,
    242. (1) Every male person who Proouring
    (a) procures, or feigned
    marriage
    (b) knowingly aids in procuring,
    a feigned marriage between himself and a female person
    is guilty of an indictable offence and is liable to imprison-
    ment for five years,
    (2) No person shall be convicted of an offence under this Com>:
    section upon the evidence of only one witness tmless the borntlOn.
    evidence of that witness is corroborated in a material
    particular by evidence that implicates the accused,
    445 243.

    HeinOnline--11953-1954pt. 14451953
    82 Chap. I)D.. Criminal Cqde. :l-3 ELIZ. II.

    243. (1) Everyone who


    (a) practises or enters into or in any manner agrees or
    consents to practise or enter into
    Polygamy. (i) any form of polygamy, or
    Conjuga.l (li) any kind of conjugal union with more than one
    union.
    person at the same time,
    whether or not it is by law recognized as a binding
    form of marriage; or
    Celebrating (b) celebrates, assists or is a party to a rite, ceremony,
    rite.
    contract or consent that purports to sanction a relation-
    ship mentioned in subparagraph (i) or (ii) of paragraph
    (a),
    is guilty of an indictable offence and is liable to imprison-
    ment for five years.
    Evitlonce
    in cuso of
    (2) Where an accused is charged with an offence under
    polygamy. this section, no averment or proof of the method by which
    the alleged relationship was entered into, agreed to or con-
    sented to is necessary in the indictment or upon the trial of
    the accused, nor is it necessary upon the trial to prove that
    the persons who are alleged to have entered into the relation-
    ship had or intended to have sexual intercourse.

    UNLAWFUL SOLEMNIZATION OF MARRIAGE.

    244. Everyone who


    Protendlng to (a) solemnizes or pretends to solemnize a marriage
    solomnize
    mnrrisge. without lawful authority, the proof of which lies
    upon him, or
    Proouring (b) procures a person to solemnize a marriage knowing
    unla.wful
    ma.rriage. that he is not lawfully authorized to solemnize the
    marriage,
    is guilty of an indictable offence and is liable to imprisonment
    for two years.
    Ma.rrlage
    contrary 245. Everyone who, being lawfully authorized to
    tolnw. solemnize marriage, knowingly and wilfully solemnizes a
    marriage in violation of the laws of the province in which
    the marriage is solemnized is guilty of an indictable offence
    and is liable to imprisonment for two years.

    BLASPHEMOUS LIBEL.

    Offence. 2-'&6. (1) Everyone who publishes a blasphemous libel


    is guilty of an indictable offence and is liable to imprisonment
    for two years.
    Question of (2) It is a question of fact whether or not any matter
    taot.
    that is published is a blasphemous libel.
    446 (3)

    HeinOnline -- 1 1953-1954 pt. 1446 1953


    254 Chap. lit. Criminal Code. 2-3 ELIZ. II.

    PART XXV.

    TRANSITIONAL AND CONSEQUENTIAL.


    Repeal. '741i. The Criminal CmM, chapter 36 of the Revised
    Statutes of Canada, 1927, is repealed.
    TransitioMi '746. (1) Where proceedings for an offence against the
    criminal·law were commenced before the coming into force
    of this Act, the offence shall, after the coming into force of
    this Act, be dealt with, inquired into, tried and determined
    in accordance with this Act, and any penalty, forfeiture or
    punishment in respect of that offence shall be imposed as if
    this Act had not come into force, but where, under this Act,
    the penalty, forfeiture or punishment in respect of the offence
    is reduced or mitigated in relation to the penalty, forfeiture
    or punishment that would have been applicable if this Act
    had not come into force, the proy-isions of this Act relating
    tc penalty, forfeiture and punishment shall apply.
    Idem (2) Where proceedings for an offence against the criminal
    law are commenced after the coming into force of this Act
    the following provisions apply, namely,
    (a) the offence, whenever committed, shall be dealt with,
    inquired into, tried and determined in accordance with
    this Act;
    (b) if the offence was committed before the coming into
    force of this Act, the penalty, forfeiture or punishment
    to be imposed upon conviction for that offence shall be
    the penalty, forfeiture or punishment authorized or
    required tu be imposed by this Act or by the law that
    would have applied if this Act had not come into force,
    whichever penalty, forfeiture or punishment is the less
    severe; and
    (c) if the offence is committed after the coming into force
    of this Act, the penalty, forfeiture or punishment to be
    imposed upon conviction for that offence shall be the
    the penalty, forfeiture, or punishment authorized or
    required to be imposed by this Act.
    Inttf'-
    pretaliOfl '74'7. Section 29 of the Interpretation Act, chapter 158
    Act. of the Revised Statutes of Canada, 1952, is repealed.
    Opium and
    Narcotic '748. Section 25 of the Opium and Narcotic Drug Act,
    Drug Act. chapter 201 of the Revised Statutes of Canada, 1952, is
    Exooptin repealed and the following substituted therefor:
    cnsoo tried
    before two
    "25. Except in cases tried before two justices of the
    jllBticesno peace sections 719 tc 732, inclusive, and subsection (2) of
    appeals in
    o 8SOS taken section 742 of the Criminal Code do not apply to any con-
    under seotion
    4(1) or (2). 618 viction,

    HcinOnlinc --11953-1954 pt. I 6181953


    1953-54, Criminal Code, Chap, 51. 255
    viction, order or proceedings in respect of any offence
    under subsection (1) or (2) of section 4 of this Act,"
    7' 49. Subsection (2) of section 4 of the Canada Evidence Canada
    ~ct, chapter 307 of the R~vised S~atutes of Canada, 1952, ~';t"'''
    IS repealed and the following substituted therefor:
    "(2) The wife or husband of a person charged with an Wileor
    offence against section 33 or 34 of the Juvenile Delinquents ~~!b'::'~n'
    Act or with an offence against any of the sections 135 to ond
    138, 140, 142 to 147, 149, 155, 156, 157, 158, 164, 184, 186, ~l~:;lr~;e
    189, 234 to 236, 241 to 244, 275, paragraph (0) of section prosecuUon,
    408 or an attempt to commit an offence under section 138
    or 147 of the Criminal Code, is a competent and compellable
    witness for the prosecution without the consent of the
    person charged,"
    7'50. (1) Wherever, in the Combines Investigation Act, Co"",;,,,
    chapter 314 of the Revised Statutes of Canada, 1952, the ~;."tiaoli{)/l
    expression "section 498 or 498A of the Criminal Code" or '
    "section 498 or 498A of the Criminal CatZe, chapter 36 of
    the Revised Statutes of Canada, 1927," appears, the ex-
    pression "section 411 or 412 of the Criminal Code" shall be
    substituted therefor, and wherever in the said Act the ex-
    pression "section 498 of the Criminal Code" appears there
    shall be substituted therefor the expression "section 411 of
    the Criminal Code",
    (2) Subsection (1) of section 18 of the said Act is repealed Idem
    and the following substituted therefor: '
    "18. (1) At any stage of an inquiry, Director
    (aJ the Direotor may, if he is of the opinion that the moty,ubmlitf
    eVI'dence 0 bt'alne d d'ISOIoses a sltua
    ' t 'IOn contrary to .tn emee °
    ovid,nee,
    seotion 32 or 34 of this Act, or section 411 or 412 of the
    Criminal Code, and
    (b J the Direotor shall, if so required by the Minister,
    prepare a statement of the evidence obtained in the inquiry
    which shall be submitted to the Commission and to eaoh
    person against whom an allegation is made therein,"
    (3) Subsections (1) and (2) of seotion 40 of the said Act
    are repealed and the following substituted therefor:
    "40. (1) Where an indictment is found against an Procedure
    acoused, other than a corporation, for any offence against for"r[f rc1ng
    this Act, the acoused may elect to be tried without a jury pena ..
    and where he so eleots he shall be tried by the judge pre-
    siding at the court at which the indiotment is found, or the
    judge presiding at any subsequent sittings of that court, or
    at any court where the indiotment oomes on for trial; and
    in the event of such election being made the proceedinb'S
    subsequent to the election shall be regUlated in so far as
    may be applicable by the provisions of the Criminal Code
    rela,ting to the trial of indictable offences by a judge without
    a jury.
    619 (2)

    HeinOllline-~ 11953~1954pt 16191953


    256 Chap. iiI. Criminal Code. 2-3 ELIZ. II.

    Jurisdiction (2) No court other than a superi,or ,court of criminal


    of court.a.
    jurisdiction, as defined in the Criminal Code, ,has power to
    try any offence. against section '32 of this Act."
    EzlradUion 7 51. A reference in item 24 of the First Schedule to
    Ad.
    the Extradition Act, chapter 322 of th!3 Revised'Statutes of
    Canada, 1952, to an offence under a Part of the Criminal
    (Jade, chapter 36 of the Revised Statutes of Canada, 1927,
    shall be construed as a reference to the .same or the cor-
    responding offence under thiB Act.
    Coming
    ihto foroe
    752. This.Act shall come into force on a day to be fixed
    by the Governor in Council.

    PART XXVL
    FORMS.
    I Forma, 71)S. (1) The forms set 'Out in this Part varied to suit
    the case or forms to the like effect shall be deemed to be
    good, valid, and sufficient in tM circumstances 'for which,
    respectively, they are provided.
    Bool not
    rOQuired.
    (2) No justice is required to attach or affix a seal to
    any writing or process that he is authorized to issue and
    in respect of which a form is provided by this Part.

    620 FORM 1.'

    HeinOn1iIle-~ 11953-1954pt.1620 i953


    ',"

    ,
    j

    REPORT OF
    ROYAL COIHffHSSION ON
    REVISION OF CRIMINAL CODE
    OTTAW"A,
    February 22, 1952.
    To: The Hcinourable STUART S. GARSON, Q.C ..
    Minister of Justice,
    Ottawa.

    Your Commissioners, 'pursuant to· their instructions, hav.e the honour to


    submit the annexed draft Bill to revise the CriJ:ninal Code which has been
    prepared by them under .the terms of reference appointing· them, as contained
    in Order in Council P.C. 2275 of the 10th day of May; 1951.
    - An examination and' study of the Criminal Code was authorized by Order
    in Council P.C. 527 of the 3rd day of February, 1949. This task .was assiglled to
    a Commission consisting of Hon. W. M. Martin, Chief Justice of Saskatchewan,"
    Chairman; 1\1r. Justice Fauteux and MY. F. P. Varcoe, Q.C:, Deputy l\1inister of
    Justice, with Mr. Arthur Slaght, Q.C., Toronto, as Counse1. The Commission
    -was to have the assista_nce of a Committee comprised of Mr. Robert Forsyth,
    K.C., (now Judge Forsyt_h), Toronto, Mr. J"ernand Choquette, K.C., (now Mr.
    , Justice Choquette), Quebec, H. J. Wilson, Q.C., Deputy Attorney General of
    Alberta, Edmonton, Mr. J. J. Robinette, Q.C., Toronto, and l\1r. Joseph Sedg-wick,
    Q.C., Toronto. -The personnel of the Committee -was subsequently increased.
    and 1\1r. W. C. Dunlop, Q.C., Halifax, Mr.' H. P. Carter, Q.C., St. John's, New- .
    foundland, and Mr. T. D. MacDonald, Q.C., Ottawa, became members of the
    Committee. As some members of the Commission and the Comrrlittee found.
    that judicial duties and other commitments made it impossible to devote the
    time necessary to the revision and as the work had progressed to a .stage where
    it could be carried on by a smaller committee, the Committee was reorganized
    by Order in Council .P.C. 68/4633 of the 26th day of September, 1950. On the
    10th day of May, 1951, as above ·stated, by Order in Council P.c:::. 2275, the
    present Commission consisting of Hon. W. 1\1. Martin, Chief Justice of Saskat-
    chewan, Chairman; Hon. Mr. Justice Fernand Choquette, Quebec, His Honour
    Judge Robert Forsyth, Tor-Onto, Mr. H. J. vVilson, Q.C., Edmonton; Mr. Joseph
    Sedg-wick, Q.C., Toronto, and Mr. A. A. Moffat, Q.C., Ottawa, was appointed
    and authorized and directed to prepare a draft Bill to reviSe the present
    Criminal Code.
    The terms of reference were as follows:
    (a) revise ambiguous and unclear provisions;
    (b) adopt uniform language throughout;
    (c) elhninate inconsistencies, legal anomalies or defects;
    (d) rearrange provisions and Parts; /
    (e) seek to _siJ:nplify by -omitting and combining provisions; .
    (f) -with the approval. of tne Statute Revision- Commission, omit provisions
    -which should be transferred to other statutes; .
    84694--1"
    3 .

    ..
    '
    Report of Royal Commission 011 Criminal Code
    (g) endeavour to :make the Code exhaustive of the criminal law; and
    (h) effect such procedural a:mendments as are deemed necessary for the
    speedy and fair enforce:ment of the criminal law. "
    The Co:m:mittee appointed by Order in Council in February, 1949, and
    reorganized by Order in Council of, the 26th day of Septe:mber, 1950, held, in
    all, twelve :meetings, each one occupying a period of about one ",reek. Prior,
    to the reorganization of the Co:mrnittee in September, 1950, the Committee
    v,"orked in close co-operation with the Commission in inaking 'a general survey
    of the Code and in laying the groundwork for the present draft Bill, Your
    Co:mmissioners have found the preliminary work done during this period 'of
    great value and :many of the decisions taken at that time have been incorporated
    in the draft Bill, Your CQ:mmissioners feel that they would be remiss if they
    did not express their appreciatiqn of the very valuable work done by those who,
    through judicial duties and other com:mitments, found that they could not
    continue with the work of revision. They therefore take' this opportunity to
    express their sincere appreciation 'to '
    Han. Mr. Justice Fauteux,
    Mr. F. P. Varcoe, Q.C.,
    Mr. J.J. Robinette, Q.C.,
    Mr. W. C. Dunlop, Q.,C.,
    Mr. H. p.'Carter, Q.C., and
    Mr'. T. D. MacDonald, Q.C.,
    for the very valuable <;!ontribution which they made toward the work of revision.
    The Co:m:mission appointed by Order in Council of the 10th day of May,
    1951, has held four :meetings, one in each of the :months of June, September,
    October and November, each meeting extending over ,a peri()d of about one
    week.'
    The Committee and the Co:m:mission have been of the opinion that the
    views of the provincial authorities should be obtained in connection with certain
    Illatters, particularly with respect to procedure. For tbis reason the proviiicial
    authorities have fro:m time to time been co:m:municated with and :meetings were
    held with their representatives' at Calgary in the :month of August, 1949, prior
    to the annual :meeting of the Canadian Bar Association, and in Septe:mber, 1951,
    in the City of Toronto at the time of the :meeting of the Criminal Law Section
    of the Conference of Commissioners on Uniformity of Legislation in Canada.
    The latter meeting was arranged to obtain the views of the provincial repre-
    sentatives with respect to 'a proposed revision of Parts XV, XVI, XVIII and
    XXI of the Code. Certain changes in procedure were suggested in order to
    give effect to the following purposes:
    Ca} to simplify the summary trial procedure and to expedite the disposition
    of cases;
    (b) to attain, greater uniformity in the procedure relating to su:m:mary
    trials of offences, whether punishable by indictment or on summary
    conviction;
    ,( c) to provide uniform 'procedure with respect to the forfeiturS', of bail.
    It is a matter of satisfaction to be able to report that there was general
    approval by the provincial representativ"2s of the suggested changes in
    procedure.

    EXTENT TO WHICH REVISED CODE IS EXHAUSTIVE OF THE CRIJY.O:NAL LAW

    Unde, the terms cif'reference the Co:mrnission is directed to endeavour tci


    :make the Code exhaustive of the criminal law. Sections 10, 11 and 12 of the'
    present Code :make the criminal law of England applicable in the Provinces of
    Report of Royal Commission on Criminal Code 5
    Ontario, British Columbia and Manitoba, as it existed on the 17th day of
    September, l792, the 19th day of November, 1858, and the 15th day of July,
    1870, respectively, in so far as it has not been repealed by any Act having the
    force of law in the respective px:ovinces or by the Criminal Code or any other
    Act of the Parliament of Canada. There are no. similar provisiqps in the Code
    "'ith respect to any of the other provinces. As to the Province· of Quebec, there
    can be no doubt that frOln the date of the Quebec Act, 1774, the English crilninal
    law has been in force except as altered, varied or modified by competent
    authority. As to the Maritime Provinces there are no statutes, Imperial or··
    Canadian, which expressly deal with the introduction of the criminal law of
    England, hut that law is considered as having been adopted in so far as it is
    applicable to local conditions. Vide: ·Tremeear, 5th Ed., p. 44, and cases. there
    cited. As to Alberta and Saskatchewan, the Northwest Territories Act, 1886,
    c. 50, as arnended by C. 28 of 1897, s. 4, provided that the laws of England
    relating to civil and criminal matters as they existed on July 15th, 1870, ·shall
    be in force in the Territories in so far as they are applicable, and in so far
    as they have not been altered, varied or modh4.ed by any Act of the Parliarrient
    of the United Kingdom. applicable to the Territories or of the Parliament of
    Canada, or by any Ordinance of the Lieutenant-Governor in Council or of the
    Legislative Assembly. When the Provinces of Alberta and Saskatchewan were
    Torm.ed in 1905 it was provided -by both the Alberta and Saskatchewan Acts
    that all laws existing before the corning into force of those Acts should continue
    in the new provinces in so far as they were not inconsistent with the Acts·
    or where the Acts contained no provision intended as a substitute for them.
    In the Province of Newfoundland, broadly speaking, the law of England as
    to crimes and offences in· so far as it could be applied was in force when the
    PFovince entered Confederation in 1949. The Criminal Code, however, was
    proclaimed in force in Newfoundland on August 1, .1950.
    Your Commissioners are of the opinion that the Code should be exhaustive
    in so far as criminal offences are concerned, but that the =irriinal law. of
    England, as presently in force, should be continued in respect of all other
    matters. In order to give effect to this opinion, claus~s 7 and 8 have been
    placed in the draft Bill .. These clauses are as follows:
    "7. (1) The criminal law of England that was in force in a province
    inlInediately before the com.ing into force of this ·act continues in force
    in the province except as altered, varied, modified or affected by this.
    Act or any other Act of the. Parliament of Canada.
    (2) Every rule and principle of the common law that renders any
    circumstance a justification or excuse for an Act or a defence to a charge
    continues .in force and applies in respect of proceedings for an offence
    under this Act or any other Act of the Parliam.ent of Canada, except
    insofar as they are altered by or a!"e inconsistent with this Act or any
    other Act of the Parliament of Canada.
    8. Notwithstanding anything in this Act or any other Act, no person
    shall be convicted
    (a) of an offence at com.m.on law,
    (b) of an offence under an Act of the Parliament of England, or of
    Great Britain, or of the United Kingdom. of Great Britain .and
    Ireland, or
    "

    NOTE: Where the reference is to a provision of the present Code, the word
    "section" is used. _Where the reference is to a provision of the: draft Bill, the
    word "clause" is used.
    6 Report of Royal Commission on CriJninaZ Code
    (c) of an offence under an Act or Ordinance in force in any province,
    territory or place before that province, territory or place becarrle
    a province of Canada, ,
    but nothing in this section affe~ts the power, jurisdiction or authority
    that a court, judge, justice or rnagi"trate had, iInmediately before the
    coming into force of this Act, to impose punishment for contempt of
    court."

    Under these provisions the criminal law of Englfind in so far as it relates to


    procedure in criminal matters, common law defences and the powers of a
    court to punish for contempt of court are preserved,
    Your Commissioners recognize that the original Code was not intended,to
    be a complete Code and that common law offences were still retained. How-
    ever, we have corne to the conclusion tEat by incorporating in the draft Bill
    'all of the cornmon law offences in respect of which ch?rges are currently laid;
    all offences which should be adopted from the cornmon law are included. -The
    offences which have- been incorporated are common--'law conspiracy (clause
    408(cl», public mischief (clause 120), indemnification of bail (Clause 119(2)
    (d» and compounding a felony (clause 121). A specific punishment applies in
    respect of each -offence. Certain common law offences are, in the opinion of
    your Commissioners, obsolete and archaic and are not retained, e.g., champerty
    and maintenance, barratry, refusing to serve in office and being a common scold._

    REARRANGEJYI:ENT AND CONSOLIDATION

    The Criminal Code was first enacted in 1892 and was founded largely upon
    the draft Code prepared in 1878 by the Commissioners appointed by the
    Imperial Government for the purpose of drafting a Code of the English
    criIninal law, and also upon Stephen's Digest of the criminal 1a",-. Since that
    time amendments and additions have been made at nearly every Session of
    Pa~liarneJ;lt. Some of the arrlendments and additions have not been placed in
    appropriate portions of the Code. Your Commissioners have consolidated and
    rearranged sections which deal with the same subject matter and have thus
    -facilitated reference. -
    Having regard to the Appendices to this Report and the study which will
    be given to the draft Bill, your Com_missioners do not consider it necessary to
    set out in detail the rearrangement and consolidation that has been made.
    However, as an indication of the'manner in which this work has been done, a
    number of examples are given.

    Rearrangem.ent
    The present Code allocates prOVlSlOns under divisions based on subject
    matter, One result of this is, for instance, that rules of evidence whether of
    general application or related to a particular offence are gathered together
    under the heading of "evidence" in Part XIX. This arrangement is inconvenient
    because it necessitates not only reference to the provision creating the offence
    but a~o reference to Part XIX for the purpose of ascertaining whether or not
    there is a special rule of evidence. relating to the particular offence. For
    example, section 394 of the Code deals with offences in respect of lumber and
    lumbering equipment, Section 990 provides that where the material which 1
    is the subject of a prosecution under section 394 bears a registered mark, this, .
    constitutes prima facie evidence that the Illaterial which is the subject of the
    charge belongs to the 'i'egistered owner of the Illark. -
    , In the draft Bill, provisions which are of general application are continued
    in a Part that is of general application, while provisions which relate to a
    specific offence-have been put with the section creating the offenq,. In as much
    •

    Report of Royal Commission on Criminal Code 7


    as section 990 is limited to an offence under section 394, it has been carried
    into clause 285 so-that the special provision relating to offences under this section
    may be readily ascertained. //
    Other examples are cases in -which corroboration is requir~d or -where there
    is a limitation of time for the commencement of a prosecution. In such cases
    the requirement of corroboration or the limitation of time' is placed -with the
    clause'that creates the offence. In the case of forgery, the provision in section
    1002 requiring corroboration is incorporated as sUbsection (2) of clause 310.

    ConsoLidation
    The -work of consolidation is designed to do a-way -with duplication and
    needless repetition, and provisions are drafted in a form that, -where possible,
    eliminates particularization and reduces to a rrlinimum the need for amend-
    ment. For example, the present Code contains provisions dealing -with false
    entries in books of account. Section 413 makes it an offence for an officer of
    a corporation to make false entries. Section 414 makes it an offence for a clerk
    or servant to falsify books of account, etc. Section 41Wrnakes it an offence to
    falsify books of account' to defraud creditors_ Sections 484 and 485 make it
    an offence to make false entries in books of account of a government or of a
    bank. In all these instances the gravamen of the offence is that it is done
    -with an intent to defraud_ In the consolidation of these provisions (clause '340)
    particularization is eliminated and it is made an offence with intent to dejrau-d
    to falsify books of account, etc.
    Another instance of consolidation to which attention is directed and -which
    is intended to meet existing and future conditions, is to be found L.T)., Part X
    -which deals -with counterfeiting. The object of this Part is the protection of
    the currency_ By a comprehensive definition of currency and the consolidation
    of provisions -which dealt separately -with the various kinds-of coin and -with
    paper money, a simple and complete code relating to this subject has been
    evolved.
    Consolidation has also been carried out in -matters of procedure. One
    instance of this is the creation of a separate Part (Part XIX) dealing -with the
    cqlling of -witnesses and the taking of evidence on commission. At present
    these matters are dealt -with in the several procedural Parts. This has resulted
    in the enactment of a great number of provisions, each group designed to cover
    the subject for the purposes of the proceedings dealt -with by the Part in which
    they appear. -
    Your Commissioners have therefore consolidated in one Part (Part XIX)
    all provisions relating to compelling the attendance of witnesses and the taking
    of evidence on commission.
    It has been found that many sections of the Code relating to particular
    offences may be omitted because the offences are capable of being dealt -with
    in one -general provision. For example, sections 358-388 create many separate
    offences for different kinds of theft. These sections are dropped and only one
    offence of theft is created for which appropriate punishment is provided. It is
    pointed out that this is in conformity -with the policy of Parliament as a similar
    step' -was recently taken in respect of th_e offence of forgery.

    UNNECESSARY PROVISIONS

    ,Certain prOVlSIons are not retain"ed because the same subject =atter is
    dealt w-ith in other Statutes of Canada. The follo-wing are examples:
    Sec_ 222A' -which deals "With manufactUre, importation and sale of
    living bacteria, is now- dealt -with by the Pest Control Products Act.
    R.S_C., 1927, c. 5, as amended by 1939, c. 21.
    •
    8 Report of Royal Commission on Criminal Code
    Sec. 224 w-hich'Inakes it an offence for a per,son. to expose for sale
    . articles v.'hich he kno'ws are unfit for human food, is no'w adequately
    covered by the Food and Drugs Act, R.S.C., 1927, c. 76,. as amended
    by 1946, c. 23, s. 2. .
    Sec: 504A dealing :w-ith Inoneylenders is also covered by provisions
    of the SInall Loans Act; S.C. 1939, c. 23. .
    Sec. 506 dealing w-ith offences in respect of copyright is unnecessary
    'in view- of similar provisions in the Copyright Act, R.S.C., 1927, c. 32.
    For the same· reason w-e are of the opinion that the subject Inatter of
    clauses 411 and 412 (sections 498 and 498A) should be dealt w-ith in the
    Combines Investigation Act. We do not feel free to OInit these provisions
    froIn the draft Bill because w-e are informed that a ComInittee has been
    appointed by the Minister of Justice to study cOInbines investigation legislation.
    In our opinion sections 1143-1148 inclusive of the Code relate to matters
    which should more properly be dealt w-ith under provincial law-. Section 1148
    recognizes the validity of provincial law- in relation to/ these m.atters and most
    proviTIces have expressly dealt with theIn. To avoid confusion and duplication
    these provisions are not retained. .
    In our opinion section 508 and subsections (4), (5) and (6) of section 515
    are of doubtful validity. In any event they .relat~· to Inatters which should
    m.Ore properly be dealt with under provincial law-. They are in fact covered
    . by statutory enactm.ents in the provinces.
    Section 1048 provides that the court may aw-ard as cOInpensation to a
    person aggrieved an amount not exceeding one thousand dollars, which shall
    be deemed a judgment debt. This has been changed (clause 638) to provide
    that compensation may be aw-arded out of m.oneys found in the possession of
    an' accused. The lim.itation in amount has been removed because the amount
    found in the possession of a convicted person sometimes exceeds one thousand
    dollars and a lim.itation might work injustice. The creation of a judgment
    debt is considered a civil m.atter and this portion of the present provision is
    not retained.
    PROCEDURE

    . The major changes in procedure have been made in Parts XV, XVI,
    XVIII and XXI of the present Code.
    Parts XVI and XVIII deal with the trial of indictable offences by Inagis-
    trates and judges. These Parts readily lend theInselves to consolidation
    and are cOInbined in Part XVI of the draft Bill. The object of the consolida-
    tion is to provide a com.plete and expeditious procedur.e for the non-jury
    trial of indictable offences.
    Under the proposed procedure the special jurisdict.ion confer:ced upon
    m.agistrates w-ill be exercised only by those w-ho are expressly appointed for
    that purpose. The requireInent that Inagistrates Inust be expressly appointed
    to exercise jurisdiction under the Part is inserted in the expectation that the
    provinces w-illdesignate only qualified persons. The follow-ing is the definition
    of "Illagistrate":
    "'Inagistrate' Ineans a person appointed under the law of' the
    province, by w-hatever title he Inay be designated, who is specially
    authorized by the terms of his appointment to exercise the jurisdiction
    conferred_upon a Inagistrate by this Part, but. does not include tw-o or
    more justices of the peace SItting together."
    Consideration w-as given to the extension of the absoiute jurisdiction
    of Inagistrates and it w-as decided that certain' minor extensions of this juris-
    diction w-ould be justified. It is therefore extended to include offences under
    •
    ,
    Report of. ~oyal Commission on Criminal Code 9
    clause 179 which are cognate to those rnentioned in clause 1.76 and over 'which
    a magistrate 'now has absolute jurisdiction. Clause 176 deals with betting
    pool-selling and book-making. Clause 179 deals with lotteries .. ·· The absolute
    jurisdiction was further extended to include attempts to commit the offences
    of obtaining property by false pretences, receiving and retaining, where. the
    value of the property does not exceed fifty dollars.
    In view of the requirement that magistrates who are to exercise jurisdic-
    tion under the Part must be expressly appointed for the purpose, it was
    decided that the number of offences which should now -be required to. be
    tried by judge and jury should be I!educed to include only .treasonable
    offences, piracy and piratical acts, murder, manslaughter, combinations in
    restraint of trade, discrimination in trade, accessory after the fact to murder
    or treason, attempt to commit murder and conspiracy to murder (clause 413).
    The rights of an accused are in 'no way impaired as he is entitled to elect
    whether he .will be tried by a judge and jury, by judge alone, ot' by a
    magistrate.
    'ProvisioJ;l is made t'o enable an accused who is in custody in one province
    to have charges outstanding against him in another' province disposed of if he
    wishes, but only where the accused- admit:;; his guilt and the Attorney General
    of the province in which the offences were committed consents (clause
    421 (3) ). .
    The anomaly which presently exists v'}"ith respect to' sentences where a
    magistrate tries an offence. mentioned in section. 773, is abolished. Sentences
    'which !nay be imposed for these offences will be the same' whether the
    offence is tried summarily by a magistrate or is tried by a higher court.
    Under Part XVI of the draft Bill no magistrate has absolute jurisdiction
    over any offence that is punishable by imprisonment for more than two
    years.
    SUT"!vrnary Conviction Offences
    With respect to Part XV (now Part XXIV of the draft Bill) which is the ~
    code of procedure for su:rn:rnary conviction offences, the purpose of the changes'
    which are made is to bring about greater uniformity in procedure w-ith respec;t
    to summary· conviction offences and indictable offences.
    The draft Bill provides that a proceeding under this Part must be
    cOIIl..."'TIenced by an information under oath and· that more offences than' one
    may be included in an infonnation as separate counts' (clause 696). However,
    there is reserved' to the court power to order a separate trial in respect of
    one or more of the counts where it is in the interests of justice so to do,
    Under this Part the right of appeal is extended to permit appeals against
    sentence alone. Appeals are to be heard on the evidence taken at the trial
    and the powers of the court hearing an appeal in a summary conviction matter
    are similar to those' of the courts which hear appeals in indictable offences.
    In order to en,;ure that th'e court w-ill have before it aU essential evidence,
    authority is given to hear w-itnesses called on the trial as well as additional
    w-itnesses.
    Forfeiture of Bail
    The provisions in respect of the forfeiture of bail contained in Part XXI
    'of the present Code are not satisfactory. These provisions have been completely
    rew-ritten and are contained in Part XXII of the draft Bill. They. provide.
    a simple and uniform procedure for all the provinces.
    COURTS
    In the draft Bill courts are specifically. defined' as superior courts o(
    criminal jurisdiction or courts of criminal jurisdiction. The terminology of
    the present Code that involves references to such courts as Oyer and Terminer
    'and General Gaol Delivery is not retained.'
    ·84694--2
    -'
    10 Report of Royal Commission on Criminal Code

    SlldPLIFICATION

    The provIsIons relating to arrest with or without warrant by a peace


    officer or other person are shortened and simplified. (Clauses 434-438.)
    The provisions relating to justification for acts authorized by law to be
    done in the administration or enforcement of the law are combirled in clauses
    25 and 26.
    SUBSTANTIVE CHANGES

    Your CommissioneI;s have made substantive changes in the cri=inal law


    which in their opinion eliminate certain inconsistencies, legal anomalies and
    defects in the law. ' ,
    One example is that under the present Code on a charge of rape or indecent
    assault, the evidence of the complainant need not be corroborated., However,
    a rule .of practice requires the frial judge to give a .warning as tb the danger
    of convicting on the complainant's evidence alone. This rule is 'codified and
    extended to cases of carnal knowledge (clause 134) v,rith the 'result that under
    the draft 'Bill corroboration of the evidence of the 'complainant is no longer
    required in cases of carnal knowledge.

    GA:NIING PROVISIONS

    Your Commissioners have considered the gaming sections of the Code.


    While' we are of the opinion that these sections contain certain inconsistencies
    and anomalies we have suggested no substantive changes' because of the
    controversial natur'e of the matters involved.

    SENTENCES

    The sentences ,provided in the present Code follow no apparent pattern


    or principle and ill OUT view are frequently not consonant with the gravity
    of the offences to which they relate.
    'Your Commissioners are of the opinion 'that there should be a few general!'::
    divisions of punishment by imprisonment, each offence being assigned to' one
    of the divisions. Accordingly, apart from the cases where the, sentence of
    death may be, imposed, maximum sentences of imprisonment are provided
    as follows:
    (a) Life,. "
    (b) 14 years,
    (c) 10 years,
    (d) 5 y~ars,
    (e) 2 years.
    Suspended Sentence
    The provisions relating to suspension of sentence contained in section 108;1
    of the Code are varied in clause 638 of the draft Bill. Under section 1081 where
    a person is convicted of any offence and no previous conviction is proved
    against him, the court may suspend the passing of sentence, but if the offence
    is punishable with more than two years' imprisonment, the concurrence of
    counsel acting for the Crown is required. It is the opinion of your Commis-
    sioners that the powers of the court to suspend the passing of sentence should
    not be subject to the consent of counsel for the Crown. It is a fundamental
    principle of the administration of justic~ that the law should be administered
    by a free and independent judiciary, and in determining whether 'a convicted
    person should be released on suspended sentence and thus be given an oppor-
    tunity to rehabilitate himself, or should be sent, to prison, the discretion of,
    -the judge should be unfettered. Under the provisions of clause 638 the court
    has power to suspend sentence in the case of any offence without the' concur- ,
    Report of Royal Commission on Criminal Code 11
    ren ce of counsel for the Crown, but the Crown is given an' appeal against the
    suspension of sentence, (Clause 581 (d)) ~ The provisions )"ith respect to -
    previous convictions have been retained.

    Fines
    The provisions of the present Code empowering the'imposition of fines
    in lieu of or in addition to any other punishment are retained.

    Minimum Punishment
    Your Commissioners consider that all mlnlffium punishments sh'ould be
    abolished and none are continued 'In the draft Bill. "
    In 1878 Sir John Holker, then Attorney General of England, in introducing
    :;: the original Draft Code iIi the House of Commons, said:
    "Minimum punishments were a great evil, and :r am happy to say
    that these punishments have been to a very considerable extent set
    aside 'by recent legislation; and now a very large discretion is confided
    to judges, and they are enabled, upon their view of the circumstances,
    to n'i.tigate the punishment almost to any extent. I think that is right."

    Chief Justice McRuer in Vol. 27 ,of the Canadian Bar Review (1949), p. 1003,
    writes in part as follows:, '
    "It is =uch easier to justify a fixed punishment for =ti.rder, with
    all the safeguards of review that have been thrown around the execution
    of the sentence, than a minimum sentence for theft of a =otor vehicle.
    An arbitrary law of the latter character tends to corrupt the administra-
    tion of justice by creating a will to circu=vent it. Even parliament
    itself has shown such a disposition by the enactment of section 285. (c)
    of the Criminal Code which, although appearing to create a separate;,..
    cri=e, defies the legal mind to distingUish it from theft properly defined."'-
    ,
    Punishment for Summary Conviction Offences
    In keeping with our' desire for simplification, the draft Bill provides one
    genera] penalty ,for all csu=mary conviction offences, namely, a fine of $500
    or six months' imprison=ent, or both .
    .;
    Indeterminate Sentetl-ces
    Your Commissioners have considered the question of indeterminate
    sentences and have consulted the provincial representatives in ,the matter.
    There' was no general feeling in favour of such sentences;, and While we believe
    they would have some merit, we think it would be impracticable to provide for
    such sentences until the requisite =achinery, including a parole board, has been
    established.
    GRAhTD JURY
    ,'- .
    Your Co=missioners favour the abolition of the Grand Jury.in the interests
    of uniformity. It, has been abolished in every part 'of the British Common-
    wealth except in Canada where it 'is retained in five provinces, nam~ly, Ontario,
    Nova Scotia, New'Brunswick, Prince Edward Island and Newfoundland. How-
    ever, the Grand Jury for=s part of the judicial =achinery for the enforcement
    of the 'law in those provinces where it has been retained. Moreover it has in the
    past been abolished only in those provinces that have asked for its abolition. In
    "
    these circumstances we do not feel 'free to recommend its abolition without .the'
    'support of the provinces concerne<;l. '
    84694-21
    12 Report of Royal Commission on Criminal Code
    CR=NAL NEGLIGENCE

    .We have considered the ·question as to the degree of negligence necessary


    to constitute a crhninal offence.
    A great deal of confusion has arisen, particularly in motor manslaughter
    cases, as to the degree of negligence required to sustain a ·conviction against an
    . accused person. Much of the confusion arises by reason of the standard of care
    set forth in section 247 which reads as follows:
    "247. Every one v,ho has in his charge or .under his control any
    thing whatever, ",,-hether animate or inanimate, or who erects, makes·
    or maintains anything whatever "\vhich, in the absence of precaution or
    care, may end~nger human life, is under a legal duty to take reasonable
    precautions against; and use reasonable care to avoid, such danger, and
    is criminally responsible for the consequences of o:mitting, without lav.rful
    excuse, to perform such duty."

    This definition appears to impose criminal liability for what rnight be


    termed civil negligence,
    .
    yet the weight of judicial authority is to the effect that
    ~

    in order to sustain a conviction, it :must be shown -that the negligence of an


    accused person went beyond a mere matter of co:mpensation and showed such
    disregard for the lives and safety of others as to a:mount to a crime against the
    state and conduct deserving punishment.
    There is also the difficulty with respect to cases involving so-called
    involuntary manslaughter and particularly motor manslaughter in which the
    jury is reluctant to convict an accused person notwithstanding that he may
    have been guilty of reckless conduct amounting to cri:minal negligence. This
    difficulty gave rise to the enact:ment of section 951 (3) of the Crirninal· Code
    which enabled a court, upon a charge of :manslaughter arising out of the opera-
    tion of a motor vehicle, to acquit the accused of manslaughter and find .him-
    guilty under section 285 (6Y notwithstanding that the degree of negligence
    required to warrant a conviction for the major or minor offence was the same_
    In order to resolve these difficulties we have dropped section 247 and also
    section 951 (3) and have inserted a definition of criminal negligence in clause
    191 of the draft Bill as follows:
    "191. (1) Everyone is criIninally negligent w~o shows a wanton or
    re(;,kless disregard for the lives or safety of other persons·
    (a) by doing a!lything, or
    (b) by omitting to do anything that it .is his duty to do.
    (2) For the purposes of this section, "duty" means
    (a) a duty imposed by law, or
    (b) a duty for the breach of which a person may be found liable in civil
    ·procee~ings. "

    This definition is followed by clauses 192. and 193 which provide that
    everyone who by crirninai negligence causes the death of another person -is
    guilty of ·an indictable offence and is liable to iInprisonment for life, and any
    person who by crirninal negligence causes bodily injury to another person is
    guilty of an indictable offence and is liable to iInprison:ment for ten years.
    The definition of criminal negligence in clause 191 is in accord with judicial
    authorities which state that wanton or reckless misconduct is required to ;;upport
    a charge involving crirninal negligence: R. v. Bate7nan, 94 L.J.K.B. 791; Andrews
    Report of Royal Commission on Criminal Code 13
    -v.Director of Public Prosecutions, 106 L.J.K.B. 370; R. v. Greisman, 59 O.L.R.
    ~56, and 46 C.C.C. 172; R. v. Baker, (1929) S.C.R. 354. In R. v. Bateman, supra~
    Lord Hewart stated that to support an indictment for manslaughter based on
    criminal negligence, the prosecution must prove the IIlatters necessary to
    establish civil liability (except pecuniary loss) and in addition must satisfy
    the court that the negligence alleged "went beyond a mere matter of compensa-'
    tion and sho'wed such disregard for the lives and safety of others as to amount
    to a criIne against the state and conduct deserving 'punishInent". See also the
    r'emarks of Lord Atkin in Andrews v. Director of Public Prosecutions, supra h

    and Tremeear, 5th Ed., pp. 271 et seq.,


    , It should be 'observed that under clause 19'2 any one ~ho is convicted 'for
    causing the death of another person by criminal negligence in operating a'
    ~:notor vehicle is liable to life imprisonment.
    In clause 194 (5) it is provided that a person commits culpable homicide
    'when he causes the death of a human being by criminal negligence. Und'er this
    provision anyone who causes the death of another persop by criminal negligence
    may be indicted for manslaughter, and if found guilty,fs liable under clause 207
    to imprisonment :for life.
    Tn concluding the report, on the subject of criniinal negligence, attention
    should be called to the provisions of clause 221 (1) whiCh make it an offence"t6-
    be criIninally negligent in the operation of a motor vehicle wh;eth.er'or -not"such
    operation causes bodily injury to' or death' of another person. Because of this
    provision it has been unnecessary to retain subsections (1) and (6) of section'
    ~.. 285.

    PLACE OF TRIAL (NEWSPAPERS)


    The Commission has considered that subsection (2) of clause 421 which
    prpvides that the proprietor, publisher; editor or other person charged with
    the publication Of a defamatory libel in a, newspaper 'or with conspiracy tcF:
    publish a defamatory libel shall be dealt with, indicted, tried and punished in
    the province '."here he, resides or in which the newspaper is printed. The
    'majority of the Commission is of the opinion that the provision is contra:ry to
    the well established principle of the criminal law that an accused should be
    indicted, tried and punished where the offence is committed and that there
    appears to be no good reason under modern conditions why this principle should
    not be preserved in relation to newspapers. However, in view of the fact that
    this section was recently before Parliament, it is retained in the draft Bill.

    CONCLUSION
    Your Commissioners desire to ,state that as to some of the provisions of the
    draft Bill there was 'a difference of opinion. While the draft Bill presented
    - reflects in some respects the view of the majority only, no useful purpose can
    be served hy indicating specifically the matters in which differences of opinion
    were not fully resolved.

    The following appendices are attached hereto:


    Appendix A-Table of Concordance showing disposition of sections
    ,of the present Code.
    Appendix B-Table of Concordance showing origin 'of clauses in the-
    draft Bill.
    Appendix C-Table of Contents of the draft Bill.
    ... .....;, :
    - -''::::-; - -
    '," 14 Report of Royal Commission on, Criminal Code
    / -
    In concluding this report your Conunis,sioners wish to take this opportunity
    of expressing their appreciation of the valuable assistance and untiring service
    which they have received fro:m the following personnel: " //
    Mr. J. C. Martin, Q.C., who has acted as Couns,el to the Co:mITlittee and
    Cornrn.ission; ".";
    Mr. A. J. MacLeod, of the Depart:ment of Justice, for his assistance in
    th~ drafting of the Bill; and

    Mr: L. J. Ryan, who has acted as Secretary to the Co:mmittee and


    Commission.
    -
    Respectfully sub:mitted.
    (Sgd) W. M. MARTIN, Chairman,
    ROBERT FORSYTH,
    FERNA:rn) CHOQUETTE,
    H. J. WILSON;
    J. SEDGWICK,
    A. A. MOFFAT.
    Ottawa.
    . February 22, 1952.

    -, '

    ,- . -,"
    .'" .-
    ,,

    'i' . "Report of Royal Commission on Criminal Code 15

    ;'.-.' .
    CRINIINAL CODE REVISION
    ','.
    "A"
    TABLE OF CONCORDANCE RESPECTING
    SECTIONS OF PRESENT-CODE

    . Ottawa,
    ~; ;-,'
    3anuary, 1952.
    TABLE OF CONCORDANCE

    Present Code Section Clause in Draft Bill Present Code Section Cla.use in Draft Bill

    1 1 6 3 (5)

    2 (1) (T) 7 3 (6)


    (Z) (Z)
    (3) dropped 8 4
    (4) (3l
    (4) (a) (4 9 6
    k (5)
    .(6)
    (5)
    dropped
    f (9) 10
    (7) 11 } covered by 7
    I (8)
    (9)
    (10)
    •
    (9) (a)
    391 (d)
    168 (1) (e)
    dropped
    not required be:.
    1Z

    13 9
    cause of definition
    - of territorial divi- 14 dropped
    sion.
    (11) (lZ) 15 10
    (12) (13
    i13 )
    14)
    (15)
    (15
    (16)
    (17)
    S 16 7 (2)

    12
    17
    (16) dropped
    (16) (a) (19) J8 ~.'
    • 13 ~
    (17) (20) and (8)
    (18) dropped 16
    (21) 19
    (19)
    (20) dropped.
    {20} (a) (23) 20 17
    (Zi) (24)
    (2Z) (26) 21 18
    (23) 247 a.nd 421 (4)
    i24
    25})
    (28) and (11)
    (29)
    dropped
    22 19

    ~}
    (26)
    (27) (30)
    (28) (22) 25 25
    (29) (31) 26
    (30) 81 (2) 27
    (31) (32)
    (32) (34) 28 28
    i(rsl
    33
    }
    (35)
    (36)
    dropped 29 25
    36
    ((37 l (43)
    (38)
    dropped 30
    31
    (38)
    (39) (39) 32
    (40) " (40) 33 25
    (41) 410 (2) 34
    (42) (41) 35
    (43) (42) 36
    (M) (43) 37
    (45) (M)
    (2) 3 (1) 38 dropped...
    3 3 (2)

    4 3 (3) 39 25
    5 3 (4) and 485 40 29
    .;:;

    Report of Royal Comnz{ssion on Crilninal Code

    Code Section Clause in Draft BHl Present Code Section Clause in Dra.ft Bill

    84 57. ..-

    } 25 87
    88.
    M
    65
    30 89 67
    31 90 66
    91 68
    32
    92 . 69
    93 33
    52 27
    94 70
    (1) and (2) 34 95 110
    (3) 36
    54 (1) 35
    96 }
    97
    " 372
    (2) 36
    99 71
    55 37
    100 See 160
    56 38
    101 72
    39
    102 73
    59 } 40 103 74 "
    ·60
    104 dropped
    61 41
    105 ' 81 (1)

    i
    62 42 106}
    ·63 43
    107
    108 dropped
    64 ,44 109
    .. 110
    65 45
    111 77
    66 26
    112 78
    67 14
    113 79
    68 15
    114 80
    69 21 and 407
    115 82
    70 22
    71
    116 S3
    23
    72 24 117 84

    74 (1) 46 (1) and (2) 118 85


    (2) 47 (1)
    119 86
    75 46 (3)
    120 88
    76 50·
    121 89
    77 46 (1)
    122 90·
    78 . 46(1)
    79 51 123 91

    80
    81
    52
    53
    124
    125
    93
    94
    -
    82 54 126 95
    83 56 127· 96
    :~~;~f1@t't of Royal Commission on Criminal Code

    Code Section ClaW>e in Draft Bill Present Code Section Clause in Draft Bill

    97 182 122/
    98 18:3 . 123
    184 dropped
    dropped
    185 125
    186 128
    ,_ r 187 }' 124
    188
    61 189 125
    &% 190 125
    1M 191 } 121
    192
    7i
    193
    194 } 126
    76
    195
    7i
    196
    dropped
    197
    \1\1
    198
    100 (1)
    199 }
    200 HI1
    161
    201
    102
    202 l-i7
    M4,
    203 dropped
    103
    2<H 1-i2
    1<H
    205.,. 158
    105 =d M4,
    • 205A (1) 1511
    106 (2) dropped
    107 206 US
    lOB 207 150
    1011 207"- 151
    110 208 152
    209 (a) and (0) 153
    111 . ,rc) . 324
    99 and 112 210 131 (3)

    99 211 (1) 143


    (2) 131 (4)
    113 (1) (3) dropped
    173 ll-i 212 144
    113 (1) 213 (1) 145
    (2) 131 (4)
    '175 } 114
    1'7.6 . 214 (1) 146
    117 (2) 131 (2)
    117
    17$ 408 (b) 215 (1) 155
    (2)-(6) 157
    ,ii9' . 118 (7) 133
    "iaG
    -_'O~_ . 110 216 184 (1) and (2)
    181 dropped' 217 156
    84694-3
    -Report of Royal Commission on Criminal Code

    Code Section Clause in Draft Bill Present Code Section Clause in Draft Bill

    - 408 (e) 247 .......covered by 191


    140 248 188
    dropped 249 190
    165
    } 250 194 (1)
    251 195
    dropped
    252 194 (2) - (5)
    160 (a)
    253 194 (6)
    dropped
    254 198
    dropped
    255 200
    168 (1) (b)
    256 199
    108 (1) (e), (d), (h) and
    } (;) and 168 (2) and (4) 257
    ,
    -196
    176 (2), 182 (2) 268 197
    (1) 176 (1) 259 201
    (2) 182,176
    (3l
    (4
    108 (1) (h)
    182 (2)
    260 202
    (5) dropped 261 203
    (6) 182 (4)
    (7) 182 (3) 262 (1) 205
    (8) 183 (2) 204
    <
    175 263 206
    326 (1) 264 210
    327 265 316
    ,-

    } dropped 266 (a)


    ,- (b)
    408 (a)
    407
    180 267 211
    177 268
    178 207.
    . 236 179 268 .. 208 .~
    , -f'-

    237 167 269 212


    238 (a) 164 (a) 270 213 -
    (b) dropped
    (e) 160 (b) 271 214
    (d)' 164 (b)
    (e) 272 215
    160 (e)
    (g) 160 (d) 273 216
    (h) 372
    -Sf-~', (i) -164 (e) 274 231 (2)
    (j) 164 (d)
    (k) 164 (e) 275 dropped
    239 164 (2) 276 218
    "i'_~

    240 185 277 } 217


    -:-,:.~, 278
    186
    ,,:::". ill} 279 77
    230 78
    243 190
    231 219
    244 186 and 190
    282 220
    245 189
    283} covered by
    246 187 284 193
    of Royal Commission on Criminal Code, 19

    Code Section Clause in Draft Bill Present Code Section Clause in Draft Bill Ii
    and (2) 221 (2) and (3)
    231
    318 249 /

    !~
    222
    ,,
    319 262 I
    223
    - (48)' - 224 320 255
    226
    221 (1) 321 256
    and (8) 225
    2 (18) '322 257
    227 323 258
    228 324 259
    229 (1) and (2) 325 260
    326 265
    230
    327 263
    231 (1) /
    "
    323 264
    and (b) 141 (1)
    231 (2) 329 253
    148 330 254
    132 331 261
    231 (2) 332 252
    232 333 250
    "
    233 334 251
    135 335 (1) (a.), (b) and (e) dropped
    139 (d) , 268 (a)
    (e), (f) drofped
    136 (g) 2 (14
    137 fi)
    (h)
    ,
    j), (k), (I)
    268 (b)
    dropped
    268 (e), (d), (e) ~
    138 (=) 322 (a.)
    131 (4) (n) • 351 (4) (a)
    dropped (Pi'
    (0)
    (.
    (q), (r)
    , 322 Jb~
    ropped
    268 (f)
    :037 (t), (u) dropped
    (" ) ,322 (e)
    (w) 351 (4) (b)
    (x) 322 (d)
    305 238 (1/ ) 322 (e)
    306 209 336 351 Q)
    307 239 337 dropped
    30S 240 338 ' dropped
    309 (1) 241 (1) 339 2 (14)
    . (2) 242
    340 294
    310 243 (1)
    covered by 351
    311 244 ill}
    iiii! 245 343 dropped
    313 234 344 269
    Si4 dropped 345 269 (5)
    .,
    ::315 235 ' 346 270 (1)

    *317
    236.
    248 \
    347
    34ll
    269 (1) -
    271
    (4),

    '.,84694-31
    ,i
    I'
    ' ,it
    II
    Report of Royal Commission on Criminal Code , 1
    I
    i
    Code Section Clause i" Draft Bill Present Code Section CIa u~ in Draft Bill

    ~72 39S 299


    ~1)
    2) dropped
    399 296,297
    dropped
    400 298 (1)
    %73
    401 dropped
    %74
    402 300
    droppeo.
    4()3 dropped
    %75
    4M 303
    276
    405 (1) 304 1) (a)
    %77 (2)
    (3) 304 (3)
    1
    304 1) (b)

    178
    405 .. , 58
    Ml5B, 59,
    dropped
    4050 58
    406 (1) 305
    (2) 306 (1) ..nd ~2)
    ~Q8 (1) (3) 306 (3) and 4)

    407 (ll
    (2 {a}
    dropped
    364 (1) {eJ
    304 (1) (d)
    (3) (b) 307

    .droppeoi 408 346

    409 347
    ..;
    ,410 346
    411 348 ~

    412 (1) and (2) 33t;


    ins (1) dropped (3) U4
    , (2) !7Q
    413 340
    'J
    - .;- ::"'0
    ~ -~::-
    .
    -380
    '.-'," -
    :381
    . '--~;--" . :382
    -,--~', . "'j
    ~
    ,384
    -385 .
    .dropped

    ~overed by
    414
    415
    415A (b) and (e)

    416
    balance
    • 343
    340
    341

    342
    dropped

    :386 } 2S0
    .0" '._'
    :387 417 (a) and (b) 335
    (e) 845
    :388 dropped
    ,418 840
    389 dropped
    419 328
    390 ~2
    420 329 "
    391 -283
    421 830
    392 • ~ (1)
    dropped
    393 covered by ~}
    386
    4Z4 ?)2)-(5)
    and (6) 337 ,
    3M '285 (1) and (6) , , dropped
    ,
    395 dropped 424A 339 l
    ,
    396 'Z86 425 331

    ':;97 :t87 !26 332

    - .~
    Royal Commission on Criminal Code 21

    Clause in Draft Bill Present- Code Section Clam", in Dra!. Bill

    333 4U 313/
    au H5 au,
    dropped 476 315
    358 477 317
    dropped 478 318
    285 (2)
    479 319
    359
    360 480
    481 } 320 and 321
    482
    361 and 664 483
    484 340
    362
    485 , 340
    l 363
    486 349
    dropped 487 350
    488 351,352
    dropped 489 351
    181 490 353
    179
    490A 364
    308
    491 355
    323
    492 356
    325
    4:93 dropped
    288
    ·494 352
    289 495 dropped
    288 '496 } 409
    497
    290
    498 411
    498" 412
    291
    499 365
    500 dropped
    456
    -
    M'l
    457
    ,:458 .
    459
    292
    501 }
    502
    502A
    '
    366

    367
    .460
    461
    503 dropped
    462 293
    504 363
    463 82
    SMA dropped
    464 295
    505 369
    465 dropped
    466 506 -dropped
    309
    467 311 508 dropped
    , 468 310 (1) 509 371 (1)
    509A 49
    411
    472 } 312
    -473 510 372

    -
    Report of Royal Commission on Criminal Code
    ,
    Prese:at Code Section Clause in Draft Bill

    16S 546
    547
    374 548
    549
    375 550
    551
    374 552
    553
    554
    375 555
    556 Part X
    377 557
    dropped 558
    5.59
    316 560
    561
    .378 562
    563 ,
    372 554
    565 ,
    567 \
    372 ' 568 dropped
    569 Part X
    .;
    570 } 406 and 407
    covered by 372,406 571
    572
    379 573 . 408 (e)
    372· 574 }, 406
    575
    380
    575A .659
    381
    575B 660
    320 and 321
    5756 (1) 660
    382 (2) ,. dropped
    (3) and (4), 662
    383 575n 668
    531 } . 384 575E 667
    532
    575F 664
    533 }
    534 372 575G (1) 664
    535 (2) and (3) 665
    385 575H 666
    537 (1) (a) and (b) 386 576 424
    (c) 316
    (2) dropped
    577 414
    538 316
    578 dropped'
    539 373 554
    579
    540 dropped 413 (1)
    580 (1)
    (2) 418
    541 371 (2) and (3)
    and 376 581 416
    542 387 581A 417
    .: , 388 582 413 (2)
    389 583 413 (2)
    545 390 • 584 419
    -lI9 585 422

    S.c. COURTHOUSE l1BRARV '. SOCIETY


    "ANr.nl IVFR
    \

    Commission on Criminal Code 23


    ,
    Section Clause in Drait Bill Present Code Section Clause in Drait Bill

    645 428/

    646 434
    dropped
    647 435
    dropped
    648 435
    410 (1)
    649 436
    420 (2)
    650 437
    dropped
    652 435 pt. 438 pt.
    100 (2)
    653 439
    dropped
    654 439
    229 (3)
    655 (1), (2) and (4) 440 (1)-(3)'
    (3) ./ Part XIX
    dropped
    dropped
    656
    •
    658 (1) 441 (1)
    (2) 441 (2)
    (3) 440 (4)
    (4) 441 (3)
    - (5) 441 (6)
    425
    659 (1) 442 (3)
    Part XIX (2) 440 (4)
    dropped 660 (1) 443
    (2) and (3) 442 (1) and (2)
    .426 (4) and (6) 444
    dropped 661 (1) and (2) 445
    I----~ (3) 20
    662 (1)-(3) 447 and 429
    (4)-(6) 446
    dropped 663 Part XIX
    664 442 (1) (c) .

    665 (1) dropped


    (2) and (3) 456
    429
    666 456
    430
    667 448
    432 (1) and (2)
    668 449
    covered by 405
    669 458
    433
    670 459
    96
    355 (2) 672 )
    671
    673
    dropped 674 Part XIX
    675
    338 676.
    677
    285 (3)
    678 457
    172
    679 } 451
    171 and .173 680
    681
    174
    682 } 453
    dropped 683
    Report of Royal Commission on Criminal Code
    ,
    Section Clause in Draft Bill Present Code:&ction Clause in Iflaft~BilI

    4053 and 454 721 .. 712


    722 710
    4,55
    .723 701
    454
    724 704
    460
    725 703
    dropped
    726 711
    dropped
    727 713
    4,60
    728 714
    512
    729 dropped
    461
    730 715
    Part XIX /
    731 dropped
    461
    732 699
    (1) 462
    (2) . 508 733} dropped
    (3) and (4,) 514 734
    463 735)
    716
    736J
    ·737
    464 733
    463 739 694
    465 -740 621 and 373 .
    463
    741)
    672

    &1~~\~~~(a)-
    742}
    743 dropped
    636 744
    745
    (d) 692
    (e) 733 746 621

    692 (d), 693 747 dropped


    692 ((1),705 .748 (1) 637
    (2) - (5) 717
    695 (2)
    697 749 719, 720 and 721
    692 ((1)
    750 721,722. 724 and 725
    709 699 727
    751 (1)
    (2) 731 (2)
    710
    711)
    695,696
    Part XIX
    (3l
    (4 and (5) .
    728
    dropped
    712~ and 700
    713; 752 + covered by Z.27

    714, 42& 753 727


    715 709 764 727 and 732

    716 (1) 709 (3) 7155 730


    (2) - (4,) Part XIX
    756 732 (2)
    717 702
    757 (1) 726 (1)
    , 718 710 (3) (2) 725 (2)
    (3) 712 (4)
    . 719 706 (4) 782 (3)

    720 707 7158 . 731 (1)

    721 708 759 781 (3) and (4)


    of Royal Commission on Criminal Code

    .Code Section Clause in Draft Bill - Present Code Section} Clause in Draft Bill

    72g, 730
    734
    ill}
    49i"
    735
    736 ~}
    737 845 (1) and (2) 491
    738 (3) 510
    740 846 dropped

    741 847 (1) 65 and 492


    (2) 510 "
    739
    848 dropped
    742
    743 849 502 and 503
    744 850 dropped
    851 572
    Part XVI
    852 } 492
    " 853
    854 500

    855 (1) 493


    [(2) 492
    Part XVI
    856 499,501

    857 } 501
    858
    441 (4) and (5)
    470 859 }" 497
    "860
    861 494
    Part XVI
    862- " 495

    Part XIX 858 496


    864 (aJ - (dJ dropped
    (e) 270 (2)

    PartXv,r 865 498

    " 630 866 } dropped


    867
    868
    450
    869 (1) , 298 (2)
    (2) dropped
    Part XVI
    870 dropped
    871 dropped
    872 486
    873 (1~ - (3) 487
    (4 488
    (5 - (7) 489 "
    Part XvI 874 } 504
    875
    876 505

    877 506

    878 dropped
    879 507
    r'ji'l~gpc>rt, of Royal Commission on Criminal Code 27
    I Present Code Section Clause in Draft Bill
    Code Section Clause in Draft Bill

    560 1002-(Cone.)
    (e)
    (d)
    Vi'l (1~' 184 (3)
    561 242 (2
    (eJ 310 (2
    490
    1003 (1) dropped
    572 (2) 566
    (3) 99 (j)
    573
    1004 575
    580
    1005 576
    523
    1006 covered by 634
    524
    1007 dropped
    525 i
    1003 } 577 ,\
    526 1009
    1010 578
    .'
    i'
    527
    1011 579
    Part XIX 1012 581
    1013 i1r (2) pt.
    2 , (4), (5) pt.
    ,583
    584
    (3 - 582
    446 (6) 585
    (5) pt. 592
    562
    1014 592
    113 (2)
    1015 593
    dropped
    1016 592
    4{)3
    1017 424,595
    574
    1018 586, 594
    dropped
    1019 587
    565
    1020 424,588
    169
    '1021 (1) - (3) 424,589
    169, (4h.nd (5) 590
    170 i6)pt. (7) 594
    326 (2) l°l '
    (11 , (13) - (18)
    591
    424
    (8l 589
    563 1022 (2 596 .

    '!.l89
    ;~90
    284 (2), (3)
    2«5 (4), (5)
    1023
    gl
    (3)
    pt.
    597 (1)
    5S7
    598
    ,',"
    'j"' (4) 599
    \'991 364 ' •
    1024 600
    {~92 357
    1025 (1) 597,598
    ;!i(." 93 301 (2) 599

    '994
    , , 302 1025A
    1026 640

    Part XIX 1027 5 (1)

    1028 } 621
    1029
    564 1030 ~
    1031 5 (1) (b)
    :902 (a) 47 (2) 1032 ,
    (b) 115 1033 J
    84694~
    ; i',~.

    28

    Present Code Se-etion~


    Report of Royal Commission on Criminal Code

    Clause in. Draft:Bill Present Code Section Clause in. Drait Bill
    I
    ~

    ~
    1034 1072 649
    ~
    >
    II
    t)
    654

    1035 and (2) 622 1073 651 i


    3) 623
    > 4) 621 1074
    1075
    652
    653
    I
    1035A 625
    1036 } 626 1076 655
    1037
    1038 627
    1077 '" 656
    1078 dropped
    1039 355 (2)
    1079 dropped
    1040 dropped
    lOS0 657
    1044 dropped
    10S1 63S
    1045 631 > -'
    10S2 dropped
    1046 } dropped
    1047 1083 639
    1048 628 1084 } 658
    1085
    1049 629
    10S>6 }
    1050 630 1087 Part XXII
    1083
    1051 5 (1) (b)
    1089
    1052 (1) ·633 1090
    (2) 694 (1) 1091
    1092
    1053 dropped 1093
    1094
    1054 621 1095
    1096
    1054.~ (1) - (3) and (5) 661 1097
    (4) 662 1098
    (6 665 (2) 1099
    (7
    (8)
    5 666
    659
    1100
    1101
    1102
    lO54B 624 1103 >>
    1104 Part XXII
    1055 621 1105
    1106
    1056 634 1107
    1108
    1057 dropped 1109
    1110
    1058 } 637 1111
    1059 1112
    1113
    1050 641 1114
    1115
    1061 dropped 1116
    1062 642
    1117
    1118 J
    1119
    1063 643
    1120 631 ,
    1064 644
    1121 } 632
    1122
    1065 }
    1066 645
    1067 1123 dropped
    1068 646 1124 683

    1069 64~ 1125 634

    1070 648 1126 685


    1071 650 1127 686
    Commission on' Criminal Code 29

    Section Clause in Draft Bill Present Code Section Clause in Draft Bill

    "" I
    687 1142 693 (2)

    682
    1144
    1145 dropped
    688 1146
    1147
    689 1148
    48 (1) 1150 dropped.
    133, 184 (4)
    48 (2) 1151 dropped.

    627 1152 748 .

    -'
    30 Report of Royal Commission on Criminal Code

    CRIMINAL CODE REVISION

    "B"
    TABLE SHOWING ORIGIN OF CLAUSES IN DRAFT BILL

    Ottawa,
    January, 1952.
    --
    Clause No. R.S. C. 1927. c. 36 Clause No. R.S.C.1927. c. 36

    PAR'!" I 6 9
    1 J 7 (IS
    (2 / 16
    new
    . .2 (1) 2 (1)
    (2) (2) 8 new
    (3) (4) 9 13
    (4) 4) (0;) .
    (5) (5) 10 15
    ~6) new
    7) new n new

    m
    (10)
    (17)
    (7)
    new
    12 17

    m
    13) 12)
    ~24)
    11)
    13
    14
    18
    67

    1
    14) 335 (g) and 339 pt.
    P3) .. 15 68

    r
    15)
    (16) 14)
    7 (15) 16 19
    - 18)) 285 (9)
    19) 116) (a) 17 20
    (20) 17)
    (21) (19) 18 •. 21 ~
    (22) (28)
    (23) (20 (a) 19 22
    ~24)
    25)
    (21
    new
    5 20 661 (3)
    26) (22)
    (27) new 21 69
    (28) (24)
    (29) (25) 22 70
    (30) (27)
    ?1) (29) 23 71
    32) (31)
    (33) ne~
    24 72
    ~34) (32)

    t
    (33) 23 to 27,20,30 to 37,
    g5 (34) 25
    39,41 to 4,5
    37) new
    38) (38)
    39) (39) 26 66
    (40) (40 )
    41) put in 410 (2) 27 52
    (41) ( 42 )
    (42) 43)· 28 28
    (43) (44) a.nd 36
    (44) (45) 29 40
    3 (1) 2 (2) 30 46
    (2) 3
    t)
    4)
    5)
    4
    ·5 (1) (b) and (2)
    6
    31

    32
    47

    48.49, 50, 51
    (6) 7
    .4, 8 33 93 0

    5 (1) (a) 1027 34 63 (1) and (2:)


    (b) 1030-1033 and 1051
    (2) new 35 54 (1)
    p.: --= -"-"i:~ ,;>;.q ....... -.~- -~.~--- ·~...J;lr;.

    ..
    l'
    Report ot Royal Commission on Criminal Code 31

    Clause No. E.S.C. 1927. c. 36


    I Clause Nc. R.S.C. 1927, c.36

    36 53 (3) and M (2) 72 101


    37 55 . 73 102
    38 56 74 103
    39 57 and 63 75 137 and 139
    40 59 and 60 76 138
    41 61 77 111 and 279
    .(2 62 78 112 and 280
    <13 63. 79 113
    « 64 80 114
    <15 65 81 ~l)
    2) .~/
    105 and 106
    2 (30)
    PAETH 82 115 and 463
    46 (1). (2) ""d (8) U. 75,77,78 83 116
    <17 (1) u· (2) 84 117
    (2) 1002
    85 (1) 118
    .{8 ?)2) 1140 ~1) (a)
    1140 2) . '.
    (2) new
    86 119
    .{9 sag-A "
    87 new
    50 76 and new
    38 120
    51 79
    89 121
    52 80
    90 122
    63 81
    ill 123 ~
    M 82
    92 new
    65 847 (1)
    93 124
    56 83
    94 125
    57 84
    95 126
    63 405... ,4050
    96 127 and 634
    50 405B
    97 128
    60 133 and 133A
    98· 129
    61 134
    62 135 PART III
    63 132A 99 155.170,171 and 1003 (3)
    M 87 100 156 and 593
    65 88 101 157

    66 90 102 158

    67 89. 103 160

    68 91 104 161

    69 92 105 162

    70 94 106 163·

    71 99 107 164
    32 Report of Royal Commission on Criminal Code

    ~ Clause No. If R.S.C.:1927, c. 36 Clause No. R.S.C. 1927, c. 36

    108 165 143 211 (1)


    109 166 144 212
    110 95, 167 and 168 145 213 (1)
    111 169 146 214 (1)
    112 170 147 202
    113 P)
    2)
    172 and 174
    979
    148 293
    149 206
    114 173, 175 and 176 .
    150 207
    115 1002
    151 207 ...
    116 new
    152 208
    117 177· / '.. j
    153 209 (<:) and (b)
    118 179
    154 new
    119 180
    155 215 (1)
    120 new
    156 217
    121 new
    157 215 (2) - (6)
    122 182
    158 .205
    123 183
    159 205... (1)
    124 187 and 188
    160 100, 222B and 238
    125 ·185, 189 and 190
    161 199, 200 and 201
    126 193, 194 and 195
    162 new
    127 191 and 192 .
    163'- OIOA ~
    123 186
    164 238 (a), (d:), (i),
    129 196 (j), (k) and 239

    165 221 and 222


    PARTlY
    166 136
    130 197 167 237
    131 (1) 1002
    (2) 214 (2)
    ~3)
    4)
    210
    211 (2), 213 (2) and
    PART V

    301 (4) 168 (1) (a) new


    (b) 225
    132 294 (e) 227
    (d) 226
    133 215 (7) and 1140 (1) (c) (e) 2 (9a)
    (f) new
    134 new (0 ) new
    135 298 (1)
    (hJ
    (i
    227
    227
    ~2) and 229 (3)
    2)
    (2) 226 1) (b) (li)
    136 299 ~3)
    4) 226
    Dew
    ·(2)
    137 300
    169 985 and 986 (1), (2)
    138 301 and (3)
    ~
    139 298 (2) 170 986 (4)
    140 219 171 641 -......
    -
    141 292 (a) and (b) 172 640
    142 204 173 &U (1)
    Report oj Royal Commission on Criminal Code" 33

    Clause Nc. R.S.C. 1927, c. 36 Clause~No. R.S.C. 1927, c. 36

    174 642 205 262 (1)


    175 230 206 253
    ~76" 228 and 229 t207 " 268
    177 235 "(I) 208 268"-
    178 285 (2) - (6) 209 306
    179 236 and 442 (b) 210 264
    !l.V
    ISO 234 " 211 267
    181 442 (a) 212 269
    182 (1) 229 (2 213 270
    (2) 228 (1 5and (2)
    and 229 (4) 214 .- 271
    (3) 229 (7
    (4) 229 (6 5 215 272.
    183 229 (8) 216 273
    134 P) and (2)
    3)
    216
    1002
    217 277 and 278
    (4) 1140 (1) -fe} 218 276
    219 231
    i>.... BTVI
    220 232
    185 (a), (e), (d)" 240 .
    (b) new 221 (1) Rew
    (2) and:(3) 235 (2)
    186 241, 242 and 244
    222 . 235 (4)
    187 246
    223 235 (4) (a)
    188 248
    224 235 (4) (b) - (4) (e)
    189 245
    225 285 (7) and (8)
    190 243, 244 and 249
    191 . new 226 235 (5)

    192 new 227 286

    193 283, 284 and new 228 287

    194 P)2) 250


    252 (1)
    229 288, 289, 595

    t4)
    5)
    (6)
    252
    252
    252-
    253
    ~4)
    3)
    (2)
    230
    231
    232
    290
    274, 291 and 295
    295
    195 251
    233 297
    196 257
    234 _ 313
    197 253
    235 315
    198 254
    236 316
    199 256
    237 303,304
    200 255
    238 805
    -- 201 259
    239 807
    202 260
    240 308
    203- 261
    241 (1) 309 (1)
    204 262 (2) (2) new
    34 Report of Royal Commission on Criminal Code

    Clause No. R.B.C. 1927, c. 36 Clause No. R.B.C:1927, c. 36

    242 (1) 309 (2) 278 357


    (2) 1002 (d)
    279 378 (2)
    243 ?)
    2)
    310
    948 230 new

    244 311 231 235 (3)


    245 312 232 390
    246 198 233 391
    247 2 (23) 284 (1) /392
    '(2) 989
    248 317 (3) 989
    249 318 235 (1) and (6) .394
    (2) 431 (4)
    250 333 (3) 638 .,.
    (4) and (5) 990
    251 334 ,
    286 396 ;.:'
    252 332
    287 397
    253 329
    238 -H5 and -H6, «8
    254, 330
    239 -H7
    255 320
    290 -H9
    256 ;121
    291 45Q....454
    257 322
    292 455-461
    258 323
    293 462"
    259 . au 340
    294 . ,
    260 325
    261 . 331
    295
    296
    464
    399,
    .j
    "

    262 319
    297 399

    I
    263 327
    298 (1) 364, 36-5 and 400
    264 328 (2) 869 (1)
    265 326 299 398
    266 912, 913, 041' '300 402
    267 956 301 993
    •
    302 994
    PART VII
    . 303 404
    268 335 (d], {.hj' (i). (k),
    (l], 8 405 SJId 407 (2)
    304
    269 345 and 347 406 (1)
    305
    270 346 and ?64 (.)
    306 406 (2) and (3)
    271 348 ~

    307 407 (3)


    272 349 (1)
    308 443
    :~.
    273 351
    309 466
    274 352
    310 (1) 468
    275 354 (2) 1002 -
    .'

    276 355 311 467

    277 356 312 471, 472 and 47lf '


    Report of Royal Commission on Criminal Code 35

    Clause No. . R.S.C. 1927. c. 36 Clause No. R.S.C, 1927, c. 36

    313 ,474 351 (1) 488 (1) pt. and 489


    (2S 488 (2)
    314 475 (3 336
    (4) (a and b) 335 (1) (n) and (w),
    315 476 241 and 342
    316 265,516,537 (Ie) and 538 352 488 (1) and 494
    317 477 353 490
    31B 478 354 490A.
    319 479 355 491, 635 and 103\)

    320 } 480 - 483 and 528 356 492


    t 321
    357 992
    PART VIII. 353 430
    ./
    .322 335 (1) (m) (0) (v) ("') 359 432
    and (1/)
    360 433
    323 4H
    361 424
    324 209 (e)
    862 435
    325 «4A.
    363 436
    326 231 and 987
    364 g'n
    327 231 ...
    365 4119
    328 -Ull
    366 501 and 503
    321l . ~20
    367 502A
    330 ~1
    363
    331 425
    369 505
    332 426
    333 ~7 PART IX
    3M ~8 .370 new

    335 417 (a) and (~) 371 509 and 541


    336 412 (1) and (2) 372 cODsolida.tion of 96
    97 .
    337 424' (1) and (6) 238 (hJ'
    510
    338 637 516B
    517
    33\1 ~ 518
    519 (aJ
    340 413,415,418,484 and 485 520
    521
    241· 415A. (b) and (e) 522
    525
    3L..2 416 533
    534
    343 ,U4 535
    344 412 (3) 373 (1), (2). (3) . 539
    (4) 740 (1) pt.
    245 417 (e)
    374 511 and 513
    346 ~ and 410
    409 375 512 and 514
    247
    us .~1l 376 541 (2)

    241l ~6 377 515 (1) and (2)

    350 ~7 378 5161. •


    36 Report of Royal Commission on Criminal Code

    Clause No. R.S.C. 1927, c. 36 Clause No. R.S.C. 1927, c. 36


    ,I
    379 524 418 580 (2)
    380 526 419 5451.. and 584
    381 527 420 (1) new
    (2) 591
    382 529
    3SS 530
    421 19 "-".d (2) 888
    new
    (4) . 2 (23)
    384 531 and 532
    422 585
    385 536
    423 586 and 587
    386 393,537 (1) (a) and (b)
    424 576, 1017 (I), 1020 (5),
    1021 (1) (d), (2)
    387
    388
    542
    543
    and (3), (11), (13)-
    (18)
    ,
    389 544
    390 545
    425 604
    426 606
    PART X
    427 544
    391
    392 428 645 and 714'
    393
    394 429 629 and 6'62
    395
    396 This Part is- derive<;i frO= Part IX of the 430 630
    397 present Code. It has been co=pleteIy
    398 revised.. - 43~. new
    399
    400 2 (8),546-569,632,955,957,981 432 (1):and~ (2) 631
    4Dl (3) new-
    402 (4) new
    403
    404 433 633
    405
    PART XIV
    'PART XI
    434 646
    4D6 570,571,572,574,575
    435 647, 648, 652 pt.
    407 69 and 572 pt.
    436 649
    4D8 (a) 266 (a-)
    (b) 178 437 650
    (c) 218
    (d) new 438 652 pt. and new
    (e) 573
    439 653 and 654
    409 496 and 497
    440 655 (I), (2), (4),
    410 2 (41) and 590 558 (3) and 659 (2},

    411 498 441 658 (I), (2), (4), (5) and


    782 (1)
    412 498A
    442 660 (2), (3), 659 (1) and
    664 '
    PART XII
    443 660 (1)
    413 (1) 580 (1)
    (2) 582 and 583 444 660 (4) and (5)
    414 577 445 661 (1), (2)
    ,
    415 Ilew 662 (4), (5), (6), 883,
    446
    581 977 and 941 '
    416
    417 581A 44e 662 (I), (2) and (3)
    i,
    ,
    Report .of Royal Cqmmission on Criminal Code_ 37

    R.S.C. 1927, c. 36 Clause No. R.S.C. 1927~ c. 36

    492 847 (1) pt., 852, 853,


    PA:aTXV- 855 (2) •

    448 667 493 855 (1)

    «9 668 494 861

    450 796 and new 495 862

    451 679, 680 and 681 496 863

    452 new 497 859 and 860

    453 682, 683, 684 (1) pt. 498 865.

    454 684 and 686 (1) 499 856 pt.

    455 685 500 854 and 891


    /
    456 665 (2) and -(3) and 666 501 856 pt., 857 and 858

    457 678 502 849 (1) pt.

    458 669 503 849 (1) pt., (2) pt., and


    954
    459 670
    504 874 and 875
    460 687 and 690
    505 876
    461 692 and 694 506 877
    462 695 (1)
    507 879
    -463 697, 698,700 and 702
    508 695 (2), 884, 885
    464 699 .and 887

    465 701
    509 886 (1)
    PAET XVI '510 845 (3)" 847 (2),
    889,890,893,898
    466]--
    467 511 new
    468
    469 512 691, 894, 895 and 896
    470
    471 513 897
    472
    473 514 695 (3) and (4)
    474 This Part is derived from. Parts XVI and
    475 XVIII of the present Code. It is a CODl.- 515 900, 901 (1) and (2)
    476 plete re"vision of t·hose Parts.
    477 516 905 (1) and 906
    478
    479 517 90S
    480
    481 518 907
    482
    483 909
    484 519
    520 910
    PABTXVII
    - 521 911
    485 5 (1) (aJ
    522 905 (2)
    486 872
    523 966
    487 873 (1) - (3)
    524 967
    488 873 (4), 940 and new
    525 968
    489 873 (5), (6) and (7)
    962 526 - 969
    490
    491 843, 844, 845 (1) and (2) 527 970
    "1
    ,
    ~

    38 Report of Royal Commission on Criminal Code

    Clause No. R.S.C. 1927, o. 36 Clause No. R.S.C. 1927, c. 36 ,

    528 916 567 9~9

    529 918 568 950


    530 919 569 951 (1) and (2), 952
    531 920 570 new

    532 914 571 new


    533 915 572 851, 963 and new
    534 921 573 964
    535 923 574 982
    536 924 , 575 1004
    537 899 (2) 576 1005
    538 925 577 " 1008 and 1009
    I
    539 926 578 1010
    540 927 579 1011
    541 933A, 927 (6) 580 965
    542 932
    P.A:RT XVIII
    543 933
    581 1012
    544 937
    582 1013 (3)
    ,545 938
    583 1013 (1) and (2)
    546 934
    534 1013 (2), (4)' and (5)
    547 935

    I
    585 1013 (6)
    548 936 -! •• - ~
    586 1018
    549 930 and 931
    587 1019
    550 '928
    588 1020 (1) - (4)
    551 939
    589 1021 (1) and (8)
    552 929
    590 1021 (4)
    553 92j)A
    591 1021 (10) /
    554 579,945 (1), (2) and (6)
    592 1013 (5) pt.
    555 new 1014 (1) (aJ, (b) and (aJ
    (3) and (4) and
    556 945 (3),(4), (5), 946 1016 (3) and (4)
    , and 959
    593 1015
    557 942 and 943 (1)
    594 1018 (1) pte
    558 (ll' (2), (3), (4) 944 1021 (6) pt. and (7)
    (5 new
    595 1017
    559 958
    596 1022 (2)
    560 960
    597 1023 ~15 and (2)
    561 961 1025 1 -pt.
    562 978 598 1023. (3) and 1025
    (1) pt.
    1
    ,
    563 988 I
    -.-i
    564 1001 599 , 1028 (4) and 1025 (2)
    :'1
    ' '934 600

    t
    565 1024
    566 1003 (2) 601 new

    '"
    ,,:.j
    , ":I
    - .""-
    ..,i ..~~
    Report of Royal Commission on Criminal Code 39

    Clsuse No. R.S.C.l927, c. 36 Clause No~ R.S.C. 1927t c. 36

    PART XIX &.!7 1069


    602 648 1070
    603
    604 649 1072
    605 This Part is derived from
    606 650 1071
    607 the Iollomng sections of
    608 651 1073
    609 the present Criminal Code:
    610 652 1074
    611
    612 6MA,655 (3), 633 pt., 653 1075
    613
    614 671-677, 693, 711-713, 654 159, 162 pt., 434 (3)
    615 and 1034
    616 716,788,789,841,342,
    617 655 1076
    618 971-976, 995-1000
    619 656 1077
    657 1030
    PART XX
    658 1084 and 1085
    620 Dew
    •
    621 740, 746. 1028, 1029, PART XXI
    . 1035 (4), 1054, 1055
    659 10MA (8) and 575A
    622 1035 (1) and (2)
    660 575B and 5700 (1)
    623 1035 (3) and new
    661 .1054.0. (1). (2), (3) and (5)
    624 1054B
    662 575c (3) and (4).
    625 1035... 1054.' (4)
    626 1036 and 1037 663 575D
    627 -' 1038 and 1141 664 5751', 575G (1) and
    1054.0.
    628. 1048
    665 575G (2) and (3)
    629 1049
    666 575]3: and 1054.0. (7)
    630 1006 and 795
    - 667 575E
    631 1045
    632 Dew PART XXII
    . 633 1052 (1) 668
    669
    634 1066 and 1056 670
    635 -
    Dew
    671
    672
    673 This Part comes from Part XXI of the
    636 704 674 present Code-l085-1119 and 886 (2).
    675
    637 748 (1), 1058 and 1059 676
    677
    638 1081 678
    679
    639 1083 and new
    640 1026 PART XXIII
    641 1060 680 new
    642 1062 asl 1120
    "
    643 .1063 682 1121, 1122, 112.9
    644 1064 633 1124
    645 1065, 1066 and 1067 684 1125
    646 1068 685 1126
    ~

    40 Repo.rt af Rayal Cammission an Criminal Code


    :
    Clause No. 'R.S.C. 1927, c. 36 Clause No. R.S.C. 1927, c.' 36
    , >

    686 1127 7l9}


    720 749 (1)
    687 1123
    721 749 (1)
    688 1130
    722 750 (b)
    689 1131
    723 new
    690 new
    724 750 (e)
    591 new
    725 ~1) 750 ((1) _c
    2) 757 (2)
    PARTX=V
    692 705, 706,707,703 (5)
    726 (ll
    (2 and (3)
    757 (1)
    new
    and new
    693 (ll 706 72i 753
    (2) 1142 754 and new
    694 (1) 1052 (2) 723 751 (3) -, -,
    (2) and (3) 739
    729 760 pt. . ...J;
    695 708 (1) and 710,pt. - ,

    730 755 (1) pt. and 760 pt_


    696 710 pt. a..nd new
    731 (1) .758
    697 708 (2), (3) and (4) (2) 751 (2) -"
    (3) 759 (1) -
    698 new - (4) 759 (2) "
    699 709 and 732 732 7M (2) and (3) 756 and -,-
    757 (4) .
    700 711
    733 705 (e)
    701 723
    734 761 --
    702 717
    735 762 (1), (2) and (3)
    703 725 .. ~-

    736 762 (4) and (5)


    704 724
    737 763
    705 707
    738 '764
    706- 719
    739 768
    707 720
    740 765 and 766
    708 721
    741 767
    709 715 and 716 (1)
    742 769
    710 718 and 722
    743 769A
    711 726
    744 770
    712 721A
    745 new
    713 727
    746 new
    714 723
    747 new
    715 730
    748 1152
    716 735-738
    717 748 (2) to (5)
    718 new
    "
    Report of Royal Commission on Criminal Code 41
    CRIMlliAL CODE REVISION

    APPENDIX C

    The purpose of this Appendix is to indicate what :m,atters are dealt with
    in the various Parts.

    PART I
    (Clauses 1-45)
    General
    Application of the Code and the extent to which the Law of England and
    especially the Co=on Law is retained-Parties to offences-Matters of
    justification or excuse--Protection of persons adlninistering the Criminal
    Law-Defence of person or property-Protection qf persons in authority.
    ./
    -'-- .-
    PART II
    (Clauses 46-98)
    Offences Against Public Order
    Treason and treasonable - offences-Offences relating to passpo-rts-Sedition-
    Unlawful assern.bly and riots-Unlawful drilling-Forcible entry and
    detainer-Piracy-Offences relating to dangerous su~tances-Prize fights
    -Offensive weapons.

    PART III
    (Clauses 99-129)
    Offences Against the Administration of Law and Justice
    .
    Judicial corruption-Bribery of officers enforcing the Crirn.inal Law-Corrup-
    tion in connection with government contracts and public offices-Municipal
    corruption-Obstructing justice-'-Perjury-False oaths and fabrication of -
    evidence--Escapes and rescues-Public' mischief.

    PART IV
    (Clauses 130-167)
    Sexual Offences, Public l\i[orals and Disorderly Conduct
    Rape--Carnal knowledge--Indecent assaults-Seduction-Acts of- gross inde-
    cency-Incest-Printing or publishing obscene rn.atter and crime corn.ics-
    Permitting defileITlent-Disorderly ,:,onduct-Vagrancy-Disturbing reli-
    .gious services-Nuisances.

    PART V
    (Clauses 168-184)
    Disorderly Houses, GaIning and Betting
    Betting -houses-Garn.ing houses-Garn.ing -in public conveyances-Pool selling
    and book-makllg-Lotteries-Cheating at play---Bawdy houses-Procuring
    ~earch of disorderly hoUses.· .
    -'
    42 " Report of Royal Commission on Criminal Co~e

    PART VI
    (Clauses 185-267)
    Offences against the person and reputation
    Duties tending' to preservation of life---':'Criminal,negligence-Murder-Man-
    slaughter-Infanticide-Concealment of birth-Suicide-Causing bodily
    harm-Omissions causing danger to persons-Dr-hnken driving-Driving
    while faculties impaired-Assaults-Kidnapping and abduction-Abortion
    -Offences against conjugal rights-Blasphemous libel-Defamatory, libel.
    PART VII
    (Clauses 268-321)
    Offences against rights of property
    Theft-Offences resembling theft-Criminal 'breach of trust-Robbery~Extor­
    tion-Breaking and entering-Receiving and retaining-False pr'etences-
    Witchcraft-Forgery and uttering-Offences resembling forgery-Threats.
    , PART VIII
    (Clauses 322-369)
    Fraudulent Transactions Relating to Contracts and Trade \
    Defrauding individuals ,or' the public-Using the mails to defraud--8toek
    market frauds-Frauds in respect bf title to property-Frauds on creditors
    -Falsification o'f books of account, public registers and documents-
    Personation-Forgery of trade marks-False trade description of, goods-
    Secreting wreck-Offences relating to public stores-Offences relating to
    breach of contract-Intimidation-Secret commissions-Trading sta~ps: ,

    PART IX
    (Clauses '370-390)
    Wilful and Forbidden Acts in respect of Certain Property
    Wilful damage to property-Rendering property dangerous'---Obstructing use I

    of property-Arson and other fires-False alarms of fire-Interference


    with signals and boundary lJ)arlfs~Cruelty to animals.
    j
    PART X
    (Clauses 391-405)
    Offences Relating to the Currency ,
    Counterfeiting-Possession of cou~terf..eit money-Uttering counterfeit money-
    Defacing or impairing coins-Making or possessing instruments for
    counterfeiting-Advertising Of trafficking in counterfeit money or counte'"
    feit tokens of value-Forfeiture of counterfeit money and instruments for
    counterfeitil)g.
    PART XI
    (Clauses 406-,412)
    Attempts, Conspiracies, Accessories
    Attempts not otherwise provided for-Accessories after the fact-Counselling
    or inciting""':""-Conspi'racy to· murder-Conspiracy to bring false accusation-
    ,Conspiracy to defile-Conspiracy at Common Law-Conspiracy to commit
    indictable-Conspiracy in retraint of trade-Discrimination in tr9:de.
    Report of Royal Commission on Criminal Code 43
    PART XII
    (Clauses 413-424)
    Jurisdiction
    Offences triable by superior courts-Offences triable by courts of criminal
    -jurisdiction-Special provisions regarding trade conspiracies and trials
    in Alberta-Jurisdiction over the person-Territorial jurisdiction-Extra-
    territorial jurisdiction-Rules of court,
    PART XIII
    , (Clauses 425-433)
    Special, Procedure and Powers
    Preserving order in Courts-Trial of Juveniles to be without publicity-Search
    warrants-Seizure-Detention and disposal of things seized.
    PART XIV
    (Clauses 434-448)
    Compelling Attendance of an Accused Before Justices
    Arrest without warrant-Laying informations-Issuance of summons or war-
    rants-Execution of warrant-Service of summons-Procuring attendance
    of a person 'who is in prison-Endorsement of warrants.
    PART XV
    (Clauses 449-465)'
    , Procedure on Preliminary Inquiry
    Jurisdiction of Justices-Remand to magistrate in cases where magistrate has
    absolute jurisdiction-Election before Justice-Powers of Justices on
    inquiry-Bail before committal for trial-Adjournment-Remand for
    observation as to mental condition-·TalCing evidence of witnesses-Right
    of accused to call evidence-Committal of witness refusing to be sworn
    or to testi,fy-Coinmittal for trial-Bail after committal for trial.
    PART XVI
    (Clauses 466-484)
    Indictable Offences-Trial Without JU1'y
    Absolute jurisdiction of magi"strates--:....Juri-sdiction of magistrates with consent
    -Jurisdiction of judges with consent-Electing mode of trial-Right of
    accused to re-elect trial without jury-Preferring indictment-Power to
    require trial, by jury---":":Procedure where accused is a corporation.
    PART XVII
    (Clauses 485-580)
    Indictable Offences~Trial by Jury
    Preferring indictments-Cbntents of counts-Particulars-Joinder and sever-
    ance 0'£ counts-Joinder of offences-Procedure before grand jury-Change
    of ;'enue-Amendment of indictment-Inspection of documents-Pleas-
    Trial of issue of insanity-Safe custody of persons found insane-Procedure
    ~~re accused is a' corporation-Qualification of jurors-Mixed juries-
    -t Challenge to array-Empanelling jury-Challenging jurors-Trial-
    Rights of accused at trial-Evidence-Previous convictions-Verdicts-
    Imposition of sentence-Saving clauses.
    i
    44 Report of Royal Commission· on Criminal Code
    i
    PART XVIII
    (Clauses 581-601) J,
    .
    Appeals: Indictable Offences
    Right of appeal to provincial court of appeal-Notice of appeal-Judge's report
    -Power of court to order production of documents and to call witnesses-
    Powers of court on hearing of appeal-Power of Minister of Justice to order
    new trial or refer question to court of appeal-Right of appeal to supreme·
    court of Canada-Powers of that court on hearing of appeal-Judgment
    final-Right of appeal of Attorney-General of Canada.
    PART XIX
    (Clauses 602-619)
    Procuring Attendance of Witnesses
    Subpoena or warrant-How issued-Execution or service--Effect-Procedure
    where witness absconds or makes default-Evidence on commissiop.-Use
    of evidence previously taken.
    PART XX
    (Clauses 620-658)
    .Puni,shments, Fines', Forfeitures and Restitution of Property
    Punishment in discretion of court-Cumulative punishments-Fines in lieu of
    or in adcUtion to imprisonment-Punishment of corporations-Commence ...
    ment of sentences-Part payment of fines-Who is to receive fines-Actions
    to recover penalties-Compensation and restitution of property-Where
    sentence of imprisonment to be served-Suspended senten.ce and binding
    over to keep the peace-Whipping-Capital punishment-Disabilities
    arising from sentence--Pardon and Commutation-Remission by Governor
    in Council.
    PART XXI
    (Clauses 659-667)
    Preventive Detention
    Habitual offenders-Criminal sexual psychopaths-Application for sentence
    of preventive detention-Procedure on application-vVhere sentences· to. be
    served-Periodic review by Minister of Justice-Appeal by accused or
    Attorney General. .
    - PART XXII
    (Clauses 668-679 and Schedule)
    Effect and Enforcement of Recognizance
    Responsibility of sureties-Duration of recognizances-Render -of principal by
    sureties-.Endorsement of default under recognizance--Procedure for
    forfeiture after default-Issue of writ of fieri facias-Cominittal of sureties
    when writ not satisfied-Remedial provision enabling release of sureties-
    Schedule of courts exercising powers under ·this part.
    PART XXIII
    (Clauses 680-691)
    Extraordinary Remedies
    Habeas Corpus-Appeal instead of successive applications-Certiorari-When
    it lies-Power of court on application-Mandamus-Prohibition-Appeal.
    . ? ..
    -"
    Repft of Royal Commissi{Jn on Criminal Code 45
    PART XXIV
    (Clauses 692-744)
    Procedure in Summary Conviction Matters
    Proceedings to be commenced by information-Issuance of process-Inclusion
    of more than one matter of complaint-Amendment of information-
    Severance of counts-Adjournment-Right to make full answer and
    Defence--Bail-Trial-Adjudication-Penalty-Enforcing adjudication-
    Costs-Sureties to keep the peace-Appeal against conviction or sentence
    -Procedure on appeal-Appeal to be on evidence at trial-Powers of
    court on appeal-Security by appellant to prosecute appeal-Stated case-
    Procedure-Powers of court hearing stated case-Appeal to court of appeal
    in certain cases-:-Fees and allowances. .

    PART. XXV
    (Clauses 745-747)
    Transitional
    Repeal-Transitional-Coming into force.

    PART XXVI
    (Clause 748)
    Forms.

    -
    _An Ae;t rcspceting the Criminal Law.

    )
    6th Session, 21st ParHa.'!nent~ 1 Elizabeth II, 1'062"

    THE HOUSE OF

    U
    subsection,
    jIi the preSt
    An Act respecting the Criminal Law. provision

    tYlER Majesty, by and with the advice and consent of the


    Senate and House of Commons of Carmda, enacts
    as foIIow8:-

    SHOHT TITLE.
    1. Secti01
    Short title.
    I. This Act may be cited as the Criminal Code.

    INTKHPHlfJTATION.
    ~!. SecLiO!
    Definitions. 2. In this Act, 5 (1) Sedio
    (1) "Act" ineludes
    (a) an Act of the Parliament of Canada,
    (b) an Act of the legislature of the late province of
    Canada,
    (c) an Act of the legislatme of a province, and 10
    ( d) an Act 01' ordinance of the legislature of a
    province, territory or place in force at the time that
    province, territory or place became a province of (2) Sectim
    Canada;
    "Attorney
    General." (2) "Attorney General" means the Attorney General 15
    or Solicitor General of a province in which proceedings
    to which this Act applies are taken and, with respect
    to the Northwest Territories and the Yukon'Territory, ~)
    ( '--'J
    \ r1 ~ .....
    ~eculOl
    "BB.nk-
    means the Attorney General of Canada;
    note." (3) "bank-note" includes any negotiable instrument 20
    ( a) issued by or on behalf of a person carrying on
    the business of banking in or out of Canada,
    (b) issued under the authority of the Parliament of
    Canada or under lawful authority of the govern-
    ment of a state other than Canada, 25
    ~t~ I~':- .:Z:1t E-vel' V
    (n
    \ l.',i.l ) "'1")"1'1'(-'"
    lJ "- t '-!.J, C":
    ILl ... ;)~

    (/1»
    •J
    i:·llO-Pl·-n.Y-I,~
    .•."- _
    ./'1 .1-1.(:-:)" ••:"
    D, feigned marriag2
    is guilty of an indictable 5
    Hlcmt for five years.
    (~~) No person shall be convicted of an ollence lmdel'
    :ocdion upon the eyidence of only one witm;ss unless
    evidence of that \vitness is corroborated in [b material
    particular by evidence that implicates the accused. 10
    24:3. (1) Everyone -who
    (a) practises or enters into or in any maImer agrees or
    consents to practise or cnter into
    Xi'~lyga.ray ... '" (i) any form of polygamy, or
    c;;Tij:g;:~C~-- (ii) any kind of conjugal union with more than one 15
    union.
    person at the same time,
    whether or not it is by law recognized as a binding
    form of marriage; or
    Coloomting (b) celebrates, assists or is a party to a rite, ceremony,
    riw. contract or eonsent that purports to sanction a relation- 20
    ship mentioned in subparagraph (i) or (ii) of paragraph
    ((L ),
    is guilty of an indietable offence and is liable to irnprison-
    ment for five years.
    Evidence
    ill caw of
    (2) Where an accused is charged with an offence under 25
    poiygr~my. this seetion, no averment or proof of the rnethod by which
    the alleged relationship was entered into, agreed to or con-
    sented to is necessary in the indictment or upon the trial of
    the aecused, nor 13 it necessary upon the trial to prove that
    the persons who are alleged to have entered into the relation- 30
    ship had or intended to have sexuaJ intercourse.

    UNLAWFUL SOLEMNIZATION OF 1\1AlUUAGE.

    244. Everyone who


    Prcwnding to
    ooloHlniz.o
    ( a) solemnizes or pretends to solemnize a marriage
    marriage. without lawful authority, the proof of which lies
    upon him, or 35
    Procuring (b) procures a person to solemnize a marriage knowing
    unlawful
    marriage. that he is not lawfully authorized to solemnize the
    marriage,
    is guilty of an indictable offenee and is liable to imprisonment
    for two years. 40
    Marriago 245. Everyone who, being lawfully authorized to
    contrary
    solemnize marriage, knowingly and wilfully solemnizes a 245. Section B
    t-o lay;.
    marriage in violation of the Jaws of the province in which
    the marriage is solemnized is guilty of an indictable offenee
    and is liable to imprisonment for two years. 45
    242. Sections 309 (2) and 1002 (d).
    1 a female person
    liable to imprison- 5

    offence under this


    ,vitness unless the
    ~ed in a material \
    1e accused. 10 . I
    f
    manner agrees or 243. (1) Section 310.
    " ,

    ith more than one 15

    lized as a binding

    , a rite, ceremony,
    3anetion a relation- 20
    r (ii) of paragraph

    liable to imprison-

    , an offence under 25
    method by which (2) Section 9'.18.
    , agreed to or con-
    n' upon the trial of
    trial to prove that
    d into the relation- 30
    'course.

    .
    nmze a marnage
    .
    24LL Section 311.
    )of of which lies
    35
    marriage knowing
    to solemnize the

    Ie to imprisonment
    40
    :]y authorized to
    'tilly solemnizes a :::; ic". Section 312.
    }Jl'ovince in which
    . i'lclictable offence
    45
    DOMINION OF CANADA

    HOUSE OF COMMONS
    DEBATES
    OFFICIAL REPORT

    SIXTH SESSION~TWENTY -FIRST PARLIAMENT

    1 ELIZABETH II, 1952


    BEING THE 94TH SESSION FOR THE PERIOD 1867·1952

    VOLUME n, 1952
    COMPRISING THE PERIOD FROM THE SEVENTH DAY OF APRIL, 1951,
    TO THE FIFTEENTH DAY OF MAY, 1952, INCLUSIVE

    INDEX ISSUED IN A SEPARATE VOLUME

    J;DI\-lQND CLQurIER, C,M,G" O.A., D.S.1'.


    QUD.N's PRINTER ANI) CO:N'IROLLER OF STA'tIONER'i
    O'l'l'AWA,1952
    APRIL 7, 1952 1191
    Standing Orders
    iJildgrn ent to', bear upon the issues of the askin:g for a curtailment of the practice that
    country' II}. the interest, not only of one is now in vogue here. I may say, Mr.
    "constituency _,but. of the whole realm. I urge Speaker, that this whole business of compar-
    ;upon all memb~rs, as I am sure they all have, ing Westminster with the situation here has
    :to read that stat~ment of Burke's to remind been gone into by others. It was fully inves-
    ';:themselves 'of tl").e hriportance in this house tigated by Dr. Beauchesne in the days when
    ,:of every private member from every consti- he was clerk. He prepared a lengthy report
    }uency in this country. on this matter which Mr. Speaker Fauteux
    Mr. Cleaver: Having concluded that, would presented to the house back in 1947. The
    report pointed out that there are great
    ~ihe hon", member mind if ± asked a question?
    differences, geographical am'ongst others,
    Mr. -Knowles: Is the hon. member going between the United Kingdom, where you have
    lback to ·the question he asked a moment ago? a small compact country, largely homo-
    \ Mr. Cleaver: No. -My questio!,! is this. Do geneous as compared with the wide expanse
    j

    ;you no't admit that· all four recommendations of our country and all the different interests
    \which I have put forward in my resolution we have from coast to coast. This report is
    lare less restrictive -as to debate than are to be found in the Journals for Friday,
    :.the rules in Westminster, or is he criticizing Decemb~r 5, 1947, from pages 7 to 32.

    ~westminster? A portion of that discussion, which is to


    be found on pages 10 and 11, points out many
    ~;, Mr. Knowles: The -situation at Westminster
    of those differences that exist between that
    land here are different in so many particulars country and ours Which result in it being
    ~that it is almost impossible to make a COffi-
    necessary for us 1:0 pay some attention to the
    ~parisoh., May 1 p"oint out-
    British practice, but to recognize a1s-o that we
    ~: -Mr. Cleaver: All your quotations are from have ,a Canadian situation, and that we have
    [the old country; .. to develop .a parliamentary praotice of our
    r Mr. U:-nowles: -that frequent reference is own based on British .principles and yet
    dearly Canadian. I would point out fb.at in
    [n.,.ade to t,he fact that at Westminster they
    &fi>; these p,eriods o~ time at the end of which that same ;report which was presented ·to this
    fl' xot~,.ls taken. I would point out that if house by Dr. Faut-eux-I think it is fair to
    say he had the assistance of Dr. Beauchesne
    l~there are II1:ember:s who still wish to speak
    ton the. day the' vote is to be taken the debate in preparing it-he said this, as reported -on
    fS6meti~es ,continues all night. Indeed you page 10 of the Journals of December 5, 1947:
    ~ave these 23-hour sessions. In other words, The mere object of shortening sessions must not
    be the aim of any revision of our rules. The
    ~139 lon~ as people still want to speak- duties of a representative parliament are too 1m-
    r
    l' .
    'Mr. Cleavel': I must quarrel with the han. pOl'tant to be performed in a hurry, No question
    should be decided untn it has been fully discussed,
    ~e~ber. on _that point. The debate only
    !.,carnes on when a motion is made for it to Mr. V/eir: Mr. Speaker, I just wanted to
    tcontinue; otherwise a vote is taken at the make an interjection. The han. memper, in
    Wnd.of th~ ..&¥{reed period. .1 cited one case his reference to Burke's speech about the
    pwhere, durmg a debate on the address, fifty duties of a member of parliament, interjected
    thlembers wanted to speak but only twelve an inference to the .effect that members who
    ~sP9ke and ,.th,Em the vote was ,taken. did not make speeches but merely voted were
    rubber stamps. I do not think that is a proper
    ~ Mr. Knowles: No doubt it happened the inference to be made. In its implication it
    ~vay the han. 'member says it was recorded on naturally refers to a greater extent to govern-
    f hat particular occasion but I have been over ment members than it does to opposition
    rthere ana. seen the m:mbers of that parlia- members. I venture to say that even in the
    ~ent in action. It is not always acceptable governments of the United Kingdom a lot
    t~O a member to withdraw, and if he does not of members have voted with their parties)
    }Wlsh to withdraw that day's sitting continues even. though they have not made speeches)
    ~ntil .thos~ who wish to speak have spoken. and m that sense the han. member would
    [Sometimes a' debate goes on continuously for refer to them as rubber stamps.
    t~3 hours, 'Or ,longer. You have therefore a
    •(Case w h er~ you are not denying "to the -private I believe that th-e hon. member will agree
    !Tn~mber ·his .right· to be heard for fifteen that members on the government side, and
    ~m~tes or ~even mi'nutes, whatever it may
    even in his own party, quite frequently vote
    I e, If. he wishes to do so. without making speech-es. Whether or not
    they are voting exactly according to the dic-
    I. Mr. Clea.ver:- All I am' asking for is the tates of their c-onscience we do not know, but
    Westminster practice. in that sense they are rubber stamps. Govern-
    ~thMr. Knowles: No, you are not asking for ment members, may I point out, have oppor-
    , e Wes~minster practice at all. You are tunities that opposition members do not have

    B.C, COURTHOUSE LIBRARY SOG!£(X


    VANCOUVER
    1192 HOUSE OF COMMONS
    Standing Orders
    of becoming informed on matters of policy. in reply to the speech from the throne and the
    I think it is quite -improper, therefore, for the debate on the budget, after the expiratiori of whi9h
    periods of time, the motion and a.ll und~rlying
    inference to go out that government members amendments would be put by Mr. Speaker; Ce) for
    are really rubber stamps voting along with the llmiting to one half hour of the debate on aU
    the party. procedural motions and underlying amendments;
    (d) for provision that at the expiration of the
    Mr. Knowles: It is six o'clock, but may seventh anoUed day the chairman of the committee
    I just say this. I have no objection to the of s·upply and ways and means shall forthwith and
    without further debate put ev~ry question neces~
    point made ·by the member for Portage- sary to dispose of all of the votes 6f the depart-
    Neepawa (Mr. Weir) that sorpe members may mental estimates under consideration; (e) for the
    feel they can express their judgment by vot- requirement that at least foul;' members should rise
    in their seats to express opposition for a request
    ing just as much as by speaking. My point for unanimous consent to a suspension. of the. rules,
    is that if a member feels he should express otherwise unanimous consent of the house to be
    his judgment by speaking, he should not be presumed when requested.
    restricted in that right or cut off from Mr. I{nowles; Mr. Speaker, just ·before six
    ~oing it. o'clock, at least just before the last interrup-
    Mr. Fournier (Hull): Except if he repeats tion before six o'clock, I was dealing with the
    the same speech five times in the same point set out in the report on procedure which
    session. was presented to the House or" Common.s on
    July 5, 1947, by Mr. Speaker Fauteux. I had
    Mr. Knowles: I would agree with that. It drawn attention to two or three sentences,
    is strange that the Minister of Public Works particularly these:
    (Mr. Fournier) did not hear me when I was
    making suggestions with which he agreed. beThe mere object of shortening sessions must not
    the aim of any revision of our rules. The
    Now that I am making a few with which he duties of a representative parliament are too im-
    does not agree, he is making these frequent portant to be performed in a hurry.· No question
    comments. should be decided until it has been fully dIscussed.
    I should point out that -in that same para':'
    At six o'clock the house took recess.
    graph it is made clear that we do not want to.
    go to the other extreme and waste time in
    unnecessary repetition. But the point is clearly
    AFTER RECESS set out there by Dr. Fauteux, and has rbeen
    confirmed by Dr. Beauchesne, in his stUdies
    The house resumed at eight o'clock. of these matters, that we should realize the
    important question in relation to parliamen-
    CRIMINAL CODE tary debate is not whether we get it over in
    REPORT OF ROYAL COMMISSION AND NEW a hurry or spin it out at length. Rather the
    CONSOLIDATED CODE important aspect is the quality of the debate,
    the quality of the legislation· dealt with· and
    Hon. Stuatt S. Garson (Minister of Justice);
    the responsibility that we bring to our task
    Mr. Speaker, may we revert to motions for as members of parliament.
    the purpose of my :fj.ling the report of the
    royal commission with reference to the Crimi- If I might refer ,back to the interjection
    nal Code under the chairmanship of the Hon. made by the hon. member ·for Portage-
    W. M. Martin, Chief Justice of Saslmtchewan, Neepawa (Mr. Weir) just" .before six o'clock,
    and the new draft consolidated Criminal Code, I have no objection to those han. members
    which is an integral part of this report? who feel that they can make their ·contribu-
    tion by saying little or nothing during .the
    STANDING ORDERS course of a session. Neither ·do I have ·any
    objection to the plea made indirectly by the
    SUGGESTED AMEND;\1~NT RESPECTING DEBATES han. member for Halton (Mr. Cleaver) that
    AND PROCEDURE IN COi\lIMITTEE there be. opportunity ·given to. ·government
    The house resumed consideration of the members to speak more than· they now do.
    motion of Mr. Cleaver: There is no doubt as to . their right to
    That, in the opinion of this house, the standing speak as often as they wish, and far from
    orders of this house should be amended in regard putting any restrictions on them, I would be
    to debates and in regard to procedure in standing glad to see them take a greater part in the
    and select committees in order to bring the rules of debates of this house than they do at the
    debate more in line with present day needs and
    that, inter aHa, ·such amendments should speCifically present time, But, ·Mr, Speaker, what I do
    provide: (a) for the passage of allocation time object to is the attempt which is involved in
    orders by this house with respect to any measure
    brought before it and that motions for allocation the motion now before us to restrict those
    time orders should be put by Mr. Speaker, including who are speaking, and, according to the hon.
    all underlying amendments. after sixty minutes of member for Halton, that happens to be ·the
    debate have elapsed; (b) for the fixation in stand~
    Jng orders of a time limit on debates on the address members of the opposition.
    [Mr. Weir.]
    rea.rrang e.ent

    PAR'!' X

    General. .
    App~~oat10n O~ r.be Ood. And the Extent ~o Wh ~oh Tho Law
    e~ England And Z.pe01a1ly The Oo•• on Law Xe Reta~ned

    Part1e. ~o O~r.noe. _ Ratter. O~ JUet1C1oatl on Or

    E~ouee _ Proteotlon O~ Pereone 4dm~n~ .t .rlng The Or1mlaa1


    La", _ ne~.noo o~ Per,an Or Propert7 _ Proteotl on or
    Pereone Yn Authorlty.

    ;) ~ fl., !~. ! ~ .w<f


    The e x ten. t o whloh the law or 2ng1and and
    • ..,eo~ a1 1 ;y the oo_on law 1, retalned , .t_ . e d t .1oth 1u
    tb.-~n-bodl"""'-"&~........-e~ •

    PAR'!' n .
    Orr.noea agalnat Publ19 Order .
    ~~t-
    Treasonable Orronoe.__ ';-&.lIpor~. _ "ed1.'~on - U'nlavt'ul.
    A••••b17 And Rlo~. - Unl.wrul Prl11 lng - F oroible En~T

    And Detalner _
    . .... ~""":"
    P1.raoT ~.rou. Bub.tanoe.
    .
    _ P r lz.
    F1ght. _ orrenet. . W••pona.

    '!'he pro~.1on • • • 1.t~ng to treasonable orranoe. are


    .1.ed a' tb • • • ourl\7 Of tbe State. ADd are ~plgaed to
    . ee " oha nged oon41*t.~.~. '!'beT ••bo47 the ocnamon law
    prl no1ple
    I""-" J~ "~ ~ "~ ~ t.. {~
    h i h e".'bJ,ss the prn •• nntSon o L-p4u,hne wl:Io
    -2-

    d.rlnl'~on or •• 41'iou. lnt.n~lon b ••• d Oft ~h. r.o.n~

    deal.1on ~r the $upr ••• Oour t Or a.nada 1n Boucher v.R ••


    19-9. SoC .R . 265_

    PART III
    Ort.no •• Ag.ln.~ The Ad&ln18tra~l o n
    or Law And luetioe.
    Judlo1a1 Corrup t i on _ Bribery or OCrioere Enforo1ng The
    Orlmlna1. Law _ aorrUp ~10D In ConD.o~l o n With Government
    Oontraot. And Pub11a Otrl0 •• M~olp.1 Corrupti on -
    Ob.truclng JUBt~O.

    Pub110 Misohle'.

    The Dommon 1&v o rr.no. or pub+l0 mleoh1.r haa b.en


    aod1f1e4 and appears 1n o1au •• 120.

    g iven .""1.~noe 1n a Ju.4..101.al. pr'oo ••,41.ng o n _ ...... t el that


    vv... t>.. ~,..........." ~, .,t:.....J ~ V1 ......-J.........:,q .
    1~ to glveA GontradiotorT ev1denoe {~~~.~t
    p roc_41...ng •

    PA1\" IV
    a.~ orr.no... Pub11 0 Moral . and
    D1.eorder1y Oonduot.

    Rape _ Carnal. ~nov1.dg. - md.oent Aseau1t. - S eduoti on


    Prlnt1ng Or Publ.1.ehing Obeoene Hatter And Cri me Oomiae _
    - -.-.,~ ;

    Permitting Der1~.m.nt _ Dl.ord,r17 Conduot _ Dleturbing


    R.11glous Servlcea _ Kuleano •••
    ~. ~ J'~AA. i.4 \ f.,. ..., ~h..yP' »-1;; v ,-"p JY .....,-).<.< ) 1. J,l~ v~~ ~ J.,I ......

    '!'her.,..--n.s.--be.n--f>On . ' ".,..'d1.


    rearrangem. a.1;: &.Ad" .eoti o ne
    ................! 1-~ ...' <.J'l;O...~ . r;..t. ,r HC.. ~ ...;
    d • •l.lng v1.Tih lIIexual. ot'reno •• ",hioh W~. 111 ~ttun -:PaPte ' or

    S .ot~ o n 134 oon'taln. a aod~~ioati o n a nd exTien.l on - or


    tbo rul.. o~ pr aat~o. whioh has grown up vl~b ~.~.r.noe to
    0 •••• where r ap. or . t t ••p~.d rape 1e obarged.
    -r.
    PAR'!' V
    D~8ord.r!z Bouaee. oaa~ng and Be~~lng .

    Oe~n B e~ tlng Hou • •• _ ~n Os_lng Houa.e - ~n

    Bawd7 RouB.a _ P oo1 S.111ng And Boo.~aak1ng - Lot~.rl ••

    Proo~lng _ Searoh or Dteorder1y R ou ••• - Ch.A~l ng At

    P1&7.
    ............-'> 6-t-'''- ''''''''-'
    ..". pr .,.ump~lon. whicb r o~ .·r17 ' .~ar&4 1n Part
    XIX; epeclal. prov181ona r.1&~ln g ~o a.arob whloh
    ~

    PART Vl:

    Dutie. Te nding '1'0 PreeerY.'lon or LtC. - Orlmlnal.


    W.g~ls.no. _ Murder _ Kaft.1.ugh~.r _ :rn r. n~lo1 d. -
    Oono.al •• n~ o~ 81r_b _ Suioid. _ Oattalng Bod11y Harm
    0.le 81 0 na C ,.u alng Dans--r '1'0 Pere ona Drunken DrlY:1ng _ ~,:-U.
    r ·' ...c.t... ~·\
    A•• ault. _ Xldn a ppl ng £nd Ahduc'l o n Abortion _ Orr.noe. G ' ~'

    Agaln,t OonJugal Rlgb~. _ 81aapb •• aua Libel - Deraeatory


    Libel. .

    The r.4r ar~ or ~h~. Par~ Dontalna the new d.Clnltl on


    or or1mlnal na gl.1genoa. The , changoR o ona .qu.n~ ~h.re~

    are a •• 1~ wl.h la the ~.por'.


    P or •• r17 there was ~ eontue lo n a. t o tba aegre ••
    or a8 a au1t 1nteD4ed ~o be indl0.ted b7 the term. ~nr 1 1otln g

    ari.~ou. had117 bar.- , .eotl o n 274. aDd .a. 8.u1~ whioh


    o o o •• l o na aotua1 bod1 1 7 h4ra-, •• o~i o n ~5 , the p .na~t7

    It hAa beon
    . ought t o oomb1n. ~b ••• by ~h. p rovl.ion o o ntalned 1n
    o lau •• 231( 2 ) .
    or a.ot1on ,10 re1.t~n g ~o pa17g..,. and ~noorp orat ••

    the ru1. a ll to a~d.no~ r.~.Taftt t b.r.~o ~oh nov


    appear. 1n o.o~ion 9~ .
    e l~11Ar1~ th. eaving proYlalone o r aeot~ o n. 912
    and 91', a nd the pr •• ent 9 56 . &1 1 or w~ oh re1at. t o
    4ar . .8tory 1 1ba1. hay. b.an p1aoa4 ~n t h ie ~art a1 0ng
    wi~ aeatlon. ,18-'34 upon the . . . . . .bJeot.

    lAR'f TYI
    Otr,no.. A«.~n.t Rights of Propart7

    R.o.~V1ng And R.~.inlng _ Pa1 •• Pre~.n,


    <-•• _ Vl taho~.~

    rors-rT And Utt.ring - orr.noee R ••••b11ng Porgary_

    orca no •• Agaln.. 19b'. or o per_T ;rno1Uda. thart


    ~ nd klndred o rrano •• bur 1 ar7~

    re oalT1ng and ret. oomm6ael o n

    . d t hare to.

    p rovide Yarlaue p ana1~le. ror p ar tiou1ar .hart e have


    b.en 1 ~ rg. 1 y rep 1 •• ad by o1au •• 2 ~0 whioh prOY1dea a
    "f:....-"'\ ~
    .aIimua pe n ~ 1t7
    r Cor ta.r~
    aDd 1oayoa to t b . dl a o re
    . tl on
    or the Judge It a app1 1 06 . ~on .0 partlDu1ar O ~ •• • •
    ~. orronoao or raoetYing and reta1ning proport7
    obtained by or1.. are •• parated.
    ~. proYiaion. re1a.lng to ~hreata n1ng 1etter. now
    appearing 1n yarl o u. p~~ ~ or ~b~ Oo d. ~v. been ga thered
    to g at~ r 1n o1au.a 316.
    -5-

    PAR!' V'Z1'l:
    Pr .u4u1 . n~ Traneaotl ona ~o1at1ng To
    aon~ao.a And ~ad._

    D~rrau~n8 rnd1y~dna1. _ rraude On The Pub110 - Ua1ng ~.

    Mal1. To D .~pan4 _ Stoak N arke' Fraud. _ FrAuds Xn Reop eot


    or Tlt~. To Proport7- _ ~Aud. On Or e~tor. _ r&1.1rlaa~l o n
    lI ~........".J . rl ~ i'? ~
    or Book_ And Doo~ns~ _ - P.r.ona~lon - r ors-rr or TradA
    Harks _ ~ .. 1 •• Goode _ Beora~lng wraokl
    uy~~ v.f,,,c.). Pbbllo St;orel'l _ l'ntlm1datlon - S aarat

    at' ita 1amgth and or 1t. d •• l ing wl~ many unrela ted
    Bub Je ots, ~al!l tbought to laad It a 011' re~~1y to Bubd1~.10n.

    ~th p~t1 oul. ar rararcnoa to ol ause 3 2 3, ,,1ea s e aaa tbe


    Raport.

    lAM rx
    Mi. . ohler

    Thi. Part deal. with 4~ag. to an4 Intartaranoa V1th


    p ublio and priva te propartr_
    brought abo ut b7 ao.blnins 1n .. g .n. ~R 1 01aUB. ( 172 ) a
    gras t many or the pre •• nt prov1s1one.
    PART x
    f,.. tI.u.. ta..(.A..-1 "---' ~......."......q "
    v

    Counterre1t1ng _ Po ••••• 1oft or OouDt.rr.1~ Mone7 -


    Ut~.r1n~ Oount.~r.1t Koftey _ Der8alng Or I~aring O o ~.

    Making Or Po ••••• ing In.tru.en~. ror ooun~.rr.l~1ng -


    AdTer&lalftg Or Tra~r~oklnc In Ooun~errel. MoneT Or Countar Calt
    Tokena OC Vah.e _ "For-:r.lttare Of" CounterCel' Monel"" IJIjC ~
    InatrU$.nt. ~or Ooun~.rr.1tlng.

    Thl. Part hAa b •• n ao~1.t.~y rewritten and


    o o neo11d~ t. d eo Ae to pro~eDt the eurrene7 gy prohibitlng

    oounterCelt mo ney.
    haa been made to lnolude paper .on87, 4trrenoe. 1n
    oo~n6~~t ~er . Co rmor l y c o vered by the aoot1 0 n.
    relating to t"org ery.

    PART Xl
    ~~l •• pt., Cog8p1raole •• Aooe •• orle.
    J c..;,. ? o...J...
    ~ o o nt.ln.8 t~ oCrenQ•• ar18ing out ot" t he
    ~' 1...,", II!W-",,-,
    rule" og.n.e~ ori mlnal. re8p onel.bl11tT .et:: eut in Part I .
    It ~B alao ga t hered 1nto o ne o1au.e (40~) the provi.iona
    o t" the present Oode re1ating to o on.plraB¥Jand ino1ud •• a
    ooea&\%!!12n at" o o naplraoy at Doamon law a" deCined b¥ the
    oa.e8.
    " eotlone ~9~ and 49«A oC the preo ent Oode ~nd retained 1n
    o~auae. 411 and 412. p1eae • • • e lhe Report.

    PMtT XIX
    Jur1.dlo~;on o~ Oourt.

    Bear1ng in mind the provieione or the Statute o r


    Weetmlneter,the Coamie.lon ha. adapted olau.e ~19 rrom the
    -1-

    Te~rltorl ft 1 Watere Jur1e41a'lon Aot~ 1878. wlt~ ~

    territ o ria l l1a1t •• t at twel? nautloa1 a l l . . . In


    th1 8 oonnllatlon rarer.noe m~ be _ad. to the ~Rot that
    the Cuato •• Aot dartns_ OBnad1an Ouatome Waters a e
    ext.nding alna aarlne mil •• beyond Uh. tr a d1tlona1
    tbr •• -a11. Italt. and 1t 18 relt ~t under a o dern
    ... .....:.. ~~ .
    o o n~tlon. this ~t 1 • •pproprl~t . tor polloI p urp o •• •.

    e p eOlAl p roviaion to th~ oontrary. ~h. trial o~ eTery


    indiot a ble orrano. aba1 1 be • • 2t.1 by Jury n nd t ha t
    ClaU8 _

    Attent10n 111 0 a1184 to the C a oll tba ..


    the 11.10 or th ••• O~ •• 8 1. not a • • x~n.lv. a . 1n the
    p ra •• nt .eotlon 583. Thi. h •• b.en noted with app ropr1ata
    Domaont 1n the Report. Tho • • 'court. or orlmlna1

    o rrenoa • • ~7 taka plaoe w1th • Jury • • 8 1n t~ Dourt DC


    general a ••• lon a 1n OntAriO &Ad ~ho o.UA~7 o o ur~ ~n Hev
    BruD.v~ok . or V1~bo.' a J~ vi~h the oons.nt or the
    a oo~8.d or ~n .0• • oa ••• vlth o ~t his o o n.an~. are der1ned
    1n pars graph (10) ot •• o~lon ~.

    The epeo1a1 proTlelone o o ntAl nad 1." the p:re8en~


    f'--'
    XI
    ~

    haTe been ooablned v1~h the a4~_lon or 8 . proyl .l,on


    oonoerning o~re noe. oo.~ ltt .4 on &i:ror.r,. The ru1a_
    aR~n g power. nov oontalned ln .eotl o n 576. and Cas to
    oourt. or &Pp~. l) in •• 0.10n 1021. hay. been o o neo11dated
    ln 0111u.a 4 2 4 .
    pAM' XXXI
    Speoial. Procedure pnd Powere.

    Wl~hout ?u b1101~7 _ Searoh W~.nte

    And Dlapoea1 or ~h~ftg. a.~&ed.

    '!"h~s Pa.r~ 1_ d.rl . . d :t'roa tbe pre8ent Part XII. The


    pro ~1.1on8 re1atlng to tb. ooneent or the At~orne7 Geners1
    to the coamenoell:ent 01' , pro.eout10'\) 1n eo rar ae they •
    I ~~
    b.Y8 been retain.d bav. b •• " put vi th the o1aulI~ r&i-a-t1.-ng
    , I'll;... ~ ~ l -. ~ ,fW'/":"';
    ....,.... the ot'r.no ....l. '!'hU5fii, also -'e.11 4e •• 1n r.~eot at'
    epeola1 poYera or .earoh. ~e power or selsur. und er a
    nenroh w~rr a nt han b •• n v1d.ned to ••power seizure at'
    th1ng a obtained by or ueed 1n the oommie Blon ot' ~noth.r

    orr.nee 11' round during the coure. or t he e e aroh.

    PAR" XIV
    Oomp.111ng At •• ndanoe ot aft AOOUBed aerore
    J'uptlee ••

    Arrest Without Warra nt _ LAying In1'ormat1ene Ie s uanoe


    or BumMons Or W~ant _ .xecution or Warrant Ser.,1oe or
    Summon_ _ Proou ri ng Attend&noe er A Peraon Who I n In
    Prieon - Endorse.ent Or W.~an~a.

    &.JC'cept
    or
    prieoner . who •• a tt.nda nae 1_ req~lred . ha~b.en oarried
    into i t rro. the pr • • en, Par' XXX a Some provl.1 ona or
    , -e... ~
    ~he pre.ent ~art XYIY ~h 4 •• 1 v1~h matter. n rl sing a rter
    the Ju. t~ oe. ha~. been t rRn.rerr e d
    w1th the p re1i&inary ~~: The
    •• oti o n. dee1ing with pewere or arrest have b ee n o o nd.~.d
    -9-

    b7 .11m1na~lng tha 10ng enu- erall o na or o~r e nO.8_

    ~h... were d •• med neo • • eary 1n ~h. Oode or 1892 beaa u ••


    or the a bo11~l on or the dl.t~no~l on b etwe.n ~ .1 on7 and
    misdemeanour.

    PAR'r XV

    Procedure on Pre11mlnary Ina uity

    c •••• Where Ma g istrate Baa Abeo 1ut. Jurled.lotl o n -


    Power s o r Juetl oea On Xnqu 1r7 _ 8411 a.rore Commltta1
    AdJournaent _ Remand For Ob " .r!'~'i~ o n ... '1'0 e.n.11:y -
    ~f ."
    'rakin g E.ldenoe or Wltn•• ~ •• _ Ao ou.ed Kay 0.11 E.lde noe
    0 0 _.1tta1 or V1.1:neae R et"ua1.ng To B. S worn Or ~o T,eatlry

    ~Rkln g E1eotlon . Cr Aoouaed _ Oommltta1 For Trla1 - Bal1


    Arter CO&m ltta )F~ ~.

    tho •• pro~.1 o n. or Part XZYZ wh10 h ~e1ato t o p re11ml nary


    1n q u1.J'"1 ••• C1auee 450 requ1re. a Ju e tloe to rema nd an
    &00u •• 4 t o apnear baror. • . 8g1 e~at. . ~oW' .ra d to a ot
    under P~t XVX .1n O ~ ••• In ~hloh a aa g l.trBte haa
    a b so lute J ur1sdla tlon . A Juatloe m&¥ p ut an aao us ed t o
    h l e e leo t l o n 1n_08.8. ~hloh .ay be tried .~y by
    ~ " I......, · ( ~ltl.&")
    A J ud g ~. Pro. l e lo n 1e maO . Cor t h e mentA1 .xamlnat1on
    o~ a V Om6n ohar g ed . vlth an o~r.noe 1n reeoeot or the
    d e Bt h or her ohl1d. (. ~~ ~ (, I ~ J ') ,

    PART XVI

    Aboolute Jurlsdlotlon OC Mag i.trate. _ Juri s diotl o n o r


    EIwOtlOoJl Pur - &
    1/,...c,c...~, ·"l1.""'&"\~ t I A
    -10-

    'I n d.1. ot •• nt ~i WO'.-J_, , , _

    1 1v~
    Tb~. o o mb1ne. APart. XV'I a nd ~IXX. 'It. erreot
    1. • • tated gene ral.ly 1n the report.

    PART XV:tx

    9v.Jl/~!d- .1(1'........ - ~.< .. ~t#"


    PrOO!dlFe bz I ...., at-eat 1I )

    Prererr1ng Indiot.ente _ Oontent. 81' Oount. ~d1otwen'.

    :Bart10ul.ar. Joinder And SeTer ano. Of' COUQt. _ Jo1.nder


    or Or-tenoe. Prooedure Bet'or-e Grand .1u.r7 _ OhaDge at'
    Venue
    Pl.ea. Trial. Ot' I • • u. or Ine.nltT _ s.re au.to47 or
    ~ ~ v,(;J
    Pereone round In.ane _ Pro.edure ~.p.o~ e~ aorp o rfttl o ~

    Ri g hts Or ....
    C.-p&J1ell1ng JUZ"7 __ abellenae '1'0 ArrQ
    Aooused Oa '!'rlal - !:v1.denoe
    Oha.11engl,ng Jurare _
    Ver&1.ote - Impoe1 t1 0 n l'
    Sent en o e.

    ~
    A"":IIQ' gar- or .001;1 0 n.
    relAtlng to _._tere at' eT1denoe a nd o . . . . ~ft et.er epe01 a l
    rule. haTe b een pLaoed v1_h ~e eeo_lone
    ~
    r~at1n
    ......;:.0 the
    o rre no e . to vh1.oh the7 rerer. Oellerally the p rooeduro

    • ~ng
    It. .
    bT indi ot ment
    ra ~''-'''''~
    at'
    h~. been pre.erved lntaat.
    the tr1.a1 or 1 •• " •• at' 1naan1 toY a nd tblt
    ordore t'ar •• re ou.,o4¥ aer
    ~ ....
    .ow
    ~e p roT1el onA
    ":':>
    h...u"",,:\ "l..- -t-(.L..,....., ..
    ee 'I~" _,
    t-
    .
    • 11 oourt. bAT1ng Jurledlot1on to tr7 lndiotabl e otr.noe ••
    0 .1 hUl S.e uea arlelng au", or ohall~ nge.!..5.d ou t or the
    .peo1~ p 1e&. ot av'reto! • • o ~d~ardon a re dea1ar,d
    ~

    by the B111 t o b e a&tt.rs t o be determ1ned by ~he Judg e.


    ~he pr o v1.ione re1atlng to t be • .en~.nt or ind iotment.
    _11_

    have been oonaol~d8 ~e d 1n one o omprehe n a1ve 8eot~ o n

    and powor haa b een g lven t o . . . nd n n lndlotment whloh


    wou1d o~herwla. be a nul 1~ ~y ~hrough the 0.18.1 0n to
    lnclud. an e SBant l al ayormant. The pro~ .lonB relating
    t o appaA.].. !ott: bid1q tab):. o:t':f'rao"a ba.e b a. n Inoorporated
    in a aepare te Par~.

    ,ART XVI II
    Indlct Abl . err.no ••
    RIGRT O~ APPEAL TO PROvINCIAL COUR~ OF APPEAL _ NOTICE
    OF' AJl'PEAL _ JUDGE 19: REPORT _ POWER OF' OOURT TO ORDER
    PRODUCTION O~ DOCUKER"~ AND T O CALL ~~ SSE9 _ POWERS
    or C OURT OK HE A1UNO or APPEAL _ POWi:R or MI KISTER OJ"
    JUSTIOE TO ORDER. NEW '1'RIAL OR REYER Q,UEST'I O H9 TO COURT
    <I~'
    or APPEAL _ RIGH"!' or APPEAL 1'9 eUPRDa: C OURT ~ _ POWER/.)
    or COOR T Olf D!!Aft:!:tf6 OF APPE AI.. ..

    Thes e pr ovi. l o ne a o •• rrom Part XXX. Tb. provi. l o ns


    I..... 0/
    relat1ng t o ordering n e w tr1al . haTS been olarlrlad in
    "
    the l l g ht 9r "
    ~he d s o1el9n . o~ t~ . Supra&a Ccurt or Oanada
    in We lch T. R • • 1950. S .O . R . 412.
    or Canada haa b een g lven a right or Rppe~ 10 08888 1n
    wh10h the pr088out 1 on has b a.n
    , t:...
    o o ndu o~ .d by hi_. The
    proY1a1ona relatIng to r1gbt or t~ Orown ~o appea1
    '-
    agal n . t an &oqUltta1 ba.ec.en rev1a.4 ~o g 1ve tha Crown
    An ap e eal wher e t:hare baa ~en an lIoqu1. tt nl. cpf th.
    pr1 nolpa1 orr anoe but II oonvlo~lon . . Aft inoluded o rrenoe.
    ,-I""
    .PA"-T XYX

    Th1. Pnrt gllt:ber. tos-thar the s e o t lons d.a1~ng ~th

    thl a sub Je o t, lind the t:llklng Or evldanoe 9" oomml.a1on ~1oh

    now appear 1n d1rr.rant Part. or the OodA.


    -12_

    PM'" xx
    Pun~.ba.nt.. Ftn... rorr.l~ur •• and
    R •• ~ltu~~on or Pr op.~.T.

    PtrNl:SHM'E1IT IN DI90RE'rION' OT cotm'1' _ atDC't1LATYVE PUNXSHMENTS _


    ,.:rREe xx LIEU 0,. OR :IN ADD:IY:rON TO YMPR:ISORB'OT - PUJfY9HMENT
    OF OORPOftA'!'I OHB _ OOKMEH OEMEWT aT sEKTBKOX9 _ PAR~ PArKER'!'
    or J"IKltS _ W"JIO :IS '!'O REOZIVE nns _ AO'Z'l:Oft'S TO REOOVEJ't
    P!CNALTIES _ OOKPEH ~ ATIO" AJro 1U:STI'rO'!'IOft' or PROP!:R.TY - WHERE

    IHPR:r~NKE1M' TO BE S ERVED _ SOSPD'DED S E1'fTEKO» AIm BINDING


    OVER TO K~EADE' WBTPPIIfO _ OAPrrAL 'Pmn9~EM'I' -
    Dl:9ABILXTXES ARI S ING P'ROM COJllnCTIOH _ PARDO",r ~~.... .

    Exo.p~ 10 0 •••• Dr ~lbe1 the provl.~onA r .1a~10g to


    The apeola1 proTt.lon
    &op11oab1e to OntarIo r.~tlng to payaent or rine. to
    Kunlo1pa11;lell ba. been 4ropped 1n the ln t ere •• e or
    unlrOr&ltT.
    the Pro~lno ••
    The proTtelon .nab11ng .baring
    and
    -
    Munlolpa11~1 •• ~.
    or
    Do~tlnu.d.and
    ,
    r~n.a
    {(.:...
    1. re1t
    bet •• en

    ~ ~ I>-'""",,l--'-'>.. ~ ..., u;,.. ~ ... _ _ut..<. ~,,., ""


    to be .daq.u~~6n--01'-~-ft-......be--i...,... ~

    '!'h. pronalona

    PART XXI

    HABIT UAL OPFKNDERS - CRIMINAL SEXUAL PS%CHOPATHS


    APPLICATY O. FOR SENTENOE or PftEVEftTIVE nE'I'ENTI ON
    PROCEDuq i: ON APPL IOA1'XOJf _ WRER.E BSNTXNOK: 8 TO BE SERVED
    PERI ODIO R E VIEW .Y MYJlI1'9'l"DI 9r- -JU5 1'I01C _ APPEAL llY
    ACCUS ED Al'fD A'!'TOlt,:,n:::r ODltRAL.

    Tb~8 Part oombln •• the proT1.1 o n8 r.~Rtlng to the


    pr.~e nt1ye detantl o n or ha bltu.~ orlm1nal. and or1~ln.1
    •• xu.+ psyoh opaths. Theae wera ro rmerly 1n d 1rrerent

    bean oonrar ~' ad on a~ l OOUJ"'ts whloh try 1nd1o table orreno.s


    a nd h.no~ e x tends the pover t o aagl atrate. aotlng under
    , ~ .i1-J><-<MoA
    Part XV"I. Th~ 1ssue le to be t:~d by the per. o n

    PART XJaI

    Erreot and Ent'oroement ot' Reoognizanoe

    RESPONS I Bn~rTY or 9URETrz~ _ DUR ~ TION OF RECOGNIZANCES


    RENDER or PRINCIPAL Br qURI:TIES _ XNOOR C\EMil'iT or DEFAULT
    UKDw.R RECOGNIZANOE _ PROCEDURE rOR FORrElTURK ~"TER

    DE F AULT _ ISSUE OF FIERI FACIAS _ COVYITTAL OF ~URETIES

    'fflJtN 'fRIT NOT SATISrIED _ REMEDIAL PROvrSION ENJIBLING


    RELEASE OF "URlt'TrES.

    Thitl PBl"' ~ pY" onde" a ·unll"ora pr ~ o1s1 oi!t Bpp11oab1. to


    all Prortnoes. '4"..",. ~ ~.,.. ~, it... ~ . . . .(, .

    Extraordinary Re.e41fts

    T h is Part applke. to the vrl~s ot' oeY"tlor&l"'l; habeas


    oorpus; mandamu s ~ nd pJ"'ohlbl~ion# and 1e derl~ed t'rom the
    p re.ent Part XXII . Provi.i o n has b •• n ma d . ror An spoeal
    ",v
    II.ndt:.~ nbo1. 1ti o n ot' the pr1!,.ent praotio . or go1ng r:r-om
    Judge to Judge w1th an app11oation t'or hab e •• oorpus.
    _ 14
    •

    PART XXIV

    P~ooedur. in 9~arX ConTlat1on Matter a

    PROOJCEDINGS T O BE COJoOllE;NCED BY INFORMAfiON - I SSUANCE 0'"


    PROCE~9 _ INOLU SION OY MORE THAN ONE MATTER O~ C OMPL A r~

    AHENDHEJifT or INYORXATIOn, _ 8EV1:RANCE 01" OOUNTS -


    AD.10tTRNHEJifT _ KIGHT '!'O MAXZ roLL A1f!3ll'ER AND DEP'ENOE

    BAn. _ TRIAL ADJUDICATION _ _ ENTORCING


    7ZKAL~

    1°<-
    ADJUDICATI ON COST S _ SURETIES TO ~EEP PEACE - APPEAL
    AGAINST CONV]:C "l'IO N OR SltNTENOE: _ PROOEDURJ: ON AP PEAL
    t--V."., N.~
    APPEAL TO B E ON P.:VTOE'!'mE,...._ POWERS OF' Cou:=tT O N AP"P E AL
    S!:COR rTY BY APPE'LLAH!' '1'0 PRO SE:'OUTB: APPEAL _ S'rAT ED C A SE
    w''p~ ~-'"''
    PROC!:DtrRE -PO~OP COURT _ APPEAL TO C OURT OF APPEAL IN

    CER'rAtN C .'SE'5.

    t o bring i t more near17 1n aooor4 with the p rooedure Cor


    the tr1a1 Dr lndlatab 1_ orren.... ~1 p roo •• d.1ng. -.-to ~
    be oommenced by a 8worn lnrora.tlon and _a7 Dontain more
    t han one orr_nce lr •• t out 1n •• parnte oount~~lth

    power to the aourt to try ths oount • • ep&rat.1y. The pavers


    or &mon~.nt r •••• b1. ~os. app11oab1. to lndlotabl.
    Orranoea. The pavers o r the oourt. hearlngapp.a1. are k b-
    .1~11&r t o thoae or the oourt. h~arlng appea1. 1~~t-
    ~~- ~
    ab1. orranoes. ~. enroroement or pena1tl •• by dlstre ••
    hAil b ...n-,'OtA.J ;+", ..d. ~ ~t. ~· l ''-.M.-.~ .
    susgee ti o n s I n co r po ~ ated ~n the D rar~ B 1 ~~

    P ART V I .
    j;~"1 h -/4-;c . .-,··~
    -" ~ ~<-.- J
    Soo . 21+6 Aota d~n~e r o u a ~o l1 r e . Sugge6t~On to
    change t e wo r d "necBes1ty " ~o "emergenoy" .

    Sec . 21+2A Not mn ~ nta~n~ n ~ fami l y . Suggest10n tha~


    thio be d r oppe In v1 ew o~ eec ~ ~on 241.

    See . 260 I>iu rde r 1 n c omm1. ss 1. o n 01' o :f f'enoee . 5uggeat~on


    t h at t h e one exp.r eae i on "harm n o r 1I1njuryll
    b e UGcd thr ougho u t . The word " harm " ~e used.

    Sec. 261 Note : Thi s ooc t~ on has b ee n altered by


    putti n g the VerDo ~n t h e past tense .

    Sec , Th r ea ts . T he red r afted sect~on (schedule.


    ft. ~ )Ie ba ing i n serted to Ca l l ow eoct~on
    7 • p . l o5 .

    Sec. 262 Inte r re r~n g w~ th ra~lwa7 ' A eugg eet10n to


    dele te " cnu s es o r" . p . ? • lin ea 1 1 & 12 .
    has been a d opted bocaus e i f death 1. 0
    oaus ed . the of'fen ce io murder . and if' bodily
    har m 1 s caus ed . ~ t Calla w ~ th ~n 291 (2) .

    Sec, 267 "D~a;:n:i!!g~e~r~o~u;:.~~p~l~a~


    c~e~.~. Tho wo r c!e " i a adeqUClto"
    have bee n in se r ted or t e r t he word liar" .
    p . 7 S- lin e 41 . p.79-l i ne 4 .

    Sec. )15(2(b) Abduction. Thi s haa been altered t o rea d


    " to be vl x teen years o r age or mor e " .

    Se c , 30 7 Vene r oal. d 1. [) en B e s . The r e draft ed sect 1. o n; flChed.ule


    p . l ? ; co mpli e s wI th s uggeet 1. o n s ~hB~ an
    orrence be c rea t e d . ponalt y prov 1.ded and
    co r r obo r at i on r e qu 1.red.

    8eo . 309A 5hou1d the


    b"r.at1.on u nder

    Sec . 3~0 p OI Y\Jsmf' Suggest; i on to add " o r ontero


    I nt o a ter " p ract~ges " 1. n c l aue e (.::d ;
    1 1. n e 1 .

    Beo . 199 Rel1. g 1. ous Ele rv~ ce e. Tho t'llord s " dut y o r u
    h av e been In De r t e d befo re ":f'uno ~1. on " 1. n
    o l nu ~ e (l)(a). l ~ n e 4 . a n d t h e 8 0ct1.o n
    t r ano:ferred to fo l l ow 222B . p . 5 1 .
    Seo . 317(2) De~amatory 1ibel. Th le section haG b een
    iilterect t o rend un de:ramato r y libel 1e
    matter pub1 1 ehed d i r eot ly or by ln s inuation
    o r i ro ny . " etc ., 2(c) hue b een eliminat e d
    and th e word " or ll 1naerted at the e nd or
    clause (a ) .

    Se o . 318 " o r" hUB be e n inserted at the e nd o f'


    o l n us e (b).

    Sec. 33 2 Extorti o n by llbel . Th e t' 011 0t-l1ng r~


    draft of secti o n 332 haa been 1n08rtod
    to replac e the se ct i o n ae 1t appears pp .
    85 and 86 .
    ~33 2 . (1) Everyone t-lho
    ( a) ' ....ith .1ntent
    (i) t o extort money; or
    (11) t o induc e a pe rs o n to confer
    upo n or p r ocur e :for any peroc n
    An o.pp0 1ntmen t o r o !':f'.1c e o:f
    prof1.t o r trus t ;
    publ.1 s heo o r threatens to publish or
    ot"rors t o abstn.1.n !'roro p ubll.oh1.ng o r t o
    pr e vent the pub11.uh.1ng o r a d e 1'ama t o ry
    libel . commite an ind io table o 1'rence .
    (2) Ev e ry o n e who as the r esul t 0 1'
    the r e 1'usal or any person to pe rmlt
    money t o be ext o r ted o r to conrer or
    pr o cure an appo 1.ntme nt o r o 1'1'ic e o r
    pr o fit or trust , p ubli shes o r th reaten s
    to publloh a deramat o r y l1b e l, o o~n lts
    an indictable offence .
    (3) Every o n e who 10 g U1lt y o r an
    o 1' ren ce und e r subsection (1) or (2) ~e
    l1ahl e t o 1mpr1.so n ment f o r two years
    o r to a 1'10c o f s1x hundred d o 11ars or
    to both . "

    Soc . 3 11 Sugge uted n e w aect10n.


    Mr. Wils o n suggests that a n ew aeetl o n be
    1nserted 1n Part VI to cov e r deat h rrom
    (l) negll gen~ shoot1ng by hu nt ers;
    (2) other oases o f cr1m1nnl n egllgenoe
    where 1t 1a not oona1de red doe1rab~e to
    charge manslaughtor.

    " " " II 1111


    THE SENATE OF CANADA
    SPEAKER: Hon. tlie Beauregard

    Official Report of Debates


    1952

    Editor: H. H. EMERSON, C.S.R., Room 236, The Senate


    Reporters: B. P. LAKE, C.S.R., G. B. HAGEN, C.S.R.
    P.·H. SHELTON, C.S.R., T. S. HUBBARD, Jr., C.S.R.
    V. LEMIRE, M.B.E., C.S.R. (Sessional)
    Translators: THE BUREAU FOR TRANSLATIONS

    SIXTH SESSION, TWENTY·FIRST PARLIAMENT


    1 ELIZABETH II

    EDMOND CLOUTIER, C.M.G., a.A" D.S,P.


    QUEEN'S PRINTER AND CONTROLLER OF STATIONERY
    OTTAWA, 1952 ,
    .'
    198 SENATE

    THE SENATE minor changes in the wording '\vith6ut-tne


    revisors say-any 'alteration of meaning, and,:
    that many more sections have been com~'
    Monday, May 12, 1952 pletely redrafted, with ,changes in penalties
    and so on. This is a measure Which, in my;
    The Senate met at 8 p,m" the Speaker in opinion, must be considered clause by clause.
    the Chair. The bill now bef-ore us ~ the result of the'
    Prayers and routine proceedings. work of a committee under the distinguished
    chairmanship of the able Chief Justi'ce of the
    CRIMINAL CODE BILL province of Saskatchewanj who- has worked
    FIRST READING on the amendments for some three or four
    years. One member of the committee is an
    Hon. Mr. Roberison presented Bill H~8, an ·able and experienced criminal lawyer from
    Act respecting the Criminal Law. the Province of Manitoba, having been for I
    . The bill was read the first time. ten years Crown Prosecutor: in the city of
    Winnipeg, and later Deputy Attorn~y Genera.!.
    NOTICE OF SECOND READING TOMORROW
    i·The. Hen. ihe Speaker: Honourable senators,
    t feel th~t the .so~ner· the bill is exp'1ained
    on second reading; the ear:lier it will go to
    when shall the bill be read the second time? committee, and the morE!! time we wiU have
    Hon. Mr. Robertson: Honourable se11:ators, to c;onsider it .in detail. I am pleased, there~·
    a short time ago the leader of tl.1e opposition fore, to consent to second reading tomorroW.
    (Hon. Mr. Haig) quite l?rope~ly_ called atten-
    tion to the necessity of adhering to the rule Hon. Mr. Reid: May I ask the honourable
    requiring at least two days notice of a motion leader if copies of the bill will be distributed
    for the second reading of a bill. I quite by tomorrow?
    agree that this rule should not be waived Hon. Mr. Robertson: I am quite sure that
    unless some excellent reason is advanced for the printed copies will be ~vailable tomorrow.
    so doing. For having myself occasionally
    lapsed into carelessness with respect to this The Hon. the Speaker: Honou,rable senators,
    rule I apologize to the housel and promise to is it the wish of the hou-se tha,t the honourable
    try to observe the rule more faithfully in the leader of the government be permitted to
    have this measure placed on the Order Paper]
    fl.lture.
    for -second reading tomorrow? .
    Under the circumstances, how~ver, I feel
    justified'in asking for the unanimous consent Some Han. Senators: Agreed.
    on
    ot the' house to place this bill the order
    p,aper ,for tomorrow. My eadier intention was TRANSPORT AND COMMUNICATIONS'
    to introduce this measure last Thursday and COMMITTEE
    move second reading ionight, but because of ADDITION TO l;'ERSONNEL
    the delay in receiving pJ;inted copies of this
    volwninous bill I later decided that when the Hon. A. L. Beaubien: Honourable senators,
    bill was introduced tonight I would ask that with leave of th~ Senate, J move, that the
    it be set down for second xeading on Wednes· name of Honourable Senator Roebuck be
    day, which would have been in accordance added to the list of senators serving on the
    with rthe rules of the house. I am now Standing Committee on Transport and
    Communications.
    informed that the Minister of Justice, who
    will explain the bill on second reading, is The motion was agreed to.
    unable to be with us on 'Wednesday or Thurs-
    day, but cm be here tom'orrow. Therefore, FARM IMPLEMENTS, INSECTICIDES
    unless the second reading is left over until AND FERTILIZERS
    Friday, or some time next week, the only INQUIRY
    alternative is to ask the leave of the house to
    proceed tomorrow. Hon. Mr. McDonald inquired of the
    government:
    Hon. John T. Haig: Honourable senators, 1. What farm implements. insecticides or fertilizer
    as I raised a question the other day on the materials are subject to import duty?
    observance of the rules of the h-ouse, I feel 2. What is the rate of duty on the above-
    mentioned articles?
    that I should say a few words at this time. 3, What other taxes are any of the aboveRmen-
    1 am most .anxious to hear the minister's tioned articles subject to. and what are the rates of
    such other taxes?
    explanation of, this bill, ·and then to have it
    considered in committee, where it can be Hon. Mr. Robertson: The answer is as
    dealt with clause by dause. I understand follows:
    that a great many sections of the law have 1 and 2. No farm implement classified
    oot been changed, that many have undergone within the Agricultural Implement Schedule
    206 SENATE

    THE SENATE CRIMINAL CODE BILL


    DISTRIBUTION OF COPIES
    On the Orders of the Day:
    Tuesday. May 13. 1952 Hon. Mr. Robertson: Honour,able senat,ors,
    The Senate -met at 3 p.m., the Speaker in before the Orders, of the Day are proceeded
    the Chair. with, may I say in connection with Order No.
    Prayers and routine proceedings. 4, which will be called in a few minutes, that
    I was a little optimistic as to the number of
    copies of the Criminal Code Bill which would
    THE LATE KING GEORGE VI be available at this time. At present we have
    MESSAGES OF THANKS FROM HER MAJESTY on the table twenty copies of the bill and
    QUEEN ELIZABETH .II AND FROM HER twenty copies of the report, 'and just how to
    MAJESTY THE QUEEN MOTHER .
    distribute this small number among so many
    The Hon. the Speaker: Honourable sena-- members taxes my ingenuity. However) I
    tors, I have the honour to convey to the house might suggest ,that distribution be proceeded
    two messageS', one from Her Majesty Queen with, and that those who accept them will be'
    Elizabeth and the other from Her Majesty found among the lawyers, who openly profess
    the Queen Mother. that they know least about the law, and
    The Senators rose and stood in their places. among the laymen who boldly profess that'
    they have a greater knowledge of law than
    The Hon. fhe Speaker: The messages are their fellows. I know of no other way.
    as follows:
    Members of the Senate and of the House of Some Hon. Senators: Oh, oh.
    Commons of Canada:
    I have received with deep appreciation the NATIONAL RAILWAYS AUDITORS
    Address which you have presented to me. BILL
    r am sincerely grateful for your kindly sympathy
    in the loss that I have sustained through the death THIRD READING
    of my dear father.
    I greatly value the assurances of your loyalty and Hon. Wishart MeL. Robertson moved the
    of your support which you have given me on my third reading of Bill 9, an Act respecting the
    accession to the Throne, and It will be my continual appointment 'of Auditors for National Rall~
    endeavour to be worthy of them. ways.
    ELIZABETH R.
    The motion was agreed to, and the bill
    Members of the Senate and of the House of was read the third time, and passed.
    Commons of Canada:
    I thank you warmly for your message of con-
    dolence.
    DIVORCE BILLS
    HoldIng, as I do, the most vivid memories of our THIRD READINGS
    visit to Canada, the many expressions of sympathy
    which I have received from all parts of your great Hon. W. M. Aseltinel Chairman of the
    country have especially touched me, and I d-eeply Standing Committee on Divorce, moved the
    appreciate this further sign of your thoughts and
    your affection.
    third reading of the following bills:
    ELIZABETH R. Bill U~7, an Act for the relief of Laetitia
    Daigneault Martel.
    SALACIOUS AND INDECENT Bill V -7, an Act for the relief of James
    LITERATURE . Alexander Ford.
    FIRST REPORT OF COMMITTEE
    Bill W -7, an Act for the relief of Joseph
    Gerard Abondius Fauvel.
    Hon. J. J. Hayes Doone presented and Bill X ...7, an Act for the relief of Richard
    moved concurrence in the first report of the Patenaude.
    Special Committee on the Sale and Distribu- Bill Y-7, an Act for the relief of Fran~oise
    tion of Salacious and Indecent Literature. Bellehumeur Dixon.
    The report was read by the Clerk Assistant Bill Z .. 7, an Act for the relief of Cynthia
    as follows: Daphne Roberts Gagne.
    The Special Committee appointed to examine jnto
    Bill A-8, an Act for the relief of Dorothy
    the sale and distribution of salacious and indecent May Tucker Patterson.
    literature beg leave to make their first report, as BiU B-8, an Act for the relief of Reginald
    follows: Clare Darrah.
    1. The Committee recommend that their quorum Bill C-8) an Act for the relief of Marjie
    be reduced to five (5) members.
    2. The Committee recommend that it be author- Weston Frost Law.
    ized to print BOO copies in English and 200 copies in Bill D-8, an Act for the relief of Carmen
    French of its day to day proceedings, and that Rule Verna Garcia Copping.
    100 be suspended in relation to the said printing.
    Bill E-8. an Act for ,the relief of Edna Ruth
    'l'he motion was agreed to. Dowsett Yqung.
    MAY 13. 1952 207

    . Bill F-8, an Act for the relief of Eleanor was that that was about all that was required
    Mary Courtney Flannery. in our debate. I hope that the same con-
    Bill G-8, an Act for the relief of Florence fidence will be entertained with respect to
    (Fanny Ruth) Sacks Roitman. your efforts on the bill now before, us.
    The motion was agreed: to, and' the bills Hon. Mr. Euler: Just as you treat our
    were read the third time, and passed, on divorce bills.
    division. Hon. Mr. Garson: The honourable senator
    says he hopes that we shall treat this as we
    PRIVATE BILL treat the divorce bills that come from your
    THIRD READING chamber. I do not know that I would be
    Hon. Mr. Stambaugh moved the third able to subscribe to that view in all cases.
    reading of Bill 8-6, an Act' to incorporate the This bill) copies of which I believe have
    "Hotel Mutual Insurance Company. been tabled, is quite a voluminous document.
    It is a very large book indeed) I should thi11k
    "The motion was agreed to, and the bill was about the size of Anthony Adverse, and
    read the third time1 and passed. upon the whole for the average layman much
    duller to read. But it has this in common
    CRIMINAL CODE BILL with all other books-at least) so it seems
    SECOND READING to me-t~at one of the important things to
    On the Order: know about it is who is its author. In the
    Second reading of Bill H-8. an Act respecting the present case we have not merely one author,
    c~jminal law. . but a large number of them, and they are
    Hon. Wishart MeL. Roberlson <Leader of all well known as competent men.
    the Government) withdre\v froPl the Senate, One of the hallmarks upon which this body
    to return accompanied by the Honourable and the members of the other place have to
    Stuart S. Garson, Minister of- -Justice, whom deperid in considering a work is the good
    he escorted to a seat in the chamber. name of the author, so perhaps you will
    permit me to amplify the remarks that were
    Hon. Mr. Robertson moved the second read- made yesterday by the honourable leader of
    ing of the bilI. the opposition in the Senate (Han. Mr. Haig)
    «'He said: Honourable senators, in line with as to the manner in which this bill came into
    the intimation that I previously gave to the being.
    ho'use, we have 'the pleasure and honour of The Criminal Code Revision Commission
    ~avh1g "th~ .Minister of Justice here today to
    was ori.ginally c9mposed of the Honourable
    eXIJlain this bill.
    'V. M. Martin" C~"ief Justice of Saskatchewan;
    Hon:. Stuart S. Ga~son (Minister 'Of Justice): J. H. G. Fauteux Q.C. then of the Quebec
    Hcinourable senators, first of all I should like Bar and now the Honourable Mr. Justice
    to express my appreciation of ypur having Fauteaux, of the Supreme Court at Canadaj
    agreed to consent to waive your rule' requir- Mr. F. P. Varcoe, Q.C., Deputy Minister of
    ing at least two day's riotice of a motion to Justice. To assist this Commission and to
    move th~ second reading of a bill. Unfortun- undertake in large measure much of the
    ately, I had for tomorrow anappointment of .detail, there was "appointed a committee com-
    several weeks' standing that it would have posed of Mr. Robert ,Forsyth, Q.C., then with
    been virtually impossible to break, 'and the the Department of Justice, and now Senior
    honourable the government· leader of your County Court Judge ~t Toronto; Mr. Fernand
    legislative chamber "(Hon. Mr. Robertson) Choquette, Q.C. then" of the Bar of ,Quebec,
    tells me that you have very kindly made this now Mr. Jt!.stice Choquette; Mr. H. J. Wilsc;m,
    afternoon available for a"n effort which Q.C. Deputy Attorney General of Alberta,
    i should have been reserved until tomorrow. and Messrs. Joseph Sedgwick, Q.C., and J. J .
    . pne qf the quite impo~tant reasons why Robinette, Q.C., of the Bar of Ontario. The
    We in the Department of Justice' and' in the _personnel of the cqmmittee was: SUbsequently
    Government decided to' avail ourselves of increased by. the appointment of Mr. W. CO
    ~ the services of' yoUr honourable chamber on Dunlop, Q,C., of the Nova· Scotia Barl Mr.
    ;. this -9ccasion was the magnificent work which H. P. Carter, Q.C., Director of Public Prosecu-
    : yoti. did for us in considering the Bankr"uptcy tions of Newfoundland and Mr. T. D.
    I Bill of 1949, and which I, as the minister in
    MacDonald, Q.C., who prior' to succeeding
    ~harg~'o{ that bill in'the House of Commons, Judge Forsyth in the Department of Justice
    am 'Confident did much more than 'cut our was Deputy Attorney General of Nova 'Scotia;
    'task in that house in two; I should think The work of the commission and the com-
    It probably reduced it by about 90 per cent. mittee was commehced in 1949 and continued
    When '·that bill came there with your until September, 19QO, when there was a
    :imprimatur upon it, the impression we ~ad reorganization, and the work from that time
    55708-15
    208 SENATE

    on was carried on by a committee which was reference. The work involved was arduous
    subsequently appointed a commission, and and required great care.· I am sure that
    was instructed to prepare a draft bill for the honourable senators will agree that the com~
    consideration of the government. mission have performed their work in an
    The commission, in accordance with their admirabl.e way.
    instructions, prepared the draft bill which I The report which was tabl~d deals with
    tabled in the House of Commons along with the number of meetings which were held and
    their report on April 7, and which my col- points out certain matters to which the com-
    league, the honourable government leader in mission felt attention should be drawn. It
    this house, has tabled in the Senate. is not my intention to review the report of
    The bill now 'before you is a redraft of the the commission, but to deal with the bill as
    commission's draft containing changes in a whole, pointing out general -matters as
    sOme minor respects made by the Depart- well as certain specific matters which are !
    ment at' Justice, under lnstructions of the thought to be of importance. It is neither I
    government. In the preparation of their appropriate nor possible for me to deal wJth
    draft bill) the commission had, of course, the every matter in which there has been chanKej
    benefit of the work already done, and their so I shall confine my remarks to those things
    draft bill can be said to give effect in large which can be considered of major importance.
    measure to the views of all groups engaged I therefore propose ·to. deal with the bill
    in the work from the time it was commenced under the following heads:
    at the beginning of 1949. (a) Matters of a general nature.
    The terms under which the commission (b) Changes in SUbstantive law.
    were asked to. enter upon the last phase of (c) Procedure:
    the work, namely, the preparation of their (1) Indictable offences-
    draft bill, were as follows: .
    CD Extension of jurisdiction of
    (a) revise ambiguous and unclear provi- magistrates;
    sions; GD Method of election;
    (b) adopt uniform language throughout; GiD Sentences.
    (c) eliminate inconsistencies; legal anomal- (2) Summary conviction offences-
    ies or defects; (i) Inclusion of more than one
    Cd) rearrange provisions and Parts; offence in an information;
    (e) seek to simplify by omitting and com- GD Appeal to be on evidence.
    bining provisions; Under the general heading I shall deal first
    (f) with the approval of the Statute Revi- with the matter of rearrangement and con-
    sion Commission, omit provisions which solidation. I have pointed out that the
    shOUld be transferred to other statutes; commission were not cha·rged with the task
    (g) endeavour to make the Code exhaustive of making changes in broad principle~, but
    of the criminal law; and were asked to evolve as simple a Code as
    (h) effect such procedural amendments as possible, and in doing so to· mak~ such
    are deemed necessary for ,the speedy and fair consolidation and rearrangement as was
    enforcement of the criminal law. thought necessary to the accomplishment of
    The main principle of -this bill which we this end.
    are now discussing on second reading, is that Honourable senators wiII have observed
    the Criminal Code of 1892, which has been that there has been considerable consolida-
    in existence for 60 years without having had tion and rearrangement. This phase of the
    any major review and overhaUl, should now work has contributed to the marked reduction
    be revised and consolidated. in the number of sections in the bill as com-
    pared with the number of sections contained
    The wisdom, and indeed the hecessity for
    this step are so obvious that I shall not in the present Code. It is obvious that this
    detain- the honourable senators with any feature of the work of the commission will,
    prove of great advantage to tnose who are
    justiflcation of it.
    called upon to interpr~t and administer the ,
    Honourable senators will note that under criminal law; and as a noteworthy example I:'
    the terms of reference the purpose of the of this branch of the work I would direct '
    revision was not to effect changes in broad
    principles, but was to evolve as simple a Code
    as possible by the elimination ot unnecessary
    ~I~~t~~n;~~c~f ~~:o::~O\~d~~~~tO:l~ t~a~:~! i
    providing for the calling of witnesses in aU
    or obsolete provisions, the correction of errors proceedings to which the Act applies.
    and the removal ot inconsistencies, and to I would like now to deal with the extent
    effect such consolidation and rearrangement to which the present bill is exhaustive of the'
    ~s was deemed necessary to facilitate criminal law.
    MAY 13, 1952 209

    Unde- the terms of reference the commis~ In introducing the Code of 1892, Sir John
    sion were asked to endeavour to make the Thompson made this observation:
    Criminal Code exhaustive of the criminal The present bill aims at a codification of both
    law. The commission, however, as they went common and statutory law; but it does not aim at
    completely superseding the common law, while it
    on with their task, came to the conclusion does aim at completely superseding the statutory
    that the Code should be exhaustive in so far law relating to cr1mes,
    only .-8.S criminal offences are concerned) and The point I am making is that the statute
    · that the criminal law of Eng18nd, as presently law -\vhich the Code of 1892 aimed to super-
    ill force in Canada, shouLd be continued in
    sede already included much of what had
    respect of other matters; inter .alia, pro- theretofore been the common law.
    cedure, matters of defence and rules of evi-
    dence not already codified. The result is that, Bearing in mind the En~lish statutes of
    in so far as the common- J.aw may now have 1861 and Canadian statutes of 1869, which had
    · effect in Can-ad-a, no change has been made been passed, it is clear that even before the
    other than to preclude the institution of pro- Canadian Code was passed in 1892 there had
    c;:.eedings for common law offences. In other been extensive codification of the criminal
    words, once this hill has been made law, any law; 2nd that therefore the number of com~
    Information that may be laid will have to be mon law offences to which resort would be .
    laid for an offence which is defined as such had after the Canadian Code was passed
    In the Criminal Code. It will not be possible, would not be great. The Martin Commission
    as it p.ow is, to lay an information against an has found, after consultation With the prov-
    accused for .offences in respect of those ma t- inces, that resort has'been had -to common law
    tel's which are not covered by our Code. offences in a very limited number of cases,
    and the commission have incorporated in
    , In case there may be some apprehension
    about this change, namely abolishing com- their draft bill those common law offences
    which the experience of the past sixty years
    mon law .offences, let me touch brief,ly on has shown should be continued as part of the
    the relevant history of the Code and the pre-
    criminal law of this country. Having regard
    cautions taken by the Comm-ission. >to the fact that before the Code of 1892 a
    The English draft Code of 1878 is said to considerable number of common law offences
    be the source of the Canadian Code of 1892. were dealt with by statute, and that there has
    Perhaps I already have said that CaMda been a careful examination of the cases relat-
    has had only Qne Code, namely, the Code ing to common law offences since 1892, and
    which Sir John Thompson introduced in 1892, all those regarded as applicable 'incorporated
    and which this present measure is to con- in the bill, it is clear that what is referred to
    solidate. This 1892 Canadian Criminal Code as the abolition of common law offences in
    · was based in large measure on the English th,is bill is not at all extensive; indeed its com-
    draft Code of 1878-a draft which never pass is very small.
    passed into law. While the EngUsh draft
    - Code_ was intended to codify the criminal law I am sure honourable senators will agree
    of England, the offences set out therein were that it is much more satisfactory to have those
    not drawn solely from the common law. A things which constitute crimes clearly set out
    great many were drawn from statutes then in in a statute, readily available to all, than to
    effect, and in particular, those Acts of 1861 have to resort to ancient texts to ascertain
    -which had been passed to consolidate and ,vhat conduct is criminal in this country. In
    amend the criminal law of England. view of what i! have pointed out, there is
    strong assurance that the draft bill contains
    In Canacta, after confederation, a group of all the common law offences which· are
    Acts affecting -the criminal law were passed required and that there will be no gap in
    in 1a69-about twenty-three years before our our law in this respect.
    Canadian Code was introduced. These Acts The commissioners in their report have
    contained a great many of "the provisions of dealt at some length with punishment. There
    th<i English Acts of 1861 to which I have just is just one phase of this matter with which I
    re'ferred-. In introducing the Canadian Acts wish to deal at this time, and that is their
    of 1869, Sir John A. Macdonald said that the recommendation to abolish both minimum
    P!~mary object in introducing these -criminal punishments, and higher maximums for sub-
    lav/s ;'was the ,assimilation of the whole sequent offences. The purpose of this is to
    crirpinai law of the Dominion, and every con- give the court-s a wider discretion in the
    isideration was- subsidiary to this. That is to imposition of punishments. It is recommended
    ~ay, while the Acts of 1869 were not designa~ as a general principle that all minimum
    ted a Clode, they did purport to. assimihite the punishment shall be abolished and that there
    Whole of the crimjna,l law of Canada as it shall be ho stated maximum for subsequent
    ~t09d at. that time. offences, but that the judge, on the facts of
    55708-15,
    210 . SENATE

    the case belore rum, and within a wide dis~ It will be observed that the definition' of
    cretion permitted to him under this new Code, treason has been redrawn. The effect of this
    shall exercise his own judgment, and if the revis10n is, in my view, to place somewhat
    accused has been guilty on more than one greater emphasis on those. phases of this
    occasion of the offence charged, he shall take subject which relate to the security of the
    the fact into account and punish the man state. ",
    accordingly. In respect of the offences of sedition, the
    In so far as minimum punishments for first Commission UJ.-cluded in the draft pill which
    offences are concerned, the recommendation it submitted a definition of useditious inten~
    of the Commission has not been accepted tion". No doubt the Commission was moved
    in toto by the government. The instances in to do so by reason of the fact that the question
    the present Code in which a minimum sen- of what constituted a "seditious intention"
    tence must be imppsed on conviction for a had'recently been dealt with by the Supreme
    first offence are few in number. Had the Court of Canada in Boucher v. The King
    Commissioners retained· the principle of mini- (1951) S.C.R. 265.
    mum punishment~, the following offences We examined. the judgments of the various
    would have carrIed minimum terms in the members at the Supreme Court in that case
    bill: -or, putting it in another way, th~
    offences I am now going to name are the
    and we came to the view that it would be'
    wiser to leave that decision itself to goverrt
    only ones in the present Code for which what constitutes a "seditious intention" and
    minimum terms- are provIded: to have the advantage of future judicia~ prb~
    Driving while intoxicated ......•........... eel, 222) nouncements as to the effect of that judg:.
    Driving while abUity impaired ............. (el. 223) ment before attempting t-o reconcile and
    Thefts of certain matter from the Post Office codify in a few short passages what constitutes
    (cI. 298) IIseditious intention" as laid down in the
    Theft of a motor car (theft of a motor car reasons for judgment in that case. Sometimes
    was not carried in as a separate offence). it is difficult to cod~fy, reasons for judgment.
    Robbery of the mails ...................... (el. 390)
    Another ch.ange to which I feel I sh-ould
    However, in view of the recommendation at this' time direct the attention of honourable
    of the Commissioners, minimum. punish- senators is the creation of" a new offenc.e
    ments for these offences were not continued designed to meet those cases of perjury where
    in their draft bill, which is attached as an it is impossible to determine whi-ch of two
    appendix to their report. sworn inconsistent statements is false. Cases
    In the 'bill now before! this chamber -arise where in preliminary proceedings a
    minimum ~unishments have ,been restored witness will swear to certain facts and
    in respect 'Of offences relatin'g to the Post later at the trial will give contrary evidence.
    Office and in respect of drunken driving or In such cases, there. cannot possibly be any
    driving while ability is impaired. Upon a doubt that perjury has' been committed, in
    purely pragmatic basis we think: it is better, respect of one or other of the statements.
    in relation to these specific kinds of offences, However, it is impossible to establish which
    to maintain the minimum penalties. As statement is false because the person test1fy~
    there will "be full opportunity for. detailed ing is sometimes the only person who can
    discussion in committee I will at· present establish this. It is to meet situations such ai
    say only this, that while there may 'be some this that clause 116 ot the bill has been
    merit in the recommendation of the Com- inserted. I would point out that this provision
    mission, we think that because of their is confined to testimony on a material issue
    deterrent effect,. minimum penalties should and pJ.:ovides safeguards in cases of honest
    not be entirely abolished, and it is for this mistake.
    i'eaSOn that we propose they should ,be In Part IV of the blll, which is the part
    retained in respec~ of the offences iI have dealing with sexual offences, there is one
    justrn~ntioned. . matter .to which I wish to direct attention,
    I s"hould _now like· to discuss changes namely a change made in connection with the
    in the .substance of la,w, and in doing offence of carnal, knowledge of girls under
    so will attempt to discuss, as one can fourteen years of qge.
    appropriately do on second reading, the priti- The simplest way of dealing with this
    ciples of certain changes in the 'substantive matter would be to. qqote what is said by the
    law which the Commissioners regarded as Commissioners in their Rep.ort at page 16 in
    properly part of the task assigned to them. dealing with substantive -changes:
    In accordance with rules I shall confine my One example is that under the present code on ~
    remarks to such principles, and the relevant charge of rape or indecent assault. the evidence of
    sections can be considered in greater detail the complainant need not be corroborated. How"
    ever, a rule of practice requires the trial judge to
    when the b!1l is In committee. give a warning as to the danger of convicting on
    MAY 13, 1952 211
    the complainant's evi~ence alone. This rule is The provision thus 'created two offences,
    codified and extended to cases of carnal knowledge namely,
    (clause 134) with the result that under the draft
    bill c6rroboration of the evidence of the com- 1. To break a contract to supply services,
    plainant is no longer required in cases of carnal and 2. To break a contract with a person who
    kn,owledge.
    had agreed to supply services.
    It was rather anomalous that it should be Next I wish to deal with the effect of the
    required in that case -and not be required, 1906 revision upon these Statutes. Before I
    for example, in rape, do so, however, I should point out that the
    The next matter I should like to discuss enactment of 1877 was carried forward into
    is that of criminal negligence. The subject of the Code of 1892, and when certain revisions
    causing death or bodily harm by criminal neg- of ,the Statutes were taking place in 1906, the
    ligence is one to which the Commissioners have sections dealing with this type of contract
    paid' careful attention and which they have came under consideration.
    cJ.ealt with at considerable length in their re- In the 1906 revision of the statutes the
    port. There is no purpose in my repeating here wording of the relevant sections was so
    what has been said by the Commissioners in changed that while they purported to con-
    their report, but I would like to emphasize tinue this second' offence-that is, the offence
    that while a new offen-ce has been created of breaking a contract with a person who had
    and a definition of criminal negligence inser- agreed to supply. services-the amended
    ted.. tV-is effects really no substantive change wording left at least a grave doubt as to
    whether, they did have that effect. It is to
    in the law but is for the purposes of clarift- remove this doubt that the commission have
    q,ation and to brj,ng the Criminal Code into recommended that clause 365 of the pre-sent
    accord! with judicial interpretation. bill be enacted, so as to put the secti-on back
    I now pass on to c1ause 365 of the- bill. This to its original substance, except that it now
    provision dealS! with breaches of contr-acts, contains no referen-ce to the carriage of the
    the result of which will endanger life, &eprive mail.
    the public of essential services or prevent The Commissioners, in 'keeping with
    the running of passenger or f,reight trains. Canada's status as an autonomous nation, by
    clause 420 give effect to the criminal law in
    May I, for a moment, touch on the history territorial waters' surrounding Canada. This
    of this section. The provision ,was first clause is an adaptation -of the provisions of
    ~nact€;d in the Breaches of Contract Act the -Territorial Waters Jurisdiction Act of
    Rassed by the Ganadian Parliament in 1877. 1878. However, in the draft bill as sub-
    In, introducing the bill, Mr. Blake (later Sir mitted by the commission a limit of twelve
    Edward Blake) said: miles was fixed for territorial w~ters. It
    ':The 'bill did not profess to deal even with a
    was felt by the department and by th~ go.v-
    strike, or to interference with the freedom of the ernment that this was an undue extension
    employee to leave the service of his employer at for the purposes of administration -of the
    any time' when his contract expired. It professed criminal law and 'that there should be no
    in general terms to say that, save under specIal departure from what is generally recognized
    qircumstances, breach of service was not a crime.
    It professed to define certain' breaches of contract, as the limit of territorial waters under inter-
    01: in ~he event of certain brea,ches of service, when 'national law, namely, three nautical miles.
    they involved consequences of such moment and We have np doubt that the adoption by the
    \yere connected with such results as might in the
    opinion 0.1: the government, fairly be called crimes, commission 'of tp.e twelve-mile limit was for
    to ,define and punish them as such. To deal with the purpose of making this bill dealing with
    such a measure was an entirely different question
    from such as how to avoid a breach of contract, the criminal law uniform viith the Customs
    or how to treat a riot, how persons obstructing Act, which permits search of Canadian vessels
    railway engines were to be treated, how persons within this limit. But in the admin'istration
    who made murderous. assaults, as alleged, were to
    qe treated, or how the f(ii1iHa of this country was of the Cns1qms Act the officials have the
    t? be ·c.alled o~t in, aid' of the civil 'powers. ' . problem of vessels, hovering about to commit
    Under the enactment of -1877, it was an a . breach of the Act, which is not usually
    Offence for anyone who was under contract encountered in the administration of the
    to provide light or water to a municipality or criminal law in general, and we do not ·think
    who :was under contract with anyone who it necessarily follows that because there is a
    had agreed to supply : such services to twelve-mile limit under the Customs' Act we
    break such contract kno\ving or having reason should have the same limit under the criminal
    to"believe that in doing so the inhabitants law: ' We! do not think that foreigners and
    of the municipality would be deprived of light foreign ships within the twelve-mile limit
    or' water. There was a similar provision should be brought within the purview of the
    relatIng to railways.·· Criminal Code.
    212 SENATE

    Now I come to habeas ~orpus proceedings. civil procedure come under the jurisdiction of
    Under the law as it stands at present, the provincial legislatures, a provincial law
    although there has not been universal accept- providing f-or appeal in the case of habeas
    an-ce of this, an applicant for a writ of corpus proceeding-s applied not only to civil
    habeas corpus, if not successful in securip.g cases in the provincial courts but, as' pro~
    the relief sought in the first instance, may cedure, applied. also to criminal matters in
    make sli{!cessive applications to a single provincial courts. That had had the effect in
    judge. That is, if he applies to Judge A for most cases of preventing habeas corpus appli-
    a writ of habeas corpus and the judge. says cations in criminal matters from being made
    "No", he may next" apply to Judge B, who from one judge to another, since it was held
    may also say uNo"; and after applying to four that because of the provincial statutes an
    or five other judges he finally gets, say to appeal had to be taken to the Court of
    Judge F, who may say "Yes", That gives Appeal. But in the case of In re StorgoiJ the
    Judge F in effect the power of an appeal court Supreme Court decided that these enact-
    over his brother judges. It has been held that ments no l-onger applied to applications for
    where- the statute contains a provision for an the writ where the applicant was in custody
    appeal court, an applicant must avail himself as> a result of crimina,l proceedings. That is,
    of ,the machinery of appeal and may not go since criminal proceedings were under the,
    from judge to judg~. It was so held in In re jurisdiction of the _federal parliament, these
    HaU, 9 O.A.B., 135, by Mr. Justice Patterson, provincial enactments ddd not apply to them.
    at page 149:· Nevertheless, the fact that provision had been
    Where an appeal is given from the court in terms made in certain provinces for an appeal in
    to the Court of Appeal, the important consequence order to preclude successive applications indi-
    naturally suggests itself that there be no longer
    the right to apply for a writ of habeas corpus to one cates a considerable body of opinion opposed
    court after another.-The intention of the legisla~ to the practice of successive applications to
    ture evidently was that the remedy should be a single judge on the same facts.
    worked O\1t by t~e machinery of the appeal and
    that there should be no second writ allowed. The commission, as can be seen from their
    report and this draft bill, were of opinion
    It was further held in In re DaVis, 25 that there should not be successive applica-
    D.L.R., 96, by Chief Justice Harvey of tions, but that an appeal shDuld be given to
    Alberta, at page 98: the full Appellate Court, thus restoring the
    The disadVantage of one judge being required practice which had obtained in certain prov-
    to s1t practically in appeal from a brother judge and,
    the consequent loss of dignity and respect to inces prior to the decision in In Te Storgoff
    and extending the ,appellate procedure to the
    judicial decisions In case of a difference of opinion,
    caused our practice to be changed and now by r. 20whole of Canada. If this is done, an appU·
    of the Crown Practice Rules, the decision of a
    cant who feels that his application has been
    judge on an application for habeas corpu.s is final,
    subject only to appeal to the Appellate Division. improperly rejected by a judge will in all
    In the provin-ces of Ontario, Quebec, British cases have the right of an ·appeal to the
    Columbia and Alberta provision was made Appellate Court.
    for an appeal, and in some instances succes- That disposes of the main changes in the
    si.ve applications were prohibited unless the substantive law.
    subsequent application was ba,sed on new Under the general heading of "Procedure"
    f.acts. Of course, if there were a new set of I should like to deal with the consolidation
    fa.cts then in a sense there was a different of Parts dealing with non~jury trials of
    case. The. reason I say Hin some instances" indictable offences. In the present code,
    is that in two of these provinces there was there are two Parts dealing with the non-
    some difference of judicial opinion, which is jury trial of indictable offences. In the
    not particularly relevant to our present dis~ bill these Parts have been consolidated and
    cussion. Then a decision was rendered by the provisions of Part XVII which deal with
    the Supreme Court of Canada in the case of jury trials, where they are not inconsistent,
    In re Storgoif, 1945;'S.C.R., that the provincial have been made applicable. The advantage
    enactments providing for -an appeal from the of this is to have uniformity in so far as
    refusal of an application for habeas corpus possible in the trial of indictable offences.
    did not apply to habeas corpus arising out of
    criminal proceedings, as habeas corpus was Extension of Jurisdiction:
    essentially a matter 'of civil law. It will be observed that under, the provi-
    That had. not been the law until this case sions of the consolidated Part.s, the jurisdic~
    of In re StoTgoif was decided. It had previ- tion to be exercised by Magistrates will be
    ously been held, although not with complete exercised only by t.hose who are specially
    uniformity, that while according to our con- appointed for that ,purpose.
    stitution, -criminal matters come under the In view of this and In the expectation that
    jurisdiction of parliament and matters of jurisdiction to act under this Part will :be
    MAY 13,1952 213

    bestowed on qualified persons, the jurisdic- It was anomalous that a person tried in a
    tion to try an accused with his consent has higher court should be subject to a greater
    been extended to include -certain offences penalty than a person tried by a magistrate
    which must now be tried 'by jury. I would under Part XVI.
    emphasize that this in no way impairs the
    right of an accused to trial by jury and that Appeal by Attorney General of Canada:
    the accused will continue to have the right As honourable senators know, prosecutions
    to select the method of trial which he desires. under certain Dominion statutes as well as
    under the Code are conducted by the Depart-
    New Fonn of Elect~on: ment of Justice by arrangement with the pro~
    There has been a change in the form of vincial authorities. That is to say, the
    election which an accused may make. Under administration of justice-notwithstanding
    the code as it now stands, a.n accused who is the designation of the federal Department of
    before a Justice of the Peace is given no Justice-is a provincial function, but the pro~
    election as to method of trial but the Justice visions of certain statutes are enforced by
    is- empowered to hold only -a preliminary the federal Department of Justice after first
    hearing. Provision is made in the revision making arrang~ments with the provincial
    whereby the Justice, if he decides that a authorities. In such cases, the provincial
    case for committal is made out, will then authorities take no part in -the trial. It was
    require the accused to elect for trial by a the view of the commission that in such cases
    judge sitting without a jury or by a judge the Attorney General of Canada should have
    andl jury. the same rights of appeal as those possessed
    by provincial Attorneys General and a pro-
    Where an accu;:ed is before a magistrate, vision has been inserted 'to this effect
    he may now elect for trial either before a (clause 601). '
    magistrate or before a judge and jury. Under
    Summary Convictions:
    the Bill, the election will be for trial before
    either a magistrate, a 'judge without a jury The principal matters to which I wish to
    Or a judge and jury, and he makes his direct attention in respect of changes in pro-
    choice. cedure in summary conviction offences are
    the following: '
    Put briefly, the change effected by the
    new form of election is that an accused (a) Inclusion of more -than one offence in
    when -in the ipolice court will be given an an information. Under the Bill, provision is
    opportunity to elect -trial by a judge alone made for the inclusion of more than one
    offence in an information. This is not an
    .if ~hat is the 'method of trial he prefers. innovation. Similar provision will be found
    I would point out that the -right of an in both dominion and provincial Acts and the
    accused who has elected trial by jury to re~ practice was widely adopted in connection
    elect for trial by a ·judge alone, which now with wartime regulations. As a proper safe~
    exists, has been continued-that is to say, guard, it will be noted ·that power is given
    under law as it stands at the present time the court to order a separate trial on anyone
    or more of the included charges if the court
    an "accused who 'has 'been committed for is of opinion that such a course is necessary
    trial may elect trial by jury, ,but if later on- in the interest of justice.
    f,or one Teason or another he desires to
    (b) Appeal to be on Evidence. Under the
    change his election to trial by a judge alone, present provisions of ,the Code where an
    he may exercise that right. Under the appeal is taken in a summary conviction
    amendment such a right of re-election i~ matter, the court must hold a 'new trial or as
    maintained. the lawyer calls it a trial de novo. The
    practice has grown up among certain shrewd
    Sentences: lawyers of not putting in any evidence for the
    Under the present Part XVI, which deals defence at a first _trial; then being familiar
    with summary trials by magistrates, of indict- with the Crown's case, an appeal is launched
    able offences, there are' special provisions and'the case is tried de novo. Having heard
    relating .to. sentences' in respect of those the Crown's case such a law'ye:r is in a posi-
    ~ffen,ces over which a magistrate has absolute tion to bring in his evidence, and it is some-
    jurisdiction. times thought that acquittals are so won
    Upder the revision, these special provisions which are not warranted.
    h,av~ been abolished and the sentences which Hon. Mr. Euler: Disgraceful.
    rnay b~ imposed for these offences will be Hon. Mr. Garson: The commissioners have
    ~he same as those which may _be imposed in recommended that in future the appeal should
    any other court. be determined on the evidence taken in the
    214 SENATE

    court of first instance as in the case of be considered by itself as we went along:


    more serious indictable offences. In order most of the sections would be' read and
    that the court will have before it all essen- passed without debate. "I de not markedly
    tial evidence, authority is given to hear addi- disagree with the Minister of Justice. This is
    tional witnesses .as well as witnesses called not the first time that I have sat with the
    on the trial. It would appear that this is honourable gentleman in a legislative assem-
    a proper change as it seems an unnecessary bly. For eight years we occupied seats oppo-"
    duplication to have witnesses called to give site each ether in another place, so that" his
    the same evidence on two separate occas- voice and manner are not unfamiliar to me. I
    ions in respect of the same issue. offer him my cong-ratulations; personally I
    Before leaving this branch of the bill, I -am delighted to see him here;
    should point out that the summary trials I would n-ot withhold for some poor fellow
    part and the part relating to summary con- accused ef an offence the right to' a ,trial
    viction offences were submitted to provincial de novo if he has been before a certain magis-
    representatives at a joint meeting held in trate or hi certain courts. From my experi-
    Toronto in September last. These parts were ence with some magistrates, and with due
    discussed section by section, and the com- respect to them, I would say that" were I
    mission in its report points out that in gen· charged. with an offence, I would rather take,
    eral the revision of these parts \vas acceptable my chances in" a higher court thaIi ,before
    to the provincial representatives. them in the court below. However, that is
    In closing, there is one general observation a detail. My point is that the house should-
    I would _like to make. In opening I pointed send this bill to committee in order to- under-
    out that the revision was not undertaken stand it better.
    for the purpose of effecting changes in broad The minister made a very flne presentation
    principles. Our system of criminal jurispru- this afternoon. Although-myself a lawyer of
    dence embodying as it does the high prin- sorts, it kept me busy to follow all the changes
    ciples of the British system provides as fair he proposes, and _I think it must have been
    and just a system as 'it is possible to devise
    to ensure that justice will be accorded to very difficult for 19-ymen to" underst'J,nd the
    significance of them all. I shall not repeat what
    all. I am" sure that those who have studied I said yesterday, but if a certain gentleman-
    the Bill will agree that the Commission in
    its work, and the bill now before you, honour- the minister knows to whom I refer-or
    able sen~tors, have maintained those prin- someone as well qualified were available to
    ciples. the committee, we would gain a much Clearer
    understa,nd-ing "of this bill. The man I have
    Some Hon. Senators: I-{ear, hear. in mind is really experienced in this "matter.
    Hon. John T~; Haig: H~nourable members, One cannot serve ten years in a city police
    it is not my intentiQll to adjourn the debate. court without getting a pretty godd idea of
    I have had the good fortune to have an the ramific"atidns of the criminal law. So I
    op~ortul).itY to read the memoranda which the suggest that he ;be allowed to meet the com-'
    commissioners sent with their bill, and the mittee; then we can have a discussion, and
    HonQurable Minister of Justice has commented when the bill is" reported' to the house ,all of
    extensive~y on th~t infoqnation. us will have a better understanding of it." Fur-
    I propose to repeat somewhat my remarks ther, if I am not in agreement with some deci-
    of "last night, in that I think there is nothing "to sion of th,e cOPlmittee, I want" to be free on
    be gained by a long discu"ssion on the bill third· rea-ding to raise such objections as I
    in this house. It is a type of measure that se~ fit. By voting today for second- reading
    is better handled in c-ommittee, where hou-our- of the bili I -a"m not to be understood as
    able senators may" have a free and" frank confirming" H. I think that all of us need
    discussicin 'of its prOVisions. The memoranda more information, and that a better job can
    a'ccorripanying the biU give a very clear expo- be done in committee.
    sition of v;hat is intended by the amend- I thank the- minister for his references
    ments. I did not have"to attend the Divorce to the Bankruptcy Act. He might also have
    Committee this morning, so I spent a good"
    mentioned the incom-e tax law, on which some
    deal of time going over the material before us.
    I checked ,,!-P on some o,f the changes and, with of us have very definite opinions.
    respect, I say to the honourable minister In conclusion, I am "persuaded that if we
    tha"t I am not sure that I agree with his do a good job in connection with the present
    views. But as I am not" an outstanding bill, members of the House of Commons, no
    lawyer, it may well be that the commission matter how they may talk "about the Senate
    is right and, I am wrong. when they are away from Parliament Hill,
    "" To study the bill in committee would help when inside thi-s building will admit that we
    us .to understand it better! each clause could are a pretty fine class of people."
    MAY 13,1952 215

    Hon. Thomas Reid: May I" be permitted we would want to do that. If we have
    to ask the minister a question? During his enlarged our jurisdiction in connection with
    'speeoh he said, something about territorial fisheries or customs, the only reason is In
    waters and the jurisdiction relating thereto. order to deal with the practical problems
    He spoke .of the twelve~mile limit as it which aDise in relation to both these matters.
    relates to customs law enforcement, -and also Han. Mr. Hayden: May I ask the honourable
    referred to the three.:..mile limit. In view minister a question, as unfortunately I was
    of the fact that international la'w knows not here during the whole of his speech.
    nothing of the three-mile limit, or ,territorial Did he deal with the question of a new
    w.aters, has the commission glven considera w
    definition of criminal negligence?
    tion to the idea of extending our territorial
    waters and so protecting our fisheries? Han. Mr. Garson: Yes.
    . Hon. Mr. Garson: Honourable senators, I Hon. Mr. Hayden: By what process of logic
    think the answer is, that what· is meant by and reasoning has he finally evolved the
    t'territorial waters" is' determined to a con- present definition?
    'slderable extent by the subject-matter with Han. Mr. Garson: Well, honourable sena-
    -\vhleh you are linking it. Let me take as tors, I cannot plead guilty to having defined
    an example, in order to make my explanation it. It was defined by the commission, and
    as brief as possible, the criminal laws of after consideration of their commission we
    the United States and of all the various mem- adopted it, and I think it can be defended.
    b'ers of the British Commonwealth retain Han. Mr. Hayden: As I read clause 191,
    this three-mile limit. When you get into Mr. Minister, it purport.s to define criminal
    customs administration you must have regard negligence as follows:-
    to .the fact that you are dealing with a new (1) Everyone is criminally negligent who shows
    8et:·of practical problems, problems of ves- a wanton or reckless disregard for the lives or
    qels hovering off the coast, waiting until safety· of other persens
    darkness falls in order to start their criminal (a) by doing anything, or
    (b) by omitting to do anything that it is his
    activities; and the same sort of practical duty to do.
    problems arise when you are dealing with (2) For the purposes of this section, "duty"
    questions of fisheries. One of the most recent means
    judgments of the International Court at the (a) a duty imposed by law. or
    (b) a duty for the breach of which a person
    Hague -had to do with the question of Nor- may be found liable in civil proceedings.
    wegian territorial waters. The report is not
    yet available, but an article upon it has been It strikes me that if I am required to do
    written by Professor Lauterpacht, a member something on the civil side of the law,. and
    . of the staff of one of the British universities, I fail to do it. and I can be sued for damages,
    who has analysed and surpmarlsed this judg- that would appear to be made one of the
    ment. dne has only to read his article to see elements in the constitution of "criminal
    that the judgment deals with the question of negligence" as defined in section 191. Now,
    territorial waters "in connection with an is that intended?
    entirely different matter, namely Norwegian Han. Mr. Garson: I think it would help
    fisheries, wherein the conformation of their if I were to repeat what I said on this sub-
    coastline and. their fiords, the places in the ject when my honourable friend was not
    ocean where fish are to be found, and similar present. It was this: The subject of causing
    considerations play their part, and the law death or bodily harm by criminal negligence
    in such a case is not a very satisfactory guide is one to which the commissioners have paid
    to What we should enact in our· Canadian careful attention and which· they have dealt
    Criminal Code. So far as the disposition with at considerable length· in their report.
    cif \the matter before.· us is concerned, it There is no purpose. in my repea Hng here
    rel~tes only to the criminal law. One of the what has been said by the .commissioners in
    problems with which· we had to concern their report, but I would like to emphasize-
    ourselves was the consequences of asserting and I. think this, answers my honourable
    ~urisdiction over a foreign ship within the friend's question...,.,...that while a new offence
    twelve-mile but beyond thethree-mlle limit. has b·een created and a definition of criminal
    SUpposing it is a Norwegian ship, with a negligence inserted, this effects really no
    Norwegian captain and crew, sailing under the SUbstantive change in the law but is for the
    Norwegian flag: are we to say that it is the purposes of clarification and to .brin.g the
    responsibility of -the Mounted Police or -any Criminal .Code into accord with judical
    other ··Canadian police or of the Cana- interpretation.
    dian courts, if a murder is committed In other words, if the view of the com-
    on that. ship While. it is within those mission and of the Department of Justice is
    nine . "miles of water, to bring the right, and I think it iS I we have done nothing
    murderer to' justice? I· do ·not think more in this than to state what is now
    66708-16
    216 SENATE

    established as the law by our jurisprudence; opposite (Han. Mr. Haig) in thanking my
    in other words, to codify the legal decisions colleague, the Minister of Justice (Han. Mti.
    upon this point. I think that will become Garson) for having given us such an inter.
    apparent when it is discussed in detail in esting exposition of this biU on the motion
    committee. If my honourable friend wanted for second reading. Of course, my prime
    to go into it we could supply the whole list object in life is to expedite the passing of
    of decisions \vhich brought us to this legislation. I suppose, therefore, J should
    conclusion.- welcome the suggestion made by the hart:..
    With reference to the specific question as ourable leader opposite, that second reading
    to whether the mere breach of a duty in be given to this measure today. At the
    itself would constitute criminal negligence, I same time I should point out that one hon..
    would be very much surprised if there are ourable senator who was unable to attend
    any decisions to that effect, or if the proper today was assured that this legislation wqUld
    interpretation of the section which the hon- not be given second reading this afternoon.
    ourable senator has read is to that effect. As I qo not know \vhether th~s honourable
    I have alway-s understood, and I am sure gentleman, who has always taken an active
    my honourable friend agrees with me, the interest in matters of this kind, may wish
    breach of a duty in1posed is negligence; but to say something on the second reading
    whether coupled wIth all of the other circurp.- or nqt, but· in fairness to him I would be
    stan-ces in the case it proves a wanton and
    reluctant to have the debate closed at this
    criminal negligence is a questioh of fact, to be time. Unfortunately I was unable to supply
    determined upon the facts of the case before
    the court. I think that is the only answer I copies of this bill before honourable sena-
    can give to my hon'ourable friend at this tors came to the chamber today.
    time. I do not altogether agree with his Hon. Mr. Aseltine: 'Will we have copies
    point but it is properly taken, and I would tomorrow?
    be glad to go into it in committee. Hon. Mr. Robertson: There are twenty
    Hon. Mr. Hayden: I am not quarrelling copies available now, and I think additional
    with your ,statement of the law, but I am ones will come to us progressively. It is
    wondering whether section 191 is drafted in a merely a question of getting them printed,
    way which reflects that. and I shall certainly see that members get
    Hon. Mr. Garson: It Is thought by the com- them as soon as possible. In case any hort..
    mission that it does that, and by our depart- ourable senator decides to speak on the'sec-
    mental and parliamentary draftsmen, to ond reading of the bill, I am going to sug;.
    whom my' honourabie friend the leader gest to my deputy whip that he adjourn the
    opposite (Han. Mr. Haig) was referring in debate.
    such 'glowing terins"a few moments ago. It
    is possible that they may be wrong, and if Hon. Mr. Taylor: Honourable senators, I
    they are, we could correCt this in committee. move the adjournment of the debate. '
    One of the reasons this matter is being con- The motion was agreed to.
    sidered. by the Senate· is that this body can
    make corrections of that sort. CANADA DAIRY PRODUCTS BILL
    Hon. Mr. McDonald: Do I understand the SECOND 'READING
    honourable gentleman to say that' he will On the Order:
    be available at our committee meetings?
    Resuming the adjourned debate on the moti9n ~J,'
    Hon. Mr. Garson: Yes. the second reading of Eill B, an act to amend tq~
    Canada Dairy Products Act.
    Hon. Mr. McDonald: Are th~ sections that
    are new so marked for st~dy purposes? Hon. Mr., Robertson: Honourable senators,
    Hon. Mr. Garson: We shall have, for the as I stated last night, I shall not be in a
    purposes of the" committee, a list of all the position to tak~ part in this debate befor~
    sections which have been discontinued and tomorrow at the earliest. I have been desir:-
    dropped, all those in respect of which sub- ous of consulting my. colleagues about the
    stantive changes have been made, all of matter, but there has been no meeting of
    those :which have been changed as to word- the government for the last few daysJ and
    ing witho.ut change as to substance, and all at present the Prime Minister is; ~way. I
    of those which are carried into the new bill hop'e, however, to hav~ a consultation tomor-
    in their identical form. By using these means row and to make my little contribution to
    one can move right through the bill and the debate in the afternoon. I therefore ask
    know exactly what has. happened to every that the order stand.
    sect.ion .itt the present l<l:w. The Hon. the Speaker: The Or<;ier stands: .
    Hon. Wishart MeL; Robertson: Honourable The Senate adjourned. until tomorrow at
    senators, I wish to join with the leader 3 p.m.
    MAY 14, 1952 217

    THE SENATE Hon. Mr. Robertson: Honourable senators


    will recall that yesterday I suggested that the
    deputy whip might adjourn the debate .in
    Wednesday, May 14, 1952 order to provide an opportunity for any
    honourable member who might wish to speak
    The Senate met at 3 p.m., the Speakel' in -to this motion.
    'the Chair.
    Hon. Arthur W. Roebuck: Honourable sena-
    Prayers and routine ,proceedings. tors, I was unable to be -present yesterday,
    and naturally might be expected to be heard
    PRIVATE BILL fr,om in a matter of this kind. Therefore, in
    REpORT OF COMMITTEE the first instance, I thank the honourable
    Hon. A.' K. Hugessen presented the report leader for having held the debate open until
    ot the Standing Committee on Miscellaneous I -could say a few word-s, notwithstanding that
    Communications on Bill R-6, an Act respect~ there seems at this time very little to be
    ing The 'Burrard Inlet Tunnel and Bridge said.
    Company. ':I'he bill comes to us at a very late hour, f-or
    He said: Honourable senators, the com- it is a very large bill, and, did anybody
    mittee have, in obedience to the order of imagine that oui· giving it second reading
    'reference of May 6, 1952, examined the said would be taken as approval of the bill, I
    bill, and now beg leave to report the same should strongly object. But I do not so
    without any amendment. understand the procedure. I ·have had an
    opportunity of reading :what was said ,by the
    PRIVATE BILL cornmissioners in their repo~·t, whi-ch was dis~
    REPORT OF COMMITTEE tributed to us two or three days ago, -but I am
    . Hon. Paul H. Bouffard presented the report sorry that I was not able to hear the remarks
    of the Standing Committee' on Miscellaneous made yesterday by {he Minister of Justice.
    ';Private Bills on Bill E-7, an Act respecting However, this morning-though not until
    ,.-1).e Sisters of Charity of the House of Provi- twelve 'o'clock-I obtained in Hansard a copy
    4ence. . of his speech. The bill itself, which is a
    . He said: Honourable senators, the com- document of approximately 300 pages, and
    mIttee have, in obedience to the order of which by the way I borrowed from the
    reference.. of MaY.8, 1952, examined the said Clerk, reached my desk at about 12.30 this
    pill, ~nd now ,beg leave to report the same afternoon.' So the opportunity of reading
    ~ithout any amendment.
    300 pages has been hil.
    I appreciate the statement ma,de here yester~
    PRIVATE BILL day by the Minister. The point about the
    REPORT OF COMMITTEE bill~ as I see it, is that it is not a recasting

    Hon. Paul H. Bouffard. Chairman of the of the criminal law. The instructions to the
    Standing Committee on'Miscellaneous Private -commissioners were to revise the expression
    Bills, presented the report of the 'Committee of the law only. It is not a new criminal
    on Bill G-7, an Act respecting a certain patent law which is being enacted, but only a new
    application of the Garrett Corporation. enactment of the old criminal law .. It is true
    that you -cannot <:hange the phraseology' of
    'He said·: Honourable senators, the commit-· a section of the Code without changirig' the
    tee· have, in obedience to the order of refer- meaning to some degree, though not neces-
    ence of May 8, 1952, examined the said bill sarily drastically. And while of course· the
    and now beg leave to report the same without 'bill does change the criminal law to some
    any amendment. extent, that is not the main purpose of the
    measure. Its main purpose is to rearrange the
    PRIVATE, BILL C-ode so as to make it more readily readable
    FIRST. RE~DING or clearlY understood .. As :stated ,by the Min-
    _ .~op. J. G. Fogo moved the first reading ister here yesterday, the instructions given
    of Bill 1-8, an Act to incorporate The National to the -commissioners were to:
    Dental Examining Board of Canada. (a) revise ambiguous and· unclear. pro~i­
    T~e bill was read -the first time. sians;
    .(b) adopt uniform language throughout;
    CRIMINAL CODE ,BILL (c) eliminate inconsistencies, legal anoma-
    SECOND READING lies or defects;
    On the Order: (d) rearrange provisions and Parts;
    Resuming the adjourned deb~t,e on the motion
    for the second reading of BiB H.S, an Act respect- (e) seek to simplify by omitting and com~
    ing the Criminal Law. bining provis~ons;
    55708-16.
    218 SENATE

    (f) with the "llproval of the Statute Revision because {he felt that all honourable members
    C-qmmisslon, omit. provisions which should should have an opportunity of speaking to
    be transferred,·"to other statutes; the measure. That. is why I conclude that
    (g) endeavour to tnake the Code exhaustive the .consent of .the house given for yesterday
    of the criminal law; and is still in effect.~
    ,) .
    (h) effect such procedural amendments as Hon. Mr. Vienl Mr. Speaker, I of cOl1rse
    are deemed necessary for the speedy and! fair do not want to appeal from Your Honour's
    enforcement of the criminal law. decision, but I feel that the honourable
    Honourable senators will observe that there leader would be well advised not to insist.
    is no authority given to the commissioners to on proceeding with the debate today, but·
    change the criminal law as such or to pro- to allow it. to stand untn Tuesday next.
    vide the Dominion of Canada' with a new Hon. Mr. Roebuck: Honourable 'senators,
    criminal law. Only the expression of the let me say that I have no objection at. aU
    law is under review. That is a -matter of great to suspendin!$ what I have to say. until later,
    detail. if the Senate so decrees.
    Hon. Mr. Nicol: Mr. Speaker, I should like Hon. Mr. Robertson: May I interject a
    to rise on a point of order. I -have asked for remark at this juncture, lest anything my
    a copy of the bill now being discussed and honourable friend has said as to my insisting
    have hot receiv"ed one. I do not know why on the debate being proceeded with today be
    we allow bills to be discussed in this house misunderstood.' That is quite contrary to the
    before copies have been distributed. fact: I intervened yesterday to prevent the
    The Hon. fhe Speaker: I would point out bill from re.ceiving second reading, though all
    to the honourable senator that it is with the honourable senators present were apparently
    leave of the Senate that the debate is pro- agreeable to such a step being taken. I said
    ceeding when only a limited ,number of at the outset of the. sitting that only twenty
    copi~s have been distributed. I understand copies of the bill were. available. I' had
    that the consent of the house given to proceed hoped that by tod;'1y more copies would b~
    yesterday continues today. on hand. but I am now advised that they will
    not reach us until tomorrow morning:
    Hon. Mr. Vien: Mr. Speaker, on the point Entrusted as I am with the responsibility
    of order. It is quite correct to say that leave of the leadership of the. house, I am interesteq ,
    was given to 'procee'd with the debate on in seeing the legislation proceed as rapidly
    second reading yesterday in order to enable and conveniently as possible, and rather than
    the Minister to explain the bill; however, it postpone this measure until next week, when
    does not follow that we should continue another substantial revision is to come before
    to debate today Without every senator paving us, I think we should proceed tomorrow,
    a copy of the. measu:.;e before him, as requir~ when the senator from Toronto-Trinity can
    by the rules of the house. Further, inasmuch conclude his remarks, If it is desired that
    as there is a report of the commissioners my honourable friend continue at this time~
    available, that report also should be in the that would be quite acceptable to' me. But
    hands of honourable senators. It is not I think we should proceed with the disc:us~
    possible to follow intelligently what is being sian tomorrow, and Friday if necessary, in
    said in this debate without the measure b~ing order to get the bill into committee as rapidly I
    before us. I . very strongly support the as possible, Certainly I am not urging that .
    honourable senator's point of order. it be dealt with until copies are in the hands
    On the remarks made by Your Honour, I of every hon-ourable senator.
    would suggest· that extending the consent
    of the house· to allow the continuation of the Hon. Mr. Haigt Honourable members, I
    debate today would be going beyond our want to support His Honour the Speaker in
    understanding of what happened yesterday the stand he takes. The house consented,
    when the minister had leave to e",plain the upon the understanding mentioned, to proceed
    bill. I do not believe that could be con- with debate on the second reading, and that
    strued as consent to the debate continuing consent will stand until the motion for second.
    without copies of the bill having been dis- reading has been put. Like the honouraple
    tributed. government leader (Hon. Mr. Robertson) I
    The Hon. fhe Speaker: In answer to the am not only willing but delighted that every-
    op'servatlons of the honourable senator, I may body shall have an opportunity to be heard.
    sa'y'that leave of the Senate was given, and
    Of course. as my honourable friend from
    at first it seemed that second reading would
    take place yesterday. However at the end Bedford (Han, Mr. Nicol) was not here yes~
    of the sitting the honourable leader of the terday, he had no opportunity of knowing .
    government did not insist op, second reading. the factS.
    MAY 14. 1952 219

    -Hon. Mr. Nicol: [ did not ask to "be heard. P);UNTING OF' COMMtSSION'S REPORT
    Tasked to have a copy of~the bill. Without Han. Mr,• .Rob~rtson: Honourable senators,
    it, should' we be expected to agree- to second as I' said before, ,I have no desire to have
    reading? the discussion on second reading curtailed
    Hon. Mr. Haig: Unfortunately, my honour- or to have it -carried on without the fullest
    able friend was not here. Had he been here facilities. What I said about the 'availabilty
    lie could have objected, but in this house one of copies of the bill tomorrow is in accord~
    cannot object in absentia. I support the ance with my best information. If copies
    stand" of the honourable the Speaker. My aTe not' ready by then, I shall have to act
    understanding is that the consent ran to the accordingly.
    second reading, but that after second reading One point has been brought .to my atten-
    cqpies of the bill must be in our hands or a tion by the Assistant Clerk. What I said
    new consent wll1 be required. referred to the bill itse1f. I am advised that
    no more copies of' the report of the Com~
    Hon. T. A. Crerar: Honourable senators, it mission are obtainable. Consequently, with
    seems to me that the suggestion· of our col- leave of the Senate, I move that the
    league from Bedford (Hon. Mr. Nicol) is a Corrimission's'report be iprinted as an appen-
    verY reasonable one. We went ahead yester- dix to our OfficiaL Report of Debates J so
    day with the consideration of second reading that it will be available to .anyone who would
    for· a special reason, namely, that we were
    like to see it.
    told that the Minister of Justice, whom it was
    desired-quite rightly-should .come before us Han. Mr. Davis: 1 assume that the motion
    to ~xplain the measure, would not be able to of the honourable member from Toronto~
    attend later ,this week. We therefore waived Trinity (Hon. Mr. Roebuck> to adjourn the
    the ordinary requirement that when second debate will protect him in his right to speak
    r~ading of a bill is moved copies of the bill again.
    should be before us. ;gut I do not think that Hon. Mr. Robertson: Yes.
    that agreement was intended to· continue
    Indefinitely. Han. Mr. Crerar: He adjou~'ned the debate. ~ I

    I confess I do not know very much about The motion of Hon. Mr. Robertson was
    the Code. I listened yesterday to a very agreed to.
    interesting exposition of the legislation.
    Apparently there is attached to it a memoran- CANADA DAIRY PRODUCTS BILL
    dum in which the commission entrusted with SECOND READING
    the revision explains its reasons for the pro- The Senate resumed from Monday, May
    posals; I think we should have at least some 12, the adjourned debate on the motion of
    opportunity df looking over that document Han. Mr. Euler for the second reading of
    arid the text of the bill before we get into a Bill B, an Act to amend the Canada Dairy
    general discussion. My honourable friend P.roducts Act.
    from Toronto~Trinity (Hon. Mr. Roebuck) Hon. Wishart MeL. Robertson: Honourable
    will, I have.no'doubt, make a'very useful con~ senators, on several occasions I have moved
    t~ibution ·to the deb'ate. Others also may do the adjournment of this very interesting
    so. 'As far as I am concerned I am in com~ debate, ·chiefly for the reason that, aside
    plete ignorance, except in a very general way, from any opinions of my own, it is mY.duty
    of what we ar~ talking about; and I would to reflect as far as possihle the views of my
    suggest that this discussion be held over until" -colleagues in the government. The question
    we have had an opportunity of familiarizing raised is an important one, because it in.~
    our~elves with the bill and the memorandum volves legislation which I introduced in the
    tp.a~ accompanies it. ,first session of last year.
    . ·Hon. Mr. Roebuck: As r understand it, the . \l communicated to my colleagues the inter~
    stand-an entirely reasonable one-taken by est which has been aroused in this matter,
    the 'honourable senator from Bedford (Hon.' and took occasion to emphasize my feeling of
    Mr. Nicol) is that he is not in a position to inability to deal with the great variety of
    even' hear a debate until the bill is before questions raised both as to matters of policy
    him; 'and in view :of what has been said by and' to leg'al aspects, as fully and .saUsfa-ctorily
    the honourable member' for Churchill (Hon. as the house might reasonably expect. This
    Mr.. Crerar) and by the leader, I move the handicap is not a new one so far as I am con-
    adjournment of the debate. cerned, and I do not doubt that it will be
    :. The motion was agreed to, and the debate evidenced irom time to time in future.
    'Was 'adjourned. Although at times I have called upon some
    MAY 15, 1952 269

    THE SENATE The report was read by the Clerk Assistant


    as follows:
    The Standing Committee on Banking and Com-
    merce, to whom was referred Bill V-6, an Act to
    Thursday, May 15, 1952 :Incorporate the Great Eastern Insurance Company,
    have in obedience to the order of reference of
    The Senate met at 3 p.m., the Speaker in May 6, 1952, examined the said bill and now beg
    the Chair. leave. to report the same without any amendment.

    Prayers and routine proceedings. The Hon. the Speaker: Honourable senators,
    when shall this biU be read the third time?
    DIVORCE BILLS Hon. Mr. Dupuis: Next sitting.
    FIRST READrnGS
    PRIVATE BILL
    Hon. W. M. Aseliine. Chairman of the
    REPORT OF COMMITTEE
    Standing Committee on Divorce, presented
    the following bills: ' Hon. Mr. Nicol presented the report of the
    Bill J -8, an Act for the relief of William Standing Committee on Banking and Com~
    Wallace Watson. merce on Bill D-7, an Act respecting the
    Economical Mutual Fire Insurance Company.
    Bill K-8, an Act for the rellef of Russell
    James Barrett. The report was read by the CLerk Assistant
    Bill L-8) an Act for the relief of Alice as follows:
    Sabrla O'Connor Muskett. The Standing Committee on Banking and Com-
    merce. to whom was referred Em D-7, an Act
    Bill M-8, an Act for the relief of Julia respecting the Economical Mutual Fire Insurance
    Emma Pearl Sager Noiseux. have in obedience to the order of reference of
    May 7, 1952, examined the said bill and now beg
    Bill N-8, an Act for the relief .of David lC!aVe to report the same without any amendment.
    Gilmore Bennett. The Hon. the Speaker: Honourable senators,
    Bill 0-8, an Act for the relief <of Kathleen when shall this bill be read the third time?
    Hilda Turk Woodall.
    Hon. Mr. Euler: Next Tuesqay.
    Bill P-8, an Act for 1he -relief of Mary
    Elizabeth Cate Lowe. PRIVATE BILL
    Bill Q-8, ·an Act for the relief of Aldea THIRD READING
    Gendreau Bourbonnais.
    Bill R-8, an Act for the relief of Peter Hon. S. S. McKeen moved the third reading
    Ernest Walker. of Bill R-6, an Act respecting the Burrard
    Inlet Tunnel and Bridge Company.
    . Bill 8-8, an Act for the relief of Dorothy
    Agnes Kearns Bradley, The motion was agreed to, and the biU was
    Bill T-8, an Act for the relief of Sarah read the third time, and passed.
    Bernstein Smith.
    PRIVATE BILL
    ."Bill U -8~ an Act for the relief of Margaret
    Gladys Redman Glassco. THIRD READING
    Bill V-8, -an Act for the relief of Louise .Hon. Mr. Duffus moved .the third reading
    Joslyn Smith Harvey-Jellie. of Bill E-7, an Act respecting the Sisters of
    Bill W -8, an Act for the relief of Bertha Charity of the House of Providence.
    Naujoks Stehr. The motion was agreed to, and ,the bill
    Bill X-8, an Act for the relief of Margit was read the third time, -and passed.
    Aloisia Payer Worontschak.
    ,The bills were read the first time. PRIVATE BILL
    THIRD READING
    The Hon. the Speaker: Honourable senators,
    when shall these bills be read the <second Hon. Mr. Fogo moved the third reading of
    time? Bin G-7, an Act respecting a certain patent
    application of the Garrett Corporation.
    Hon. Mr. Aseltine: Next sitting.
    The motion was agreed to, and the bill was
    PRIVATE BILL read the third time, and passed.
    REPOR~ OF COMMITTEE
    CRIMINAL CODE BILL
    Hon. Mr. Nicol presented the report of the
    Standing Committee on 'Banking and Com- SECOND READING
    merce on Bill V -6, an Act to incorporate the The Senate resumed from yesterday the
    qreat Eastern Insurance Company. adjourned debate on the motion of Han. Mr.
    270 SENATE /
    Robertson for ,the second rea-ding of Bill found in the Criminal Code may be charged
    H-8, an Act respecting the Criminal Law. in Canadian courts under .the title of criminal
    Hon. A. W. Roebuck: Honourable senators, are law. For that, I take itJ the commiSSioners
    certainly to be congratulated.
    when I was speaking on this debate yester- There have been a number of other
    day, and before ,the interruption, I was point-
    ing out that the subst~mtive law was not important changes, more than I can discuss
    today. For instance, it was the desire of t11,e
    affected by the commission's order of refer- commissioners to abolish minimum penalties.
    ence; that what was discussed by the commis- With that purpose, too, I have a great deal
    sioners was more the phraseology in which of sympathy. I never liked this hog-tying
    the criminal law is expressed than the sub- of magistrates and judges in the matter of
    stance of the law itself) a task that in my punishment by making the penalty automatic
    judgment was long overdue. upon conviction and stating its amount, so that
    The Criminal Code was drawn, not by one a magistrate could give more but could not
    author, but by many. It came in the first give less. The result, of course, has been that
    instance from a report to the British House men whom magistrates, judges and juries
    of Commons, which was not adopted by that did not wish to punish were not convicted.
    house; 'and it did not become law in Great I myself have seen the criminal law evaded
    Britain, although it did· here. Year after year through the refusal of juries to convict before
    it has been amended and revamped in part, a judge whom they thought was unduly
    but never in whole. So the time finally came severe; and so an jnaccurate decision was
    when a big job had to be done; the given in order to correct what the jury_ felt
    remodelling of the statement of criminal law. was wrong. In the matter of these minimum
    Although it is the expression of the law penalties J the responsibility is not with the
    with which we are now concerned, in the magistrate but with parliament; so a magis-
    very nature of things ,the subst-an,ce of rlaw trate, faced with the facts, is likely to make
    also arises, in two ways. In the first instance, his finding in accordance with the penalty
    no two words in the English language mean attached to it, because he cannot proportion
    exaotly the same thing; so if the phraseology the penalty to the proper finding. The com-
    is changed) the thought is also changed. mission has decided to abolish that restriction
    Secondly, we are asked to re-enact ,the law and leave the matter of sentence in the
    in its new dress. Theref'Ore, for two reasoTIS, hands of the magistrate or the judge,
    the substance of the law-the whole Code- I notice, however, that the minister says
    is to be passed upon by this house. Ill! conse- he has not wholly followed the advice of the
    quence, I submit, this is a serious matter commissioners in this regard; and there is
    which should receive the maximum of care. something to be said for his point of view.
    When a young offender comes before the
    The commissioners themselves admit ,that court for a first offence, the thought is upper-
    in some ,respects they have altered and most that he may not have fully realized
    revised the substance of the Crimina,! Code. the gravity and the consequences of his act,
    For instance, they have abolished common and that3 having come to realize them, he may
    law offences-and for that I give them credit. never repeat the offence. But that can
    True, there were very few such offences -still hardly be argued in favour of the man who
    in existence, and it was seldom ,that charges drives when in a drunken state or when his
    under the common law were laid in· our ability to drive has been so affected that he
    courts. How many offences under the common endangers the lives of his fellow citizens,
    law had not been included in the Criminal because the admonition "if you drive, don't
    Code, I for one do not know. Others in the drink; if you drink don't drive" has been too
    house may have -seen a consolidation or even frequently repeated for anybody in this
    a treatise on what was left out Df the criminal country now to plead ignorance of the dangers
    law, but I never have. So it seems to me in and the wrong of driving a motor-car when
    view of the ancient legal principle that ignor- efficiency is affected. Furthermore, the
    ance of the law is no-excuse, and that citizens temptation of magistrates to be lenient when
    are expeoted to know the law and observe it, citizens, otherwise respectable, come before
    the least we can do is to have an- authorita- them, is very great. So there is a good deal
    tive statement of what it is. To me it is silly of support for what the minister said here,
    and ridiculous that citizens of Canada should that the minimum penalties for drunk driv-
    be calIed upon to search the ancient texts of ing have not been abolished.
    English courts in order to find out what is I am not so sure that I go with the min-
    prohibited in our own country. The commis- ister in the matter of offences against the
    sioners have removed any possibtlity of a Post Office. There is a tendency among depart-
    charge being laid in Canada for the commis- ments of government to make themselves
    sion of an offence prohibited by English com~ sacrosanct, a fourth estate somewhat different
    m'On law. Only those offences that are to be from ordinary men; and so you have special'
    MAY 15, 1952 271

    provisions in the Code relating to theft from definition of the offence. At the moment I
    the· Post Office. I suppose that could be justi- think it is also a sensible definition, but I
    fied as regards an employee of that depart- reserve judgment on this until we have read
    ment whose duty it is to sort mail. There is it more carefully in committee.
    upon him some special obligation, uberrimae Hon. Mr. Vien: Have you got the wording?
    fidei, with respect to the mail which he is
    handling, and perhaps special penalties might Hon. Mr. Roebuck: Yes.
    well be meted out to one who is in a position Hon. Mr. Vien: I do not want to interrupt.
    o.f trust of that kind who steals from the Post
    Office. But the provisions, as I see them, Hon. Mr. Roebuck: That is perfectly ·all
    are very general. On the boulevard in front right. It is sectio~ 60, and it reads.
    of my house in Toronto there is a box, put (1) Seditious words are words that express a sedi-
    there by the Post Office for the purpose of tious intention.
    (2) A seditious libel is a libel that expresses a
    assisting postal employees in the sorting of seditious intention.
    the. mail of the locality. This box is not on (3) A seditious conspiracy is an agreement be-
    my property, but on city property right in tween two or more person_s to carry out a seditious
    front of my house. Each day Post Office intention.
    employees put mail in that box and take mail (4) Without limiting the generality of the mean-
    from it, and frequently I see, lying beside it. ing of the expression "seditIous intention," every
    one shall be presumed to have a seditious intention
    bags designed for the carrying of mail. These who
    bags are left unguarded, and anybody could (a) teaches or advocates, or
    take them away. If some person assumed (b) publishes or circulates any writing that ad-
    that the bags had been abandoned by the force vocates, the use, without the authority of law, of
    as a means of accomplishing a governmental
    Peist Office, and carried them away, I suppose change within Canada.
    the magistrate would have to send that person
    to jail,' willy-nilly, if he determined that the Anybody can understand that.
    bags had been taken intentionally, and it was (5) Notwithstanding subsection (4), no person
    a case of theft. I would not go -that far. But shan he deemed to have a seditious intention by
    reason only that he intends, in good faith,
    this is a matter for discussion in committee. (a) to show that Her Majesty has been misled or
    I wish to congratulate the commissioners mistaken in her measures,
    on their boldness and (!OffirnOn sense in at (b) to point out errors or defects in
    la.st f4rnishing a definition of' sedition. In (1) the government or constitution·of Canada or
    the present code sedition is defined in these a province,
    words: "Seditious words are words that a (ii) the Parliament of Canada or the legislature of
    province, or
    express a seditiotls intention." (iii) the administration of justice in Canada,
    Spme Hon. Senators: Oh, ~h. (c) to procure, by lawful means, the alteration
    of any maHer of government in Canada, or
    .Hon. Mr. Roebuck: There is no definition (d) to point out, for the purpose of removal,
    of a seditious intention, so you are just like matters that produce or tend to produce feelings of
    hostility and ill-will between different classes of
    a little kitten chasing its tail in a circle. persons in Canada,
    ~arliaments 'and ministers in the past have
    shie.d away from the difficult task of defining Section 61 reads:
    the offence of sedition or of stating what 61. Everyone who
    sedition is. In his address to this house on (a) speaks seditious words,
    (b) publishes a seditious libel, or
    ~~onda:y last, the Minister of Justice pointed (c) is a party to a seditious conspiracy, is guilty
    out the difficulty of condensing in two or of an indictable offence and is liaole to imprison-
    three 'Sentences what constitutes "seditious ment for fourteen years.
    i~tention" as laid down in the reasons for Thus, honour,able senators, in a very short
    jU.d!iment in -whIch the definitions are to be paragraph which has taken me only .a moment
    found. Once -again let me point out that to read, we find the whole law of sedition
    ignoranc~ .of the law is.,nQ excuse, and that except, of course, as the words are defined
    the obligation to do this difficult thing, which by the judges in written judgments. Lawyers
    ministers of justice say tlJey cannot do, 1here- will sUn have plenty to study, but the
    for~ rests'·upon the shoulders of the .ordinary
    SUbstance of the law itself is all there. I
    -citizen. And if he is charged with a sedi- repeat that I give these commissioners credit
    t~ous. '.offence he finds that it is riQ excuse f.or for their boldness and common sense in
    him 'to. say that the 'law-givers of the drafting that section.
    so·
    4oIl).inion, had been loose in their expres- r am not so sure, howeverl about their wis-
    slo~' of ihe law that he did not know what the
    Ia."w was. I say that if· it is the duty of any- dom in dealing with treason. A section has
    been added tQ the Code, which to my mind
    body to ·find out what the law of sedition
    is, it is the duty of 'parliament. The c.om- is very doubtful. It is sec;tion 46.
    missioners have been bold enough to actually 46 (1) Everyone commits treason who, in Canada,
    (c) assists an enemy at war with Canada, or any
    put into the Code f.or ,the first time a readable armed forces against whom Canadian forces are
    55708-19
    272 SENATE

    engaged in hostilities whether or not a state of war have even g'One so far as to make it an
    exists between Canada and the cpuntry whose offence on the part of anyone to harbour a
    forces tliey are.
    member of the R.C.M.P. who deserts or is
    I saw i~ Saturday Night of May 31 an absent without leave. Those provisions might
    editorial .which e~presses my view rather be all right for a military force, but 1 do
    well. It €ays: . not like to see them applied- to a civilian force.
    . . . the extreme uncertainty and obscurity of the
    new definition of treason (a crime punishable by
    The Saturday Night editorial from \~hich
    death) which makes· it cove"r, not merely assistance I have already quoted has a paragraph on
    to an "enemy," but also assistance to "any armed this subject, too, that I ~hink is worth reading:
    forces against whom Canadian forces are engaged The ancient and invaluable distinction between
    in hostllfties whether or not a state of war exists," the police forces and the armed ~orces of the nation:
    The existence: of a state of war, and consequently are abolished by amendments which place·' the'
    of a defined enemy. is a matter of proclamation; R,C.M.P. on exactly the sarne footlng as the armed-
    the Queen tells her Ca,nadian subjects to whom forces, making it as grave an offence to coun~t11
    they may not lend assistance and when such refusal of duty by a member of the R.C.M.P. a$ by
    assistance becomes treasonable. No such official a soluler, sailor or airman. The R.C.M.P. Is a
    action is necessary to turn a legitimate action into civilian force. For that reason and that reason
    treason when the test is merely that the action alone, it has been possible to use it for many pur-,
    benefits any armed forces against whom Can,adian poses for which a mt1ita~y force would be most un",.
    forces are engaged- in hostllities. suitable, including the preservation of order during
    incidentally, "t1lls removal of the distinction be- strikes. 1£ it is to be treated as a military force in
    tween "hostilities" and "war" abolishes at one this respect it should be tUrhed into a military
    sweep all the "laws of war" as they have developed force, and it should be withdrawn from polic~"
    over the centuries, and creates a new situation to work.
    which no precedents or treati~s concerning war
    have any application. Among other things, it is That expresses my sentiment. I have
    not necessary that the Canadian forces in question every respect for the R.C.M.P., and ,I do·
    should have been ordered into hostilities by any
    action of the Canadian government; they may have not wish my words to be understood as
    been plunged into them by the commander of an critical of the force at all. I am critical of
    allied but alien army. It may be treason to aid an the law which we are enacting as applied to
    armed force_ which - th,e Canadian government does
    not even know is "engaged in hostilities" against the RC.M.P.
    our forces, for the amended Code says nothing Then, by way of congratulation tl? the
    about any action by the Canadian government commissioners, I wish to mention their state-
    whatever. ,
    ment with regard to magistrates.
    It seems to me -that in going so far we are
    taking a reckless step. The citizens of Canada Hen. :Mr. Farris: I am sorry, 1 did not hear'
    should- know what -alien- -forces it is treason- that. The statement is with regard to what?
    able to aid. There should -be some sort of Hen. Mr. Roebuck: Ma'gistrates-a class
    proclamation befor~ the highest offen-ce known of offi-cials with whom my friend from Van-
    to the criminal -law ,becomes -chargeable couver-Bouth (Hon. Mr. Farris) and I ha~e
    -against a -citizen. Aside from -that, . of course had something to do in the past. The com-
    anybody who assists the armed forces- of a missioners say, beginning at the bqtto;n::t _of
    nation with whom Canada is at war is guilty page 12 of their report:
    of treason 'f\nd I have no objecti1)n to the part Under the proposed procedure the spechil juris-
    of the Code which deals with that definite diction conferred upon magistrates will be exer-
    offence. My only objection is to -the indefi- cised only by those who are expressly apPOinted
    niteness of the ofien:.ce provided, for in the for that purpose. The requirement that m.agistrates
    must be expressly appointed to exercise jurisd,Jction
    paragraph that "1 read. under the Part is inserted in the expectation that
    Honourable senators may remember that the provinces will deSignate only qualified persons.-
    not long ago there W'f\S an amendment to the The following Is the definition of "magistrate":
    "'magistrate' means a person appointed t,lUder
    Criminal Code with respect to th-e Royal the law of the province, by whatever title he may
    Canadian Mounted Police, whereby that force be deSignated, who is specIally . authorized by the,
    was made a police. force apart from all terms of his appointment to exercise the jurisdic",
    tion conferred: upon a magistrate by this Part, but
    other police forces in this country. I under- does not include two, or more justices of the peac~
    stand that amenQ.,ment h<.ls :been -carried into sitting together." _ .
    the new Cod-e. The ordinary munidpal or
    provincial police i~ a civilian, not a military I may say, incidentally, that there is pro",:.
    force. In days gone ,by the R.C.M.P. also has vision whereby the jurisdiction of the magIs-
    trate may 'be somewhat enlarged, but I am
    been considered .a civilian force. For that glad to note that thls cannot 'be dQne witholJ,t.
    reason it has been usable at times i11l eon-
    necti-on with :strikes and; civilian disturbances the consent of the accused. Under the ,new
    Code the magistrate may try offences that
    where it could not have been used had it
    been a military force. Yet by this, Code we he could not try under the present Code, ,but
    are applying to the R.C,M.P. the provisions he may do so only with the cOl1sent of the
    dealing with such things as failure to obey accused, so in this regard there is no" trespass
    a commanding officer, and desertion-of all upon the ancient protections that have bee.D
    things, desertion from a: ,police force:!-and we thrown around an accused person. But noW
    MAY 15, 1952 273

    that 'the jurisdiction of a magistrate is reform, or be great benefit to the public


    eUlarged, ,·the requirement that magistrates generally. Therefore, I think it is as impor-
    must be expressly appointed to ~xercise juris"- tant to have a trained magistrate as it is to
    diction is a most salutary one. When I took have a trained judge of the County' Court or
    office as Attorney General of Ontario I found of the Supreme Court.
    a -great many magistrates who had had no My remarks, "hoIfourable senator~, have
    legal training whatever, each of whom sat in been sketchy, This measure, came into our
    his little jurisdiction as a sort of Crown Prince hands only- recently, and "I am impressed
    of the locality, and was paid by fees. One of with the thought that it should be studied
    my first official acts was to fire a considerable clause by clause in one of our committees.
    number of them-I think it was 89-by one Indeed it is almost impossible to do other-
    order in Council, divide the ·territory up into wise. 'The measure is long and 'detailed;
    sections, arid appoint oneJ two or three itiner~ almost every section has a background; and
    ary :magistrates for every section. It was a we shall require the explanations of the
    most beneficial change, but I €I?-countered con~ Department of Justice and those who have
    siderable difficulty because of my determina~ been engaged in the drafting of the bill to
    tion not to appoint to the Bench anyone who inform us' of the reasons for the changes.
    W~S· not qualified for it. Although I had many Only then 'will we appreciate what changes
    battles over thi.s question, during my term are proposed, and the reasons for them. It
    of office, I made no appointment of a magis~ will'consume a good deal of time to consider
    trate whQ was not a lawyer. this measure step by step, but it will be
    -:Hon. Mr. Beaubien: Why? worth while.
    :·Hon. Mr. Roebuck: Because.t.he administra~ I recall that when the combined Code
    tion of law requires the" knowledge of a lawyer. affecting the ~hree armed forces was c?n~
    . . . " s i d e r e d in this house it was referred-I thmk
    .'Hon. t.ir. ~~ge,ssen: Hear, hear. to the !Banking and Commerce Committee-
    : Hob.. -Mr. Roebuck: While there; are .some and a number of my fellow senators and I
    laymen who by diligence and special apti~ sat in consideration .of it for. some days. We
    tudes, .and by opportunity, perhaps, know made no less than eighty~three ·amendments
    more about law than some lawyers, I think to the draft bill, all of them with the consent
    the general ·rule may be laid down-with of those persons who prepared it. That
    which even laymen will agree-that the man indicates that they were impressed by the
    who goes to college to learn law, and spends logic.of our approach to the subject. I think
    sorp.e. ye~rs in .the practi~e, of it, is surely a we can handle this bill in much the same
    speCl.cilist in law. And as we have an adminis~ way. True, it'may not be,necessary to make
    tratiori'.,·of· law, certainly we want persons as many 'as eighty~three . amendments, for I
    aa.ministering it who know ~vhat theJ." .are believe that many of the sec-tic;ms win be car~
    t~lki:qg about, and to whom .other lawyers ried almost on" the reading of them. Never~
    m~Y" address their re'marks with a certain thehiss a 'great -deal of care 'is required, for
    amoUl]..t of deference,.,. know~ng that 'the when .this billleaYes the house with the sanc~
    o~cl,lpant ,af th~ Bench :qas gon~ through the tion' of the committee that has studied it, it
    'Same'. experiences and studies ~s 1hey have will be receiv.ed \Yith respect In,.another place.
    themselves. . . .
    I am .prepared, honourable senators, to. vote
    :However, the Code does not require that for second reading of the bill, notwithstal1ding
    only lawyers be appoip.ted to s\lch ,positions. some difficulties .which I and others 'have
    I.'.am only reminiscing when I 'tell you that encountered in approaching it, and the lack
    when! had the responsibility and the author~ of cppl,es of the p1easure and. th~ documents
    ity I 'appointed nobody except lawyers to the supporting it, The bill, 1 t,hmk, sh?uld
    Bench. I may· add that my 'successors in receive second reading as soon as pOSSIble.
    office followed that :example, apd with v~ry , In'sayini{that I do not mean to cut off any..
    few exceptions-certainly not in the crowded body else ·who. wishes to speak; ,bllt let. us
    ce:nb;'es-bave magistrates been appointed give it ·secop.d reading as soon' as pOSSIble
    Who were not ·lawyers. In my opiriion it is and devote ourselves to an inch~by~inch study
    a~:-necessary to' have an informed magistrate of 11s .provisions .ill: committee.
    - as 'it is ',to have an iIlformed judge. Indeed,
    , I :~av~ aJwclYs felt that Jhe:- most impc;>r"tant Some Hon. Senators: Hear, hear.
    courts"in ;Canada are not the.·app·eal courts, Hon. Mr. Vien: Honourable senators, not~
    Which deal with civil cases 'invblving millions withstanding the diligent efforts that hilVe
    ?f'd911ars, but t~e Imlice courts, Which 'deal been made to .have an adequate number of
    1l1- hliman lives. 'A deci.~i9n from such a court .. d
    rnay,:Ol'l the one hand, be tr",gicj or on ,the copies of this measure placed in our han S
    o~lier' hand it tnay be beneficent.: A ina:gis~ today, we are now under the same dis~bility
    tr'ate's - j'udgment 'may meari'"'happiriess 'or as we were yesterday.
    55708-19.
    274 SENATE

    . -I agree with the suggestion of the honour- would appreciate the opportunity of know~
    able gentleman from Toronto-Trinity (Hon. ing something of the background of. the
    Mr. Roebuck),. that the bill should not be circumstan~es connected with the matters
    delayed. in. going to committee. However, under discu~sion, and C!ur records shOUld be'
    under the circumstances, I think the honour- a vaila)Jle to ~hose who wish to see _them. .'
    able leader of the government should give I take it. that the greater part of the
    us some assurance that in having agreed bill will. be adopted without much discus.. ,
    to second reading we are not necessarily sion, but on certain specific matters some
    committed to the principle of the bill. With debate is likely to arise. So not only would
    that };>rovlsion, . I do not object to the bill I not oppose reference to committee, but I
    now being read a second time and referred would facilitate it and indeed urge: it. By
    to committee. this course a considerable amount of infor_
    Hon; Mr. Roebuck: May I have the indul- mation will be forthcoming which .may be
    gence of the house to add a word? If we useful to- members in the other place, par- 1
    now give the bill second reading, Mr. Speaker ticularly if, because of the pressure of'
    will take note, and all honourable senators other business, the bill comes before them:
    will observe, that we are doing so without late in the session. In this way we might
    sufficient knowledge of the measure, so that turn the other cheek and set a good example,
    when it comes back to the house for third because sometimes bills are received by
    reading no rules will be pleaded against us us late in the session and we have to deal
    to prevent a thorough discussion at that time. with them without the benefit of any great
    amount of discussion in the other hous,e..
    Hon. Mr. Vien: That would apply not only
    to the bill in the third reading stage but also Hon.- A. MarcoUe: I was of course, very
    while it is in committee. The rule is that much inte;rested in the add.ress of the honour~
    second reading having been given to a bill, able senator from Toronto-Trinity (Hpn. Mr.
    it has been adopted in principle, and we Roebuck). 1 understand that by voting for
    should then address ourselves to it clause the second reading we are- not committed
    by clause.· Assurarice should be given that to the bill as it stands. It has been stated
    we will not be precluded in committee from more than once in this chamber that our
    discussing the principle of the bill. giving of second reading to a bill does not
    mean that we are Dbligated to adopt it
    Hon. Mr. Robertso.n: Honourable senators, until we have had more enlightenment OUi
    I am entirely in agreement with what has the subject-m~tter.
    been said as to the lack of facilities for the
    proper consid,e~a tion of this bill on se'cond I should like to know whether the com~
    readiI).g, and I' now give assurance that I mittee 'to whom the bill is to be referred
    shall 'do everything in my power. to see. that will 4av~ the' right to call people before it
    full opportunity.js given for 'adequate 'con- to give .th~ir o:pinions -on these amendments?
    sideration of th,e me-lisure. This is a large This is one of the m·ost important measures
    and an important l?UI, and' I' realize how i.vith which we have ever lJ,ad to deal. ~t
    necessary it is that every 'opportunity should is not 11 matter of conferring more or less
    be_ given for the examination of ·it in -com- ordinary powers; the hill deals i,vUh human
    mittee, and for further and perhaps a more rights and affects human liberties;' under_.
    enlightened discussion of it on third reading. its provisions persons can be sent to jails,
    to reformatories, or otherwise dealt with.
    Some honourable senators may recall that This" morning -I received a letter' from a
    before the introcluction of the bin there was lawy'er in Montreal who has long been
    some suggestion that we might follow the interested in criminal justice. He· said he
    precedent establi~hed.'in 1914 w~en the Rail- thought that he and others who were like~
    way Act was considered, and that, in moving minded should have the right to be heard ..
    the bilI to committee, 1 might ex.'tertd to the I ask' that the committee shall have the
    other place an invitation .to have some of power to send for people or to receive -the
    its members join' with us in considering view~ of those who want to app~ar ;before -it..
    the measure. I would' have been embar~
    rassed had that suggestion been pressed, for Hon. Mr. Robertson: 1 doubt whether
    I do not think any particular benefit would anything 1 sayar refrain -from saying will
    have accrued; but after some discussion it clothe the committee with more or less power.
    was dropped. ~t W9uld seem that our com- than it riow ha·s. My understanding is that
    when legislation is referred, to any of our
    mittee could proceed more rapidly, with its standing committee$, it is for that committee
    work if it did not have to wait from time to decide whether it shall exercise any or
    to time on the' convenience of others. How- all of the powers vested in it; and if .it
    ever, it is quite possible that members from requires extra powers, the propei' procedure,
    the other place and other interested parties 1 suppose, would be to ask the Senat~ for
    MAY 15, 1952 275

    thein. But it is my impression that the index, though it may not be the kind to which
    c'ommittee of its own volition _can do what my honourable friend refers. I understand
    the honourable senator has suggested. that the department is preparing -a list of
    Hon. Mr. Vien: Those powers are given to the sections which have been changed', and
    all standing committees when they are so on.
    created, at the beginning of the session.
    Hon. Mr. Haig: We have that now. I think
    Hon. Mr. Robertson: I think so. Certainly I the honourabl.e senator from Inkerman (Han.
    -would not seek to limit their powers by any Mr. Hugessen) wa's correct. We already have,
    statement of mine. in the report of· the commissioners, a table
    Hon. Mr. Vien; When the bill is sent to com- of the sections of the -present Code and what
    mittee it will probably be desirable-though has been done with them. My memory on
    -that is for the committee to determine-that ·these matters is that the indexes are never
    a rec'ord be taken, in vie\v of the fact that
    ·tl~is measure was introduced in the Senate.
    prepared until after the bills are passed by
    parliament. I think that was the case in con-
    . Jion. Mr. Hugessen: May ~ offer' one obser- nection with the Bankruptcy'Act. . It is quite
    'vat,ion on the discussion that has taken ,place?
    I.t seems to me that the only principle for possible that in committee we may accept the
    which we are voting when we vote for the suggestion of the honourable .senator from
    second reading of this bill is that the' Criminal Toronto~Trinity (Han. Mr. Roebuck), and that
    'Code of Canada be recodified; and' that leaves would - necessitate a change in the proposed
    us 'Completely free to discuss and suggest definition in the bill before us. Further, the
    'amendments of anyone section. If that is the Senate may· take action to strike out some
    understanding, I do not see why any honour- clauses and to restore others that are in
    able member could have ·any objecti'On to the present Code. I think we would run
    approving second reading -at this time.
    into trouble here with an index.
    ,The motion was agreed to, and- the bill was
    read' the second time. Hon. Mr. Robertson: Honourable senators,
    I hope to have this bill before our committee
    REFERRED TO COMMITTEE next Tuesday morning. If my \-honourable
    The Hon. the Speaker: When shall thi-s bill colleague from Toronto-Trinity (Hon. Mr.
    be read the third time? Roebuck) would give me a memorandum
    Hon. Mr. Robertson: I move that this bill be later this afternoon as to exactly what he has
    referred to the Standing Committee 'On Bank~ in mind, I shall refer it -to the Minister of
    ing ant;:1: Comm-erce. Justice.
    Hon. Mr. Roebuck: In that connection 'may The motion was agreed to.
    I make a suggestion, to the leader? There is
    no ind-ex in the bill. To be iJroper,ly studied,
    it Feeds an index. I am sure that one must INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT
    have been prepared. Am I right? BANK BILL
    Hon. Mr. Hugessen: I think that for a bill FIRST READING
    of this kind it is not the practice to have an Hon. Mr. Robertson ·presented ~ill Y-8, an
    index when it is first introduced" but that Act to amend the Industrial Development
    when it is finally published ran index is Bank Act.
    prepared in conjunction with it. I do not
    think an index is properly part of a bill when The bin was read the first time.
    it is introduced.
    The Hon. the Speaker: Honourable senators,
    Hon. Mr. Roebuck: No, I did not mean that. when shan this bill be read the second time?
    What I say is that" we sh'Ould be provided
    with an index in the committee when we are Hon~ Mr. Robertson: Monday next.
    stud;ying this bill. No doubt an ind.ex has
    been prepared. I know that it is not usually NATIONAL RAILWAYS
    included in a bill, hut there is no earthly AUDITORS BILL
    reason why the officers could not produce on€
    and give' each ot us a copy. My suggestion ANSWER TO INQUIRIES
    is that the leader intimate to them that we On the motion to adjourn:
    would like an index. Hon. Mr. Robertson: Honourable senators,
    Hon. Mr. Robertson: It is my impression on the m-otion .to adjourn, may I answer three
    that the minister, whether publicly or questions which were asked on the .second
    privately, mentioned, the preparation of an reading of the National Railways Auditor.s
    MAY 20, 1952 287

    grant a certificate specifying that a certain said by the honourable senator from St. Boni-
    examination has been passed and that certain face (Hon. Mr. Howden), that the bill before
    approval has been extended. That is as far us is more or less a replica of the Roddick
    as it can go. The board may, however, Bill.
    induce provincial governments to pass legis- The Roddick Bill had to do with the medical
    lation which will make its decisions law in profession, and was enacted in 1913. It has
    those provinces. Without that legislation, the therefore been in forq.e for forty years; and it
    decision of' the National Dental Examining is because of that bill that T, although born in
    Board of Canada will have no legal constitu- Quebec and a graduate of Laval University,
    tional validity in any province. While r1 in Montreal, have been practising medicine in
    would read this legislation with great care Ontario for the last thirty-eight years. I was
    and with some suspicion for fear that it one of the first beneficiaries of that legisla-
    infringes on provincial authority, at the tion. But before being allowed to practise in
    moment I do not see that it does. Ontario I had to have the degree of M.D.
    Han. Mr. Paterson: Will the honourable from my own province, an,d then I was
    senator read section 7 as well? required to submit to an additional examina-
    tion under the auspices of what is still called
    Hon. Mr. Roebuck: It reads: today the' Medical Council of Canada, which
    7. The Board shall have power to was the offspring of the Roddick Bill. After
    (a) estabItsh a qualification in dentistry such
    that it will be recognized by the appropriate having successfully passed that examination
    licensing bodies in all the provinces of Canada; I had to be accepted by the provincial author-
    I see nothing wrong with that. It just says ities in Ontario, and to pay the required regis-
    tration fee. Under the provisions of the Rod-
    the board shall have power to establish a dick Bill, had I been more than ten years in
    qualification in dentistry that will be
    recognized. practice I would have been free to hang up
    my shingle in any province where I chose
    Hon. Mr. Euler: Must it be recognized? to go, without any further ado other than
    Hon. Mr. Roebuck: No. payment of the provincial fee.
    Hon. Mr. Euler: I was wondering about that, As I say, I think this bill is more or less
    because I think it was said a moment ago a copy of the Roddick Bill. If there are any
    that when a dentist has this dental certificate differences between -the two, thls sh-ould
    he can go and practise in any province upon be an improvement on the earlier one,
    paying the license fee. because of the experience that has been
    gained since 1913. I do not think the bill
    Hen. Mr. Roebuck: That is the idea, but it presents any challenge to provincial rights
    Is not In the bill. or prerogatives.
    Hon. Mr. Euler: Must a provincial body As I see it, the purpose of the bill is simply
    grant a dentist the right to practise if he to help dentists who wlsh to move from one
    holds a national dental certificate? province to anoth-er to practise th-eir pro-
    Hon. Mr. Roebuck: I take it that that is fession. There is nothing of a -compulsory
    not so. nature at all about the measure. Those who
    . Hon. Mr. Euler: Well, that constitutes an desire to take advantage of its provisions will
    interference. be free to do so, upon complying with the
    laws of the province into which they move.
    Hon. Mr. Roebuck: It says that the board A dentist who intends to practise in the prov-
    shall have the power Hto establish a quali- ince in which he ,gr-aduatesJ would of ,course
    fication in dentistry such that it will be not submit to the additional examlnation and
    re'cognized", not that it shall be recognized. pay the fee required. of one who moves to
    Hon. Mr. Howden: Use the word "accepted" another province.
    instead of "recognized". This explains the hill as I understand it,'
    in the light of my personal experience with
    Hon. Mr. Roebuck: It means about the same the Roddick Bill, which g,we birth to the
    thing. It is their, desire, not their legal existing Medical Council of Canada.
    authority.
    The Hon. the Acting Speaker: Honour-able
    Hon. Mr. Vien: It says Uthe Board shall senaiors, the question is on the motion for
    have power." the seconru· reading of the hill. Is it your
    Hon. G. Lacasse: Honourable senators may pleasure to carry the motion?
    be interested to hear from a man who is a Some Hon. Senators: Carried.
    product of the first year of operation of what
    was known as th~ Roddick Bill. I took advan- Hon. Mr. Vien! No.
    tage of that legislation right after its enact- The motion was agreed to, ·and the bill
    ment, and I understand from what has been was read the second- timeJ on division.
    288 SENATE

    REFERRED TO COMMITTEE DIVORCE BILLS


    Hon. Mr. Gershaw moved that the bill be SECOND READINGS
    referred: to the Standing Committee on Mis- Han. Mr. Haig, for the Chairman of the
    cellaneous Private Bills. Standing Committee on Divor-ce, moved th~
    Hon. Mr. Vien: Honourable senators, may second reading of the following bills.
    I suggest that the provincially -constituted Bill Z-8, an Act for the relief of Leo
    bodies which control these professional mat- Kendali.
    ters in each province be ,notified of the date Bill A-9, an Act for the relief of Tom
    at which this bill will be considered in com- Barnard Clayton Gould.
    mittee and invited: to express their views to Bill B-9, an Act for the relief of Helene
    the committee? Laura Solomon Wiseberg.
    Bill C-9, an Act for the relief of J oa~
    Hon. Mr. Roebuck: It seems to me, Borland White.
    honourable senators, that notice of'the date Bill D-9, an Act for the relief of John
    of the committee's hearing; on the bill should Laurence McDonough.
    be sent to the: Attorneys General of all the Bill E-9, an Act for the relief of Jean
    provinces, so that if they have any objection Wiseman Schwartz.
    to the bill we may hear of it. Bill F-9, an Act for the relief of Judith
    Hon.. Mr. Vien: That is' agreeable 10 me. I Sorel Riven Gainsbury.
    should Uke to have the house express for- Bill 0-9, an Act for the relief of Agnes I

    mal approv.al of that suggestion, and if Bertha Baugh Guimont. .


    necessary I will move that that be done. Bill H-9, an Act for the relief of Genevieve
    Flora Agatha Brown Smith.
    Hon. Mr. Haig: Excuse me, but I do not Bill I-9, an Act for the relief of Marcelle
    think that is a matter for the house. That Alice Beliveau Martin.
    can be attended to in committee. Bill J -9, an Act for the relief of Marcel
    Despatis.
    Han. Mr. Roberfson: The Chairman of the
    Bill K-9, an Act for. the relief of Joseph
    Miscellaneous Private Bills Committee (Hon. Wilfrid Ernest Senecal.
    Mr Bouffard) is present and will have noted
    the suggestion that has been made. I am The motion was agreed to, and the bills
    sure he . will act accordingly. If, when the were read the second time, on division.
    bill is reported back from committee. any CRIMINAL CODE BILL
    senators thinks that the attorneys general of NOTICE OF C.oMMITTEE MEETING
    the provinces were not notified, that wouldOn the motion to adjourn.
    be a very pertinent question to r1l:ise here at
    Han. Mr. Roberison: Honourable senators)
    that time. It seems to me that, as stated by
    I wish to remind the house that the Standing
    the leader opposite, (Han. Mr. Hatg), notice of
    Committee on Banking and Commerce will
    the committee's hearing on th,e bill is a matter
    meet as soon as the Senate rises to resume
    consideration of the Crhninal Code Bill. ,May
    for the committee to consider, and that no
    formal action by the Senate is necessary.I add this: I assured the Minister of Justice
    that as far as lay within our power we would
    Han. Mr. Roebuck: That is satisfactory do all we could to see that the bill was dealt
    to me. with as expeditiously as it is possible to make
    The' motion of Han. Mr. Gershaw was a thorough study of the measure.
    agreed to and the bill was referred to The Senate adjourned until tomorrow f\t
    committee. 3 p.m.
    MAY 21. 1952 289

    THE SENATE PRIVATE BILL


    REFUND OF PARLIAM:ENTARY FEES
    Hon. Mr. Duffus moved-:
    Wednesday. May 21. 1952 'l'hat the parliamentary fees paid upon Blil E~7,
    an Act respecting The Sisters of Charity of the
    The Senate met at 3 p.m., the Acting House of Providence, be refunded to Messrs. Hen~
    Speaker (Hon. J. H. King, 'p.e.) in the Chair. derson, Willoughby and Company, Kingston, On w

    tario, . solicitors for petitioners, less printing and


    Prayers and routine proceedings. translation costs.
    The moti-on was agreed -t-o.
    CRIMINAL CODE BILL
    FIRST REPORT OF COMMITTEE DIVORCE BILLS
    Hon. Mr. Hayden presented and moved THIRD READINGS
    -concurrence in the first report of the Stand~ Hon. Mr. Haig.. for the Chairman' of the i
    Standing Committee on Divorce, moved the
    lng Committee on Banking and Commerce on
    ~inH-8, an Act respecting the Criminal Law. third reading of the following bills: I
    The report was read by the Clerk Assistant Bm Z-B, an Act for the relief of Leo
    as follows:
    The StandIng Committee on BankIng .and Com~
    Kendall.
    Bill A-9, an Act for the relief of Tom I
    merce to whom was referred Bill H-S, an Act Barnard Clayton GOUld.
    respecting the Criminal Law, beg leave to report Bm B-9, an Act for the relief of Helene
    as follows: Laura Solomon Wiseberg.
    1. Your committee I.ecommenq. that they be Bill C~9, an Act for the relief of Joan
    a4th6rtzed to send for persons, papers and records.
    '2. Your committee also recommend that leave be
    Borland White.
    give~ them to sit - during all adjournments of the Bill D~9, an Act for the relief of John
    Senate, and also during sittings of the Senate, Laurence McDonough.
    ,3. Your committee further recommend that Bill E~91 an Act for the relief of Jean
    authority be granted for the printing of 800 copies Wiseman Schwartz.
    in English and 200 copies in French of its proceed-
    hlgs of the said bUl, and that rule 100 be suspended Bm F-9, an Act for the relief of Judith
    in relation to the said printing. Sorel Riven Gainsbury.
    Bill G-9, an Act for the relief of Agnes
    The motion was agreed to.
    Bertha Baugh Guimont.
    Bill H~9, an Act for the relief 'of .Genevieve
    PRIVATE BILL Flora ·Agatha Brown Smith.
    REPORT OF COMMITTEE Bill I~9, an Act for the relief of Marcelle
    Hon. Mr. Bouffard presented the report of Alice Beliveau Martin.
    tlW 'Standing Committee on Miscellaneous Bill J-9, an Act for the relief of Marcel
    Private Bills ,on Bill F~71 an Act to incorporate De.spatis.
    Bill K~9, an Act for the relief of Joseph
    the Equitable Insurat:lce Company. Wilfrid Ernest SeI1ecal.
    The report was read by the CleTk Assistant The motion was agreed to, and the bills
    as follows: were read the third time, and passed, on
    The Standing Committee on Miscellaneous Private division.
    Bills,. to whom was referred Bill F~7, an Act to
    Incorpor~te the Equltable Insurance Company, have,
    in obedience to the' order, of reference of May 8, CANADIAN NATIONAL RAILWAY (TER-
    1952, examined the said b1I1 and now beg leave to RACE TO KITIMATI BILL
    r.eport: the same with the following amendments:
    . 1:'Page 1, line 13: Delete "The Equitable Insur~ ~ECOND READING
    an~.e . Company" and substitute "Equitable Fire
    ~siiian,ce Company ,0£ Canada."
    Hon. Gray Turgeon moved the second read-
    ;~. Page 1, line 14:, Delete "La Compagnie ing of Bill 192, an Act respecting the ·con ..
    d Assurance Equitable" and substitute "Compagnie struction of a line of railway by Canadian
    Eq1,lita"ble d'Assurance Ineendie du Canada." National' Railway Company from Terrace
    In the Title to' Kitimat, in 'the province of British
    -':3. -Delete "The Equitable I.nsurance Company" Columbia.
    and SUbstitute "Equitable Fire Insurance Company He said: Honourable senators; it gives me
    of Canada." .
    very much pleasure to move the second read~
    ~ ~e Hon. the Acting Speaker: Honourable ing of this bill, regardless of the fact that
    se,natOrs, when shall these amendments be the bill!f passed will bring about an expendi-
    ~ken into consideration.? ture of money. It authorizes the Canadian
    National Railway Company to build, at an
    "Hon. Mr. Bouffard: Next sitting. estimated cost of $10 million, 46 miles of
    31-1952-H railroad from Terrace to !Gtimat in the
    JUNE 20. 1952 479

    THE SENATE CANADIAN NATIONAL RAILWAYS


    CAPITAL REVISION BILL
    PRINTING OF COMMITTEE PROCEEDINGS
    Friday. June 20. 1952 Hon. J. W. de B. Farris presented the
    report of the Standing Committee on Bank~
    The Senate met at 3 p,m., the Speaker 'in iug and Commerce on Bill 308, an Act to
    the Chair. revise the capital structure of the Canadian
    ~rayer$ and routine proceedings. National Railway Company and to provide
    for certain other financial matters,
    TREATY OF PEACE (JAPAN) BILL The report was read by the Clerk Assistant
    REPORT OF C01'lMITTEE as follows:
    The Standing Committee on BankIng and Com-
    Hon. Mr. Lambert presented the report of merce, to whom was referred Bill 30B, an Act to
    the Standing Committee on External Rela~ revise the capital structure of the Canadian National
    tions on Bill 210, an Act to provide for carry- RaIlway Company and to provide for certain other
    financial matters, beg leave to report as follows:
    ,jng into effect the Treaty of Peace between Your committee recommend that they be author~
    Canada and Japan. ized to print 500 copies in English and 200 copies
    in French of its proceedings on the said bill, and
    The report was read by the Clerk Assistant that Rule 100 be' suspended in relation to the said
    printing.
    as follows:
    The 'Standing Committee on External Relations, to The Hon. the Speaker: Honourable sena~
    whom was referred Bill 210, an Act to provide for tors, when shall this report be considered?
    carrying into effect the Treaty of Peace between
    Canada and Japan, have in obedience to the order Hon. Mr, Farris: With leave, II move that
    of reference of June 18, 1952, examined the said bill, the report be concurred in now. I
    and now beg leave to report the same without any
    amendment. The motion was agreed to. I

    THIRD READING
    I,
    IMMIGRATION BILL
    The Hon. the Speaker: Honourable sena~ NOTIC,E OF MOTION
    tors, when shall this piIl pe read the third Hon. Mr. Robertson: Honourable senators,
    time? I beg to give notice that at the next sitting
    'Hon. Mr. Robertson: With leave of the 1 shall move:
    Senate, now. That the Standing Committee on Immigration and
    Labour be authorized to examine the subject-matter
    The motion was agreed: to, and. the bill was of Bill 105, an Act respecting Inunigration, presently
    before parliament, in advance of such bill reaching
    read the third time, and passed·. the Senate, and that the said committee be author~
    ized to send for persons, papers and records,
    CRIMINAL CODE BILL Honourable senators, by Monday afternoon
    REPORT OF COMMITTEE I shall have ascertained what progress has
    been made with this bill and whether a
    Hon. J. W. de B. Farris presented: the practical purpose would be served by con~
    report of the Standing Committee on Banking sidering it in committee in accordance with
    .and Commerce on Bill H-8, an Act respecting' the notice which I have given. I shall advise
    the Criminal Law. the house at that time.
    . The report was read by the Clerk Assistant
    CANADIAN SHIPS AND SEAMEN
    as foHqws:
    INQUIRY
    The Standing Committee on Banking and Com-
    merce, to whom was referred Bill H-B, an Act
    On the notice of inquiry by' Han, Mr.
    respecting the Criminal Law, have in obedience to Duff respecting Canadian ships and seamen:.
    the order of reference of M.ay 2, 1952, considered Hon. Mr. Robe:dson: Honourable senators,
    the said bill, and now beg leave to report as this inquiry has been on the Order Paper
    follows:
    for some time. It is a difficult one to
    Your committee recommend that the bill be not answer, but the information will be given as
    further proceeded with at the present session.
    soon as I can possibly obtain it.
    The Hon. the Speaker: Honourable sena~
    tors, when shall this report be considered? l(OR'rHWEST TERRITORIES BILL
    Hon. Ml', Farris: With leave, I move that SECOND READING
    the report be concuned In now. Hon. F. W. Gershaw moved the second
    reading of Bill 337, an Act respecting the
    The motion was agreed to. Northwest Territories.
    55708-32
    .~

    i.'!i-'

    22 STANDING COMMITTEE KA
    agree with its principle. The effect of it will be to endeavour to drive out 3b 1952

    private enterprise altogether and give us a purely socialistic state, and I do not
    intend to vote for that.
    A32.. 1
    THE SENATE OF CANADA
    Hon. Mr. ABBOTT: In so far as it tends to do anything, it tends to minimize I qS?,
    the danger of socialism. c. 1
    Hon. Mr. HAIG: I think not.
    Hon. Mr. ABBOTT: It may not go far enough, but it at least reduces the
    danger of public ownership.
    Hon. Mr. HAIG: That is my motion.
    Hon. Mr. ABBOTT: Your motion, if it were accepted, would increase the
    the incentive to socialize these companies.
    Hon. Mr. HAIG: Well, it will be on the table and I think the government
    wants this legislation. , PROCEEDINGS
    Hon. Mr. ABBOTT: It is not my legislation. I am here to raise moneys
    for the government.,
    OF THE
    Hon. Mr. HAIG: It does not affect your money raising.
    Hon. Mr. ABBOTT: Yes, it does.
    Hon. Mr. HAIG: No, you are cutting down here. STANDING COMMITTEE ON
    The CHAIRMAN: The effect of tabling this bill would be to continue the
    rates presently in force, and they are higher than the rates here. BANKING AND COMMERCE
    Hon. Mr. HAIG: That may be so.
    The CHAIRMAN: You are penalizing all the people in Canada. To whom was referred the Bill (H-8), intituled:
    Hon. Mr. HAIG: This is the only instrument I have got to use, and I An Act respecting the Criminal Law.
    must use ·the instrument I have.
    The CHAIRMAN: As long as the honourable senators understand the effect
    of tabling the bill is to inflict a higher rate than the government thinks is
    necessary for raising the revenues for this country this year. Are you ready
    for the question?
    Some Hon. SENATORS: Question.
    The Honourable SALTER A. HAYDEN, Chairman
    The CHAIRMAN: Those in favour of Senator Haig's motion to table the bill
    please raise their hands. Those opposed? I declare the motion lost. Shall
    I report the bill without amendment?
    Some Hon. SENATORS: Carried.
    The committee thereupon adjourned. WEDNESDAY, JUNE 11, 1952

    APPENDICES
    "A" Clauses where corroboration is now required and where the require-
    ') ment of corroboration has been dropped, replaced or added.
    "8." Disposition of Sections of the, Criminal' Code in the BiII.
    'z.',

    ;'
    .I
    EDMOND CLOUTIER, C.M.G .. O.A .. n.s.p.
    QUEEN'S PRINTER AND CONTROLLER OF STATIONERY
    onAWA. 1952 '
    -1"

    BANKING AND COMMERCE

    THE HONOURABLE SALTER ADRIAN HAYDEN, CHAIRMAN

    The Honourable Senators


    Aseltine Gershaw McGuire
    Baird Gouin McIntyre :;
    Beaubien *Haig McKeen
    Bouffard Hardy McLean
    Buchanan Hawkins Nicol MINUTES OF PROCEEDINGS
    Burchill Hayden . Paterson
    Campbell Horner Pirie
    Crerar Howard Pratt WEDNESDAY, June 11, 1952.
    Daigle Howden Quinn
    Hugessen Raymond Pursuant to adjournment and notice the Standing Committee on Banking
    David
    Davies King *Robertson and Commerce met this day 'at 4.15 p.m.
    Dessureault Kinley Roebuck
    Taylor
    ; Present: The Honourable Senators:-Hayden, Chairman; Beaubien, Davies,
    Emmerson Lambert Dessureault, Emmerson, Farris, Fogo, Gouin, Howard, McDonald, McIntyre,
    Euler MacKinnon Vaillancourt
    Vien Robertson, Vaillancourt, Vien and Wilson. 15.
    Fallis MacLennan
    Farris Marcotte Wilson Mr. John F. MacNeill, Q.C., Law Clerk and Parliamentary Counsel, and the
    Fogo McDonald Wood official reporters of the Senate, were in attendance.
    The Chairman presented to the Committee an interim report of the
    * ex otJicio member. sub-committee appointed to consider Bill H-8, intituled: "An Act respecting
    the Criminal Law".
    It was ordered that the interim Report be incorporated in the printed
    proceedings of the C o m m i t t e e . '
    At 6.15 p.m. the committee adjourned to the call of the chairman.
    ORDER OF REFERENCE
    Attest.
    , Extract from the Minutes of Proceedings of the Senate for Thursday.
    15th May, 1952. JAMES D. MAcDONALD,
    Clerk of the Committee.
    "Pursuant to the Order of the Day, the Senate resumed the adjourned
    debate on the motion for the second reading of the Bill (H-8), intituled: "An
    Act respecting the Criminal Law".
    The question being put on the said motion,
    It was resolved in the affirmative.
    The said Bill was then read the second time, and-
    After further debate, it was-
    Referred to the Standing Committee on Banking and Commerce."
    L. C. MOYER,
    Clerk of the Senate ..
    I
    ,I

    3
    lI96M-li
    ~',

    :5~
    MINUTES OF EVIDENCE
    ~ THE SENATE
    1
    c;;! OTTAWA, Wednesday, June 11, 1952.
    ; The Standing Committee on Banking and Commerce, to whom was referred
    Bill H-8, an Act respecting the Criminal Law, met this day at 4.30 p.m.
    ~
    .'.' .Hon. Mr. HAYDEN in the Chair.
    . . . . ~

    't~: The CHAIRMAN: . Gentlemen, some weeks ago when the Criminal Code came
    b~re us we tried our hand at,it in committee for half a day, and we did not
    ~ very far. Then we appointed a subcommittee, ~d this subcomnUttee has
    '~ sitting fairly steadily in the interim, ,and it was felt at this time, as tp.e
    seSsion is getting to a close, that we should mrute an interim report on the work
    tbat we have, done. That is the purpose fOr' calling together the general
    committee today. When the subcommittee started in on this work it was
    provided with. a number of lists. We were provided with a list prepared by
    tl1~ Department of Justice purporting to be a list of the sections in the bill
    inClQrporated without any change other than a change in form from the present
    .~~; then.a ~ond list purporting t~ relat~to ,the se~tions in the bill which
    ,were brought In from the Code, but m respect of which there were changes
    no{\!smly in form but in substance.;, Then w;e ha4 a, third list of sections which
    w:~~ dropped, and we had a fourth list of what we called "New Sections
    Ac;W~". Now" then, when :we got that material in the first place it was
    in<;lp~plete, "and it was only a week ago that we got the balance of the lists
    bl'o~ght right down to section 748, which is the last section in the bill.
    ~.~"}~When we started out in committee we ,took a run at the first 124 sections
    in)he bill, just to see what procedure we shopld follow, and to make a check
    QP~ these various lists that were given to us. In the course of the first 124
    sections we ran into sections which were in our list as having been changed
    iIJ,,~ubstance, and into .sections which were in our list as having been changed
    iJjrJorm, but not changed in substance and we ran into some new sections.
    We found in connection with some of the sections where our list. had beeni
    changed in form only, that they had been changed in substance as well. So~
    ~eimmediately concluded that if we were going to do a proper job in dealing
    with the Criminal Code, that ultimately we would have to examine everY"
    section of the bill. Now, that;is a terrific job, so we decided next to deal
    ~rst,with the ,list containing the sections sought to be changed in substancj
    '" as well as in form, and we have covered that list to the extent of the original
    .'i list supplied us. We have not as yet .dealt\yith the list supplied us a few
    days ago. ~ ;£
    During part of our hearings as a subcoll)lllittee we had officials from the
    Department of Justice s~tting in with us, and~we discussed these sections with
    them. You can understand how laborious' it was because the bill is not
    annotated, and therefore we had to open upthe bill, consider a section, open
    up the Code, look at the section from which it was taken, and then look at
    these lists to see what categories, they came under and then ultimately we
    got hold of' an annotation-which was prepared for the purposes of the
    Minister-of the sections of the bill, giving some reasons in some of the cases
    Why the changes were made or why a section was dropped or why a new section
    I }Vas added. This annotation is just a simple~sized document like this, as you
    I can see, of about 160 pages. When we got this annotation we were able to
    move a little more quickly on some of the sections because we got some idea
    of the reasons impelling them to make the changes.
    5
    /, .ftt;,.. .
    ~ ..,,~

    .,
    '.'.;H

    iii,.";, I

    6 STANDING COMMITTEE /~',' BANKING 'AND COMMERCE 7


    "'f .;,
    There seemed to be some pressure about getting this Code into the Senate '~the course of its 'work on Bill He, your subc<?npnittee has considered
    and out of committee and over to the Commons for them to deal with it this the:r~port of the Royal Commission on tlie lteVision of the Criminal Code, sub-
    year. As we applied ourselves to this job we felt more and more convinced . mitbid to the Minister of Justice on F~bru8ry 22nd, 1952, and noted the obser-
    that it was impossible for us to give proper consideration to this, and to finish vations contained therein. We have been impressed by the work done by the
    it in time for any accepted conclusion of the sittings of the house this session. Coi¥unission and feel that it has made a valuable contribution to the study of
    As a result of that, we had several sessions with the minister. First of all the Criminal l a w . . \ ' .
    members of the subcommittee, together with the leader,' went over and had tt~our subcommittee notes, however, the conduding paragraph of the said
    a session with Mr. Garson. We pointed out to him some of the difficulties which report which reads as follows:-
    we were running into, and the revisions we had to make, as a result of which . ~ j, Your Commissioners desire to state that as to some of the provisions
    we felt we' could not do 'a good job unless we took the time and examined' every "::. of the draft bill there was a difference of opinion. While the draft bill
    section. In order to make doubly sure I went back to see the Minister the . , ' presented reflects in some respects the view of the majority orily, no useful
    next I day, because there seemed to be a feeling in some quarters, as it was .,' . ,,~: purpose can be served by indicating specifically the matters in which
    communicated to me, that if we were to apply ourselves diligently we could ~W{ i differences of opinion were not fully resolved.
    do this job within a reasonable time. I went back and dispelled that notion,
    "~"'While your subcommittee is of the opinion that members of Parliament
    and his final answer to me as Chairman of the subcommittee was that what he
    must:always seriously study legislation, it feels that, in view of the paragraph
    wanted first was a good bill, the best he could get, and secondly, that if that
    required carrying over from this session, then that was all right as far as he
    qUQ~. in
    the Commissioner'S Report, it must exanune this bill most carefully
    was concerned. The first thing he wanted was to be a'ble to tell the House of andYiFUte the time necessary to consider thoroughly the many alterations in the
    pr,elil~t law which it propo.e..~.: ,
    Commons that it was the best bill that could be drawn, and that it carried
    ;'i'!~;'Ilour subcommittee discussed ,some features of the bill with the Minister
    the best judgment of the Senate. We told him very strongly that we were
    of Justice who agreed that the bill should not be dealt with hastily, for as he
    not prepared to put our recommendation on anything that we had not looked
    , saidWIwant to have a job done thoroughly; I want the best possible law to be
    at in the light of what we had found when we checked the various sections.
    That is the background of the report which you have before you; the tinal result of your efforts." .'i ,

    ",During the course of our examination of "the bill, we secured from the
    I think this report should be incorporated into the Minutes of our Pro- oqicials of the Department of Justice several explanatory memoranda, giving in
    ceedings today. There are some appendices referred to, which may also be some cases the reasons for changes made in the present law. The memoranda
    printed, because in that way the House of Commons will have available the are appended to'this report and we recommend that they be printed in the pro-
    work that has been done. We have not finalized all the sections. As a matter ceedings of the main Committee for the information of the members of the
    of fact we have left a number of them for the consideration of t~is main Senate and of the House of Commons. The labours of your subcommittee
    committee. With this in mind, possibly the best proceduJe would be to read members would have been considerably lightened and more progress could
    this report. It will not take very long, even though it may look formidable, . have been made if these and other notes had been printed with the bill when it
    and explain some of the things we ran into so that you will appreciate some
    of the difficulties we encountered. It is proposed that we shall continue, within
    was originally submitted to Parliament.
    We are of the opinion that, when important measures are submitted to
    the limits of our time, to review additional sections of the Code, but so far Parliament, the fullest possible explanations 'should be printed opposite the
    as this subcommittee is concerned we are satisfied now that it is just physically clauses of a bill, to enable members of both Houses to appreciate readily their
    impossible to do this job in' time for consideration by the Commons at this effect and the reasons for their enaetroent. It is impossible for members with
    session. The report reads: limited' time and research facilities to deal, satisfactorily with complicated
    Your subcommittee was appointed by resolution of the 20th day of May, ' legislative measures without full explanations readily available by those respon-
    1952, and consisted of the following members of the Committee appointed by sible for the drafting of the legislation.
    the Chairman pursuant to the said resolution:- Your subcommittee,' at the beginniJag of its work, considered the clauses
    The Honourable Senators:-Bouffard, Hayden, Farris, Hugessen, Fogo, of the bill in numerical order but, after considering the first 124 clauses,
    Roebuck, Haig, Vien, *Robertson. realized how much time had been expended in comparing proposed clauses with
    The members of your subcommittee have individually given considerable the relevant sections of the present Code, and how long it would take to so
    study to the bill in detail and have held several sittings of the subcommittee complete the full 748 clauses of the bill. The attending officials were asked to
    at which officers of the Department of Justice were present and have given prepare a memorandum showing the clauses in which substantive changes had
    explanations of some of the changes made by the bill in the Criminal law as been made in the law, and so from clause 124 on the subcommittee has dealt
    at present exi~ting under the Criminal Code. with the clauses which the officials considered embodied substantial alterations
    The lack of satisfactory explanatory notes appended to the bill has made in the law now in force, leaving for later consideration the remainder of the bill.
    the task of your subcommittee most tedious and difficult, and has delayed the The CHAmMAN: You will recall we dealt with the definition section, and
    Committee's progress. A great deal of time has been spent checking the clauses I think it took us several hours to deal with about forty-four definitions that
    of the new bill as against the corresponding sections of the present Criminal were in the definitions section. We have incorporated here the changes which
    Code.
    we made in that section. .
    The bill would enact what would be in many respects a new Criminal law
    for Canada. It proposes many changes in the law which call for most serious . . Hon. Mr. DAVIES: In all cases of contempt of court?
    and thoughtful consideration by members of the Senate and House of Commons I The CHAmMAN: Yes. I might just pause fora moment. There is no
    who are under our constitution responsible for the enactment of the Criminal provision for appeal from contempt of court proceedings-the decision of the
    law. judge who determines that there has been contempt and imposes a penalty,
    is final and the feeling of the committee was that there should be an appeal.
    • Ex officio member.
    l'I .,.!J,~

    8 STANDING COMMITTEl:
    '~~ , BANKING AND COMMERCE 9
    Hon. Mr. DAVIES: Has there not been an appeal in the
    "Star"? '
    CB$e of the Windsor ,~ Hon. Mr. VIEN: Then would it not be preferable to have this subcom-
    ~'mittee'8 report printed and qistributed and taken into account by this com-
    The CHAIRMAN: I have been wondering as much as you! have how they '''{f'mittee next week?
    hope to carry their appeal. '
    The CHAIRMAN: That is exactly what'we are doing, only we think that
    Hon, Mr. DAVIES: They were fined $1,000 and $100, and they have ; we could not just hand this report to the Hansard reporter and tell him to
    appealed.
    .write up a set of minutes of the meeting oj the general committee; we felt
    Hon, Mr, ROEBUCK: I don't know how they have appealed. There is no we had to gather the committee and present the report to them, and whatever
    appeal given,
    comment there is' in the course of the meeting can go in the record. Then
    Hon, Mr, DAVIES: They are reported in the press to have appealed the case. everybody will have a copy of the printed record to study by himself.
    Hon, Mr, ROEBUCK: There is no appeal in the civil law that I know of. Hon. Mr. VIEN: When this report goes to the House of Commons, do they
    There has been much comment on arbitrary powers exercised by a judge to "then appoint a committee to go over it all again?
    call somebody before him in court and be judge, jury, executioner-all com-
    bined. He levies the fine, if it is a fine, or imposes imprisonIll-ent; and that The CHAIRMAN: They can.
    is that. ' lIon. Mr. VIEN: They have to.
    :II The CHAIRMAN: We felt that that was an important question, but it was
    not one on which the subcommittee thoaght it should make the final decision.
    . Hon. Mr. ROBERTSON: Up to the moment this is a report of the subcom-
    Plitt~e.
    We have expressed our views to this general committee; that is, we think
    11jj there should be an appeal in such cases to the appropriate appellate court. :'t The. CHAIRMAN: The bill was introduced in the Senate. It still will have
    ,Jl It is up to the maih body of the committee to decide (i) whether there should
    to be dealt with in committee by the Commons.
    'it " be an appeal, and (ii) the extent and the circumstances and conditions under Hon. Mr. ROEBUCK: That all depends. It might go to committee in the
    -I
    which an appeal should be given. It may be that, having raised the question, Commons and' it might not. It is government legislation.
    1
    we could consider the rest of the report and then you could make your .i. Hon. Mr. VIEN: A bilLof this importance could not be dealt with by the
    decision. Possibly that would be the better way to deal with it. Do you , ~,house without being referred to a special committee or a standing committee.
    1'" think we should deal with these matters as we go along, or go through the , The CHAIRMAN: Well, that is their problem when they get it. We have
    whole report and then come back and deal with them?
    "j
    ;1"
    I" Hon. Mr. VIEN: Can I have a copy of the report? I am a member of the .
    enough problems 'of our own in dealing with this.
    Hon. Mr. ROEBUCK: I suggest the Chairman proceed.
    t~
    su bcommittee.
    The CHAIRMAN: Well, we have so referred to you. The CHAIRMAN: (reading):
    t Hon. Mr. VIEN: Why cannot we have enough of these things to go around? Clauses 1 and 2 of the bill were amended in the Main Committee and
    The CHAIRMAN: Because we did not have time to prepare them. agreed to as amended:- i

    Hon. Mr. VIEN: It is not reasonable that the committee should have to deal , Page 3, lin(i! 47: Delete "or" and SUbstitute "and".
    with the report before having a copy of the report before them. Page 4, lines 35 to 39, both incl'U8ive: Delete sub:-clause (25) and substitute:
    The CHAIRMAN: It will be printed in the proceedings of today. (25) 'motor vehicle' means a vehicle that is draWn, propelled or
    Hon. Mr. VIEN: Well, then, is there any very great urgency? driven by any means other than by muscular power but does not include
    a vehicle of a railway that operates on rails:
    'The CHAIRMAN: Not to deal with it, but there is urgency in reporting to
    the. general committee the work that hG\s been done. Your subcommittee took over at this point, and has dealt with the follow-
    Hon. Mr. VIEN: That is what we are doing now? clauses of the bill al! .set out hereunder: ~
    The CHAIRMAN: That is what we are doing now. Clauses 3, 4, 5, 6 and 7 were passed.
    Hon. Mr. ROEBUCK: I suggest we go ahead and read the report and not Clfluse 8 stands for consideration of the whole Committee. ,The sub-
    attempt to deal with it in detail as we go along. Then perhaps we will hav~. ommittee understands that the sutnmllfY power of punishment for contempt
    time to go over it and pass it or deal with it one way or the other. But the ,t court has been given to courts to prevent any attempt to interfere with the
    important thing this afternoon is to get it on record and give 'the membllrs of ~i1dministration of justice and that it is priinarily for the protection of the pUblic.
    the committee some notice of what the problems are,. and then perhaps they f'¥evertheless it is' felt that there should be an appeal in such cases to the'
    may send us back to continue our work. ,;;;i).ppropriate appellate coutts. .
    Hon. Mr. VIEN: But I understand that the Prime Minister has annQ~ced " :: Clausel{ 9 to 38 inclusive, are passed. Clause 15 on page 10--shouid be
    that this bill will not be passed at this session. t~ feconsiq.er~. De facto law is made a complete defence and it was pointed out
    Hon. Mr. ROEBUCK: Oh, no, he did not go so far as that. Pardon me; you ~~;would have protected Riel' in the west and Mackenzie on Navy Island. The
    may be better informed than I am; but I read in the papers that he said that;' ~.~rieed
    .It"it
    for such an enactment is open to question.
    unless the bill was reported by us two weeks prior to the date of prorogatiQz/ '~"'" Clause 39, page 17, line 8: After "or" insert "does not "--clause as amended,
    it would not be dealt with this session. You may be perfectly sure that we , ;~passed.. " • .
    will not report this within two weeks of the end of the session. ~::~. Clause40-passed. ~.J.

    ~I<
    :'" ','''~'','
    ,·1.~,
    ~ ~:~~
    ','0\>.
    I!f:f;'

    !i~ 10 STANDING COMMITTEE


    f( BANKING AND COMMERCE 11
    I,; :/
    . '
    ~.

    Clauses 41 and 42. We recommend changes as follows:- the ~ Committee should decide whether they are going to group the mem-
    r
    \,"!
    Page 17, line 20: Delete "land" and substitute "real property". beniJi( the military forces and of the R.C.M.Police in relation to these offences,
    Page 17, line 23: Delete "land" and substitute "real property". or w~ther they are going to consider the R.C.M. Police as a civilian organiza-
    f'
    i( Page 17, line 26: Delete "land" and substitute "real property". tion{1P be put on a different level from the military.
    Page 17, line 31: Delete "land" and substitute "real property". Clauses 64 to 71, both inclusive. Passed.
    Page 17, line 36: Delete "land" and substitute "real property". Clause 72. We recommend that it be deleted as being archaic. In the
    Page 17, line 38: Delete "land" and substitute "real property", event of our suggestion being approved, clause 73 should be divided into two
    Page 17, line 47: Delete "land" and substitute "real property". clauses to preserve subsequent numbering of clauses.
    Page 18, line 2': Delete "l,md" and substitute "real property".
    [.,Hon. Mr. ROEBUCK: Clause 72 deals with duelling. According to the bill
    Clause 43, amended as follows:- anY,.person who challenges or attempts by any means to provoke another
    Page 18, line 9: Delete "master". person to fight a duel, or attempts to provoke a person to challenge another
    Page 18, line 11: Delete "apprentice". perSOn to fight a duel, is guilty of an indictable offence and is liable to imprison-
    This clause protects persons in authority when inflicting punishment, such men~.for two years.
    as school teachers, parents, etc. We recommend deletions above mentioned as ..The CHAIRMAN: Yes, a duel'under the bilI is not made an offence, but if
    obsolete. you.. provoke some person to a duel or if you attempt to provoke a' person to
    Hon. Mr. ROEBUCK: It gives the master or officer in command of a vessel challenge another person to fight a duel, that is an offence. We thought that
    on a voyage the power to strike an apprentice, just as a school teacher does this did not make sense, and we suggest it be struck out.
    a child. Hon. Mr. DAVIES: The whole clause? .~.r
    The CHAIRMAN: Yes. The CHAIRMAN: Yes, the clause dealing with any person who challenges
    Clauses 44 and 45. Passed. or attempts by any means to provoke another person to fight a duel, or attempts
    Clauses 46 to 50, both inclusive, which deal with treason and treasonable to provoke a person to challenge another person to fight a duel. We think it is
    offences are to stand for consideration by the Main Committee together with archaic.
    clause 55. Hon. Mr. VIEN: ,Even though it is archaic it may be well to leave it in the
    The CHAIRMAN: We felt that this was a very important section. I omitted Act. I think a duel should remain a criminal offence.
    to state earlier that we have received a considerable number of briefs from . The CHAIRMAN: Duels are not criminal offences, but the act of provoking
    various organizations in Canada. Since this is beihg reported verbatim I shall : a duel is a criminal offence. That does not seem to make sense to us, but that
    make no other comment about it, other than to say that this is one of the:' is a matter for the Main Committee to decide later. We have made our
    subjects they raised for discussion-the offence of treason as contained in the recommendation.
    Code at the present time. Hon. Mr. ROEBUCK: It should be pointed out too that a duel may be
    Hon. Mr. VIEN: Has the subcommittee any recommendation? attempted murder. It is certainly a breach of the peace. It is an assault, and
    The CHAIRMAN: We have certain recommendations to make in this regard, it is covered in other sections of the Cqde.
    but we thought it would be advisable to make them later. "Hon. Mr. VIEN: Why should it not be a criminal offence to provoke a
    Hon. Mr. ROEBUCK: When we come to discuss it later we shall have person to fight a duel? Why should it not be a criminal offence? We do not
    opinions to express and recommendations to make. wish to return to the ages when a duel was considered to be a noble gesture.
    Clauses 51, 52, 53 and 54. Passed. Han. Mr. FOGO: If this is, to be discussed later, perhaps we could save time
    by moving along now.
    Clause 56. Passed.
    Hon. Mr. VIEN: Yes.
    Clause 57 is to stand for consideration of the Main Committee.
    The CHAIRMAN: This clause deals with offences in relation to members of The CHAIRMAN (Reading):
    the R.C.M. Police. Generally the section sought to place the R.C.M. Police on Clauses 73 to 75, both inclusive. Passed.
    the same basis as members of the military forces, and we felt that this should J Clause 76 is to be redrafted to read as follows:
    be reflected upon and considered further. We did not feel that the R.C.M. Police Page 26, delete lines 33 to 37, both inclusive, and substitute:
    should be regarded in the same position as the members of the armed forces. 76. Every one who, while in or out of Canada,
    Hon. Mr. ROEBUCK: It is a civilian organization and not a military (a) steals a Canadian ship, or
    organization. (b) steals, or without lawful authority throws overboard, damages or
    The CHAIRMAN: Yes. destroys anything that is part of the cargo, supplies or fittings in a
    Clauses 58 to 61, both inclusive. Passed. Canadian ship,
    Clause 62 is to stand for consideration by the Main Committee. Han. Mr. ROEBUCK: This has not changed the substance of the clause in
    Clause 63 is to stand for consideration by the Main Committee. the bill, but it has made a clumsy expression into a more businesslike expression.
    I
    This clause 63 deals with offences in relation to military forces and the .The 'CHAIRMAN (Reading):
    R.C.M.P. ;,,(!lauses 77 to 80, both inclusive, are to stand for redrafting and discussion
    The CHAIRMAN: The reason for having this clause 63 stand for the con- of the policy of the law in the Main Committee. Redraft of the clauses is
    sideration of the Main Committee was that it is a question of policy. We think sUQm,itted for purposes of discussion, as follows:
    ,,~_ ~!1
    '~~~~
    12 STANDING COMMITTEE ...... , BANKING AND COMMERCE 13

    77. Everyone who unlawfully 'has be~ defined and that the obligation oil the accused is oppressive and
    (a) causes an explosion of an explosive substance that does bodily harm unjust. The following redraft of subclause (3) has been prepared for purposes
    to any person, or of discWlsion: .
    (b) causes an explosion of an explosive substance that is likely to . It;.. 90. (3) Every one who is an occupant of a motor vehicle in which
    endanger life or to cause serious damage to pr2perty, whether or not he knows there is a firearm commits an offence unless some occupant
    life is endangered or property is damaged thereby, .;;O.f .the motor vehicle has a valid permit in Form 42 or Form 44 relating
    is guilty of an indictable offence and is liable to imprisonment for life. 'to that firearm, but no person shall be convicted of an offence under
    this subsection where he establishes that he had no reasonable means
    Hon. Mr. ROEBUCK: I am not satisfied with this clause even as it has been of ascertaining whether' an occupant of the motor vehicle had a valid
    redrafted. It does not satisfy the objections made in the subcommittee. For .~t relating to the firearm.
    instance, what about mining people who are using explosives all the time?
    Then there are explosives used in construction work on streets, and used in Th~ ,CHAIRMAN: A8 it was drawn there was not that protection in it at
    vast quantities to dig canals for hydro-electric poweJ;'. Here we say, "Everyone fill, ~we have recommended this change.
    who unlawfully causes an explosion ... ". That is to say, if he did not have a ~Mr.. DAVIES: What did they say about that permit?
    licence to use explosives and is likely to endanger life, it constitutes an indic- ThEt~CHAIRMAN: This is the redraft we have made.
    table offence and he is liable to be imprisoned for life. What' is hit at, of The original section 90, subsection (3) simlfiy said:
    course, is such an action as that of the MacNamara's when they blew up the
    Times Building in Los Angeles. " Every one who is an 'occupant of a motor vehicle in which he knows
    ~tbereis a firearm commits an offence unless some occupant of the motor
    Hon. Mr. FOGO: Bombs.
    'i vehicle has a valid permit in Form 42 or Form 44 relating to that
    The CHAIRMAN (Reading): firearm. .
    ,t'oO.
    78. Every one who.
    We-~have felt. there should be some basis of knowledge. What ability or
    (a) with intent to do bodily harm to any person, opporitiftlW did the occupant of the motor-car have to know that there was
    (i) causes an explosive SUbstance to explode, a permit? There might be a firearm in the glove compartment of the car, and
    (ii) sends or delivers to a person or causes a person to take or if you sat in the car, unless you catechized the person when you got in the
    receive an explosive substance or other dangerous substance or car and said, ''Mister, is there a gun in this car, and jf'ao, have you a permit?"
    thing, or
    (iii) places or throws anywhere or at or upon a person a corrosive you might be liable. 'That was the way the law was drafted, and the only way
    fluid, explosive substance or' any other dangerous substance or you could protect yourself. So we have drafted this to make it more reasonable.
    thing; or Hon. Mr. EMMERSON: Does that mean a permit is necessary to carry a
    (b) wilfully does anything to cause an explosion of an explosive sub- gun?
    stance that is likely to endanger life, The CHAIRMAN: Yes.
    ( c ) makes or has' in his possession or under his control an explosive Hon. Mr. EMMERSON: What about an ordinary hunting licence? Is that a
    substance with intent thereby to endanger life or to enable another permit to carry a gun in a car?
    p~rson thereby to endanger life, .
    The CHAIRMAN: Your hunting permit is a permit to hunt.
    is guilty of an indictable offence and is liable to imprisonment for life.
    79. Everyone who Mr. MACNEILL: This is a firearm as defined for the purpose of the Code.
    (a) with intent to destroy or damage property, places or throws an Hon. Mr. McINTYRE: Does that include anybody who goes out for sport
    explosive SUbstance anywhere, and has a gun of his own? Can he not take that without a permit?
    (b) does anything with intent to cause an explosion of an explosive The~HAIRMAN: No, this section does not deal with that. This section deals
    substance that is likely to cause serious damage to property, or with an attempt to create a series of offences in relation to unregistered fire-
    (c) makes or has in his possession or under his control an explosive arms; and the P9lice apparently have difficulties at times: there will be firearms
    substance with intent thereby in a car and no\peraon owns them or knows anything about them. So- they
    (i) to cause serious damage to property, or were attempting to make it an offence that "Every occupant of a motor-car
    (ii) to enable another person thereby to cause serious damage to in which he knows there is a firearm commits an offence unless there is a
    property, permit". We felt that that is too sweeping, so we have cut it down in section 3
    is guilty of an indictable offence and is liable to imprisonment for by saying that no person shall be convicted of an offence under this subsection
    fourteen years. where he establishes that he had no reasonable means of ascertaining whether
    Clause 80. This clause stands for consideration of th,e Main Committee. an occupant of the motor vehicle had a valid permit relating to the firearm.
    The CHAIRMAN: This deals with persons possessing explosives without . Hon. Mr. DAVIES: But would he not have a means of ascertaining? In the
    lawful excuse. majority of caseS w:here you think there would be a gun carried in the car you
    Clauses 81 to 89, both inclusive. Passed. would be suspicious. I mean, anybody might carry a gun in the glove com-
    Clause 90. This clause stands for discussion in the Main Committee. We partmellt of 'a car, but it would be very seldom'..that a law-abiding citizen
    are of opinion that as worded in the bill it is too sweeping as motor vehicle would do so.
    '11'''' '-'- .,,\ -;#<...;,

    14 STANDING COMMITTEE BANKING AND COMMERCE 15

    The CHAlliMAN: Without such a change as we have made, in order to/ otherwise provided in any federal., or provincial statute the penalty was-
    protect myself I would have to say to the man, "Have you a valid permit?" if , either. one or two years, I have forgotten. In the bill they have taken out any
    I saw a gun there, and if he did not answer me I would have to get out of the reference to a provincial statute., If you have a federal statute which enacts
    car right away, otherwise I would be guilty of an offence. an offence and no penalty is provjded in the statute, the penalty will be under
    Hon. Mr. ROEBUCK: The purpose of the legislation was to help the police section 164. The feeling of the departmf:Iltal officers and the committee was
    in the case of these bandits who are picked up and firearms are found in their that when a province passes a statu~ it should be able to provide its own
    ,~ motor-car, but nobody admits/ownership. In order to get over that difficulty penalties or have a manifest provision which will show what the particular
    '" they make a sweeping provision of this kind. The result is tllat if you get into penalties are when the provincial statute does not say so,
    a motor-bus or into a railroad train-I think railroads are included here-and Hon. Mr. ROEBUCK: Most of them ,do.
    you see a gun, you had better get out just as fast as you can, or else go around The CHAIRMAN: (Reading)
    and find out whether there was a permit for that gun-which of course you
    could not do. Clause 108. Passed.
    Clause 109 is amended as follows:-
    The CHAlliMAN: A "firearm" is defined as meaning a pistol, revolver, 01' Page 39, line 10, delete paragraph (a) as "misconduct" is undefined.
    firearm that is capable of firing bullets in repeated succession during one
    What is misconduct?
    pressure of the trigger; so you can say it is limited toi a certain type and situa-
    tion. A hunting rifle would not come in that category. Section 109 provides:
    Every peace officer or corOI~er who, being entrusted with the
    Hon. Mr. FOGo: An automatic shot-gun or an automatic rifle. execution of a process, wilfully
    The CHAlliMAN: Yes. (a) misconducts himself in the execution of the process, or
    Hon. Mr. EMMERSON: There are no guns made with one pressure of the (b) makes a false return to the process, is guilty of an indictable offence
    trigger. There used to be one, but I don't think there is now. and is liable to imprisonment for two years.
    The CHAlliMAN: (Reading) We suggest the deletion of paragraph (a), because "misconduct" is unde-
    Clauses 91 to 103, both inclusive. Passed. The way I use the word "pass" fined and we did not know what it meant. We asked the officials, "What does
    only means that we pass them. The general committee is entitled to review it mean? Give us some kind of an ex;ample of that", and they were powerless
    any of this. to' give us an example. They said they didn't know what it means and were
    Clause 104 is amenqed as follows:- powerless to give us an example, so it has no business to be there.
    Page 38, line 4, after "deceit" insert "unlawful" Hon. Mr. GOUIN: I would suggest that if his conduct amounts to a criminal
    Page 38, line 5, after "other" insert "unlawful". offence he would be punishable under the section.
    . The clause as it appears in the bill would prohibit any influencing by The CHAIRMAN: They have not defined the word "misconduct". The report
    perfectly lawful means. continues:
    This clause deals with ,municipal corruption. Clauses 110 to 116, both inclusive. Pal?sed.
    Clause 117. This clause speaks of fabricating evidence for a proposed
    The subsection reads:
    proceeding. It is a question' whether anything is evidence until it is used as
    "Every one who by threats, deceit, suppression of the truth or other such, and the subcommittee amended the clause to read:
    means, influences or attempts to influence a municipal official to do any- 117. Every one who with intent to mislead, fabricates anything
    thing mentioned in paragraphs (c) to (f) of subsection (1) is guilty of with intent that it shall be used as 'evidence in a judicial proceeding, by
    an indictable offence and is liable to imprisonment for two years." any means other than ,Perjury or "incitement to perjury is guilty of an
    We have suggested that after the word "deceit" in line 4 on page 38 the indictable offence and is liable to imprisonment for fourteen years.
    word "unlawful" be inserted, and that after "other" we insert the word "unlaw- Hon. Mr. DAVIES: How would that work?
    ful". As I have said, the clause as it appears in the bill would prohibit any The CHAIRMAN: The wording of the paragraph as set out in the Code is
    influencing by perfectly lawful means, so we thought the element of "unlawful"
    should be inserted before you create an offence of this kind. this:
    "Everyone who, with intent to mislead, fabricates evidence for the purpose
    Clauses 105 and 106. It was objected that "office" should be defined. of a judicial proceeding, existing or proposed, by any means other than perjury
    These sections deal with selling and purchasing offices. or incitement to perjury is guilty of an indictable offence and is liable to
    Hon. Mr. Roebuck: Anyone who "purports to sell or agrees to sell an imprisonment for fourteen years."
    appointment to or resignation from an office". Han. Mr. DAVIES: Do you' mean physically fabricating something that is
    The CHAlliMAN: We don't know what kind of office they are talking about. going to be put in as evidence?
    We thought that "office" should be defined. 'rhe CHAIRMAN: Yes. .,
    Clause 107. Passed. We point out that the offence of disobeying ~ provin- :flon. Mr. DAVIES: Fabricating would constitute perjury, would it not?
    cial statute, which is included in the present section 164 of the Code, has been The CHAIRMAN: Not necessarily.
    dropped. . I Hon. Mr. ROEBUCK: It might frequently be perjury.
    That section 164 is the section that provided the sting in the legislation / 'The CHAIRM4N: That would be so if the person who fabricates and who
    that w~ passed at a special session when the railways stopped running, a couple tells -the story is the same person, but somebody might do the fabricating and
    of years ago. The meat of that section provided that where no penalty was have a series of witnesses to unfold the tale.
    , '-I
    '~(v
    '~'I~l
    16 STANDING COMMITTEE ·· .•'1 BANKING AND COMMERCE 17
    \ \;:}f. /
    Hon. Mr. ROEBUCK: Or leave it in such a way that an innocent witness ,,:, ~f When this was being discussed there was some question with regard to the
    will use it in a court. duty. of the judge to warn the jury of the necessity for corroboration, and it
    The CHAIRMAN: We thought that the words, "Everyone who, with intent may' be that it was on that ground that we stood this.
    to mislead, fabricates evidence for the purpose of a judicial proceedings, exist- ,'.,'<t. The CHAIRMAN: It relates' ba~k to section: 131, and I think we stood it on
    ing or proposed . . . . " was too indefinite. The possibility of speculating there ~. basis of the requirement of .corroboration.
    is teriffic, and so we have revised the section in the Code so as to make it clear. ~~{ Hon. Mr. DAVIES: According to the Criminal Code as it now reads, is it
    Clause 118. Passed. necessary that tl,1e evidence in connection with an offence against a girl, let us
    Clause 119. Sub-clause (d) to be inserted after sub-clause (c) of clause say' rape, be corroborated in court? '
    125. . 'J. Hon. Mr. ROEBUCK: There have been changes made under the bill and
    Hon. Mr. ROEBUCK: That is merely re-arranged, and it is unimportant. they'are very important ones. Under the Act the judge must warn the jury
    Clause 120. Passed. I thilt' it is unsafe to convict in an event of non-corroboration of the plaintiff's

    Clause 121 standing for consideration of the Main Committee. story, but they may convict if they feel like doing so under the bill. They
    The CHAIRMAN: We left this for the consideration of the Main Committee, C~uld not under the old Code.
    and the section in the bill reads: ~>':I The CHAIRMAN: I would refer the ~ominittee to subsection (3) of section
    Everyone who asks or obtains or agrees to receive or obtain any 131 of the bill, which reads:
    valuable consideration for himself or any other person by agreeing to , ' "In proceedings for an offence under'subsection (2) of section 138
    compound or conceal an indictable offence is guilty of an indictable or section 143, 144 or paragraph (b) of section 145 the burden of
    offence and is liable to imprisonment for two years. proving that the female person in r~lIpect of whom the offence is alleged
    Hon. Mr. VIEN: There is no change there? to have been committed was not of previously chaste character is upon
    the accused.
    Hon. Mr. ROEBUCK: It is new. Anyone who agrees to compound or conceal
    an indictable offence is himself guilty of an indictable offence. .'1"; 'We decided that this clause under discussion should stand so that the
    Main Committee could consider the question of corroboratioI).. That is a matter
    Mr. MACNEILL: Concealing is somewhat analogous to compounding. It 'Vvhich the Main Committee will have to decide upon. We hesitated when
    consists in concealing or permitting the concealment of felony. Concealing dealing with it because we felt that possibly there should be corroboration
    is the common law offence of misprision of felony. That offence is obsolete' 'at required. '. The report continues:
    the present time. That is the note in Tremeear.
    . Clause 139 is amended as follows:- '. ,"
    The CHAIRMAN: We thought that we would bring this section to your Page 46, line 16, after "137" delete "or"and after "138" insert "140 or 142".
    attention. The report continues:
    The clause as-amended is passed. It provides that no male pers.on shall be
    Clauses 122 and 123. Passed. deemed to commit the offence of rape, attempted rape or having sexual inter-
    Your sub-committee dealt with the followin~ clauses of the Bill which course with a female under fourteen years of age, if he himself is under
    were reported by officials of the Department of Justice to change in substance fourteen years of age. The subcommittee is of opinion thut if this exemption
    the provisions of the present Criminal Code, as follows: is to remain at all, to be consistent it should also cover clauses 140 and 142,
    Clauses 124, 125, 129 and 130. Passed. indecent assault and incest.
    Clause 131. The provisions with regard to corroboration in charges of Clause 140. Passed.
    sexual offences were ordered to starid pending preparation of a memorandum Clause 145. In offences of intercourse with a female employee, the present
    on the subject by the departmental officials. The memorandum is attached as Code, section 213 subsection (2), permits the judge to instruct the jury that if
    Appendix "A" to this report. the accused is not wholly or chiefly to blame for the commission of the offence,
    The CHAIRMAN: You will have a memorandum which will show all the they may find a verdict of acquittal.
    offences and the provisions with regard to corroboration in respect to them. ;. I This safeguard is dropped in the Bill.' The subcommittee. is 6f opinion
    The report continues: . that it should be restored. It accordingly recommends that present subsection
    Clauses 132 and 133. Passed. (2) of section 213 be added as subclause (2) of clause 145, to read as follows:
    Clauses 135 to 137, both inclusive. Passed. . (2) On the trial of any offence against paragraph (b) of this section,
    Clause 138. Stands. . the trial judge may instruct the jury that if in their view the evidence
    The CHAIRMAN: I do not recall what clause 138 stands for. What was the does not show that the accused is wholly or chiefly to blame for the
    purpose of having that stand? commission of the' offence, they may ~nd a verdict of acquittal.
    Hon. Mr. ROEBUCK: I do not know why we stood it. It reads: The CHAIRMAN: That is the offence created by section 145(b), and section
    145(b~ creates this offence:
    Every male person who has sexual intercourse with a female person
    who . 'Every male person who has illiCit sexual intercourse with a female
    person of previously chaste character and under the age of twenty-one
    ( a ) is not his wife, and years who
    ( b) is under the age of fourteen years, (i) is in his employment,
    whether or not he believes that she is fourteen years of age or more, is . i (ii) is in a common, but not necessarily similar, employment with him
    guilty of an indictable offence and is liable to imprisonment for life and is, in respect of her employment or work, under or in any way
    and to be whipped. subject to his control or direction, or
    '6966~2
    !l~:
    II
    l~
    !
    18 STANDING COMMITTEE BANKING AND COMMERCE 19

    ~
    ~
    (iii) receives her wages or salary directly or indirectly from him, Page 48, line 10, delete "such a purpose" and substitute "the purpose of
    i{ is guilty of an indictable offence and is liable to imprisonment for two publication, distribution or circulation".
    1~
    years. Page 48, line 14, delete "such a purpose" and substitute "the purpose of
    j Now we feel that there may be all kinds of compensating factors con- publication, distribution or sale".
    Ii nected with the commission of an offence under these circumstances, and i Clause 154. Passed.
    "..,
    I', therefore the safeguard which is in the present section of the Code should '. Clause 157. This clause refers to endangering the morals of a child and is
    remain. If the judge forms the opinion that the man is not wholly or chiefly a greatly condensed version of Code section 215 (2) to (6). The subcommittee
    to blame for the commission of the offence, he should instruct the jury that ·i:.feels that this clause should stand for "'ull discussion and consideration by the
    they may find a verdict of acquittal. D;lain committee.
    \.'.: All you have to do is to read the section to appreciate the broadness of it,
    Han. Mr. DAVIES: But a judge very often instructs a jury and then they do
    not pay attention to his instructions. and the question whether it shQuld be enacted in the form in which it is, or
    '<.whether we should safeguard it. It says:
    The CHAIRMAN: We cannot say it is not an offence, because it becomes .; 157. (1) Every one who, in the home of a child, participates in
    a question of fact for the jury to decide whether it is so or no.t.·
    adultery or sexual immorality or indulges in habitual drunkenness or
    Hon. Mr. DAVIES: I should be inclined to leave it the way it is. any other form of vice, and thereby endangers or is likely to endanger
    The CHAIRMAN: In the Code, yes, but the bill changes it, so we· say that the morals of the child or renders or is likely to render the home an unfit
    the Code section should be put back; that is our recommendation. place .for the child to be in, is guilty of an indictable offence and is liable
    Clause 149 is amendcd as follows:- to imprisonment for two years.
    Page 48, line 5, delete "act or gross indecency" and substitute "unnatural (2) In proceedings under SUbsection (1) is it not a defence that a
    sexual act". . child is not old enough to understand or appreciate the nature of the
    As drafted, 149 is a sweeping section. It reads: conditions that prevail in the home or the nature of the acts that are
    Everyone who commits an act of gross indecency with another alleged to have taken place in the home, or to be immediately affected
    person is guilty of an indictable offence and is liable to imprisonment thereby•.
    for five years. (3) For the purpose of this section, "child" means a person who
    is or appears to be under the age of eighteen years.
    Section 206 of the Code relates to gross indecency with a male person.
    This has been carried into the bill omitting any reference to sex,. and so may (4) No proceedings shall be commenced under subsection (1) with-
    cover anything which the Court may in its opinion deem indecent, which is out the consent of the Attorney General, unless they are instituted by
    much too unguarded. Evidently it is sexual indecency that is in mind and the or at the instance of a recognized society for the protection of children
    subcommittee is of opinion that the clause 'should ,be amended as set out above. or by an officer of a juvenile court.
    Han. Mr. DAVIES: What is the difference between "gross indecency" and Of course there is an infinite variety of situations you can imagine under
    "indecent assault"? f57, and whether every one should be swept into this section or not is a matter
    which should be debated. The purpose of the section is perfectly good, but
    Hon. Mr. ROEBUCK: Well, you get the definition of "assault", to begin with. whether it is too sweeping or not is something which has to be considered.
    It is the application of force or the threat of force on the person of somebody
    else when the person threatening is in the position to carry it out. That is in
    .:f.t Clause .159. Nudity. It is a question whether the clause as presently
    /:;.~orded is not wide enough to cover, .for example, the shower-room of a golf
    substance the definition of "assault". '··,·Club. In the corresponding section of th0 Code, section 205A, this possibility
    The CHAIRMAN: "Indecent assault" might proceed quite involuntarj,ly as '~.,i:'was protected against by requiring the consent of the Attorney-General before
    far as one of the parties is concerned. \i'i,;41 charge was laid but this protection was dropped in the bill. The omission
    Hon. Mr. ROEBUCK: Yes. There are two parties to an iIldecent assault, the i;"'l.VaS thought to be more serious in view of the fact that the section has been used
    ;~~ith respect to the Doukhobors,and the subcommittee is of opinion that the
    person assaulting and the person assaulted. But an act of gross indecency may Jlfsubsection requiring consent should be restored as sub-clause (3) of clause
    be perhaps by only one party. . ~t 159 to read as follows:- ..
    Hon. Mr. DAVIES: Something like indecent exposure. ~i(3) No action or prosecution for a violation of this section shall be
    Hon. Mr. ROEBUCK: But what is "gross indecency"? I don't know, because ;~,:~: commenced without 'the leave of th~ Attorney-General for the province in
    it has never been defined. It was not defined in the old Code, because toe term '::'" '. which the offence is .alleged to have been committed.
    was always used in connection with the act of a male person which imported Hon. Mr. FOGO: Do the DOukhobors play golf?
    the sexual idea. They dropped that out, but left "gross indecency" in the open, Hon. Mr. VIEN: Or take showers?
    so anything which you or I might think indecent is covered by this clause as
    we now find it in the bill. The CHAmMAN: I cannot say whether they take showers, or play golf,
    either. There are political considerations involved in handling the Doukhobors,
    Hon. Mr. DAVIES: But to constitute indecent assault there must 'be some and the provincial authorities are better acquainted with these political impli-
    assault on a person. /
    . cations than the federal authority. Therefore we feel that in that regard, and
    Hon. Mr. ROEBUCK: Yes, there must have been some person assaulted. 'I also having regard to how broad the language of the sectlon is, there should
    The CHAIRMAN: We come now to "offences tending to corrupt morals": be some liInitation so that people could not go "haywire" in preferring charges
    Clause 150 is amended as follows:- of nudity. . For instance, section 159 reads: .
    59664-2i
    '''Ii

    20 STANDING COMMITTEE
    BANKIN(1 AND COMMERCE 21
    (1) Everyone who, without lawful excuse, (a) is nude in a public
    place, or (b) is nude and exposed to public view while on private the offence which is disturbing the generaJ,public, or Her Majesty's subjects,
    property, whether or not the property is his own, is guilty of an offence is just a distortion which we felt shows no concept of a common nuisance at
    punishable on summary conviction. all . .
    (2) For the purposes of this section a person is nude who is so clad , Hon. Mr. ROEBUCK: It is a complete answer to the suggestion that this Code
    as to offend against public decency or order. has been so thoroughly gone over by the officials that we should open our
    motiths 'and' swallow it. It is a complete answer because no first-year law
    We feel that when you use such broad language to lay the limits of the studEmt would have passed that section if he had read it, and I cannot think
    offence of nudity there should be some saving clause where somebody should it was passed by these commissioners after a reading and understanding of
    show a little sense or discretion in a situation which would lend itself to what they were passing. It is an outstanding piece of draftsmanship. It says:
    abuse. , A common nuisance is an unlawful act or omission to discharge
    Hon. Mr. DAVIES: No one is nude unless they are completely nude, a legal duty, which act or omission endangers the lives, safety, health,
    Hon. Mr. ROEBUCK: They might be, under this: property or comfort of the public, or by which the public are obstructed
    For the purposes of this section a person is nude who is so clad ill the exercise or enjoyment of any right common to all His ~Iajesty's
    as to offend against public decency or order. subjects.
    There is the low neckline! Everyone is guilty of an indictable offence and liable to one year's
    imprisonment 'or a fine who commits any common nuisance which
    The CHAIRMAN: (Reading) endangers the lives, safety or health of the public, or which occasions
    Clause 160. Passed. injury to the person of any individual.
    In clause 161 we provide against disturbance of religious services.
    The 'CHAIRMAN: (Reading) They strike out the definition and say that anybody who commits an
    unlawful act and thereby injures an individual commits a common nuisance.
    Clause 161 is amended as follows:-
    Hon. Mr. FOGO: You have been reading from the Code as it stands?
    Page 52, line 21, after "wilfully" insert "wilfully and without lawful excuse".
    Page 52, line 26, after "(2)", insert "wilfully and without lawful excuse". , Hon. Mr. ROEBUCK: Yes, now let me read from the bill, having got the
    Under the clause as presently worded, a property holder is powerless to Code in your minds:
    <10 anything to disturb an assemblage of persons camping on his lawn. Everyone commits a criminal common nuisance who does an
    Clauses 163 and 164. Passed. unlawful .act or fails to discharge a legal duty and thereby
    (a) endangers the lives, safety or health of the public, or
    Clause 165. Nuisances. Section 221 of the Code defines a common nuisance
    as an unlawful act or omission to discharge a legal duty, which act or omission (b) causes physical injury to any person.
    endangers the lives, safety, health, property or comfort of the public,or by ,~Hon. Mr. DAVIES: That is the bill?
    which the public are obstructed in the exercise or enjoyment of "any right f:'·Hon. Mr. ROEBUCK: Yes, the bill is absurd.
    common to all His Majesty's subjects".
    ·Y:;;\Hon., Mr. FOGO: You might drive on the wrong side of the street.
    Section 222 of the Code makes it an indictable offence to commit a
    common nuisance which endangers the lives, safety or health of the public, ,,:0, Hon. Mr. ROEBUCK: Yes, and if anybody strikes another person that would
    or which occasions injury to the person .of any individual. b~ an unlawful act, and it would come within this clause.
    In the Bill the definition of common nuisance is omitted, and in effect .' 2,; The CHAIRMAN: It is a complete misconception of what. a common nuisance
    gives an entirely new and remarkable definition. It says, "everyone commits i~ t::.1 shall continue reading from the report:
    a criminal common nuisance who does an unlawful act or fails to discharge a :~The subcommittee requested a redraft of this clause, to read as follows:-
    legal duty, and thereby (a) endangers the lives, safety, or health of the public, '<: 165•. (1) Everyone who commits: a common nuisance and thereby
    or, (b) causes physical injury to any person". So ,that an unlawful act causing .. (a) endangers the lives, safety or health of the public, or
    physical injury is according to the bill a common nuisance. Such an act is (b) . causes physical injury to any person, is guilty of an indictable
    already defined as "common assault" .. offence and is liable to imprisonment for two years.
    Hon. Mr. DAVIES: Can a common nuisance be committed against an (2) For the purposes of this section, everyone commits a common
    individual? . nuisance who does an unlawful act or fails to discharge a legal duty
    The CHAIRMAN: The basis or essence of an offence of a common nuisance and thereby
    (a) endangers the lives, safety, health, property or comfort of the
    must be damage to the public. The report continues:
    public, or
    From sub-clause (a) the words "property or comfort" of the public are (b) obstructs the public in the exercise or enjoyment of any right that
    committed, and also "obstructing the exercise or enjoyment of any right . is common to all the subjects of Her Majesty in Canada.
    common to all His Majesty's subjects". The latter course, at least, is. very 168. Passed.
    important. 171. Re: S,earch with or without warrant. Subclause (3) says,
    The CHAIRMAN: So we have made a redraft of it, restoring the definition the .Court before whom anything that is seized under this section
    of a common nuisance. That is, you have got to preserve some essential basis is brought may (a) declare any money or security for money so seized
    of criminal law in your approach to it, and just to make a physical injury to and forfeited, and (b) direct that anything so seized other than money
    another person a common nuisance, without carrying it into the essence. of or security for money shall be destroyed, or if' required for evidence,
    after it is no longer so required. There is no provision for notice to the
    '~'. \

    22 STANDING COMMITTEE BANKING AND COMMERCE 23

    rightful owner, or even to the accused, and the subcommittee requested subclause does say, however, that section 5 of the Canada Evidence Act applies.
    a redrafting of the clause to provide for the claiming of the goods by That is to say, that a person who knows of the law may protect himself against
    someone so disposed and the giving of a lag in time of 30 days before the use of the evidence so extracted from him in any subsequent proceeding
    forfeiture is declared or until the proceedings are completed. other than perjury by ch~iming the benefit of the section, but, as the individual
    will not be represented by a lawyer under such circumstances, only the well
    The CHAIRMAN: We did not feel in the execution of a search warrant they initiated will know 'enough to claim.
    should be able to bring whatever they seized before a magistrate or justice of
    Hon. Mr. ROEBUCK: Once he answers the question without claiming the
    the peace and get an order for the immediate forfeiture or an order for the
    privilege he is sunk. We felt that you have to proceed on the basis that a lot
    immediate destruction of the materials. 'We thought that there might be a
    .', of people do not know what section 5 of the Canada Evidence Act provides.
    rightful claim and a good defence, and that therefore there should be a lag
    in time before forfeiture is declared. The report continues: Hon. Mr. DAVIES: Or even ,what the Canada Evidence AC,t is.
    The redraft of the clause reads as follows:- The CHAmMAN: That is right. Our suggested draft is that instead of
    . referring to section 5 of the Canada Evidence Act, put the provision of section
    171. (1) A justice who receives from a peace officer a report in
    writing that he has reasonable ground to believe and does believe that 5 in there, and then they have to read that to him, and he understands what
    his ppsition is. The report continues::The sub-committee is of opinion that
    an offence under section 176, 177, 179 or 182 is being committed at any
    the provisions of the Canada Evidence Act in this regard should be written
    place within the jurisdiction of the justice, may i~sue a warrant under
    into the clause. The clause has been redrafted to read as follows:
    his hand authorizing a peace officer to enter and search the place by
    day or night and seize anything found therein that may be evidence 174. (1) A justice before whom a person is taken pursuant to a
    that an offence under section 176, 177, 179 or 182, as the case may be, warrant issued under section 171 or 172 may require that person to be
    is being committed at that place, and to take into custody all persons examined' on oath and to give evidence with respect to
    who are found in or at that place and requiring those persons and things (a) the purpose for which the place referred to in the warrant is or has
    to be brought before him or before another justice having jurisdiction, been used, kept or occupied, and
    and be dealt with according to law. (b) any matter relating to the execution of the warrant.
    (2) A peace officer may, whether or not he is acting under a (2) A person to whom this section applies who '"
    warrant issued pursuant to this section, take into custody any person ( a) refuses to be sworn, or
    whom he finds keeping a common gaming house and' any person whom (b) refuses to answer a question.
    he finds therein, and may seize anything that may be evidence that such may be dealt with in the same manner as a witness appearing before
    an offence is being committed and shall bring those persons and things a superior court of criminal jurisdiction pursuant to a subpoena.
    before a justice having jurisdiction, to be dealt with according to law. (3) No evidence that is given by a person under this section may be
    (3) Except where otherwise expressly provided by law, a court, used or received in evidence in any criminal proceedings against him,
    judge, justice or magistrate before whom anything that is seized under except proceedings for perjury in giving that evidence.
    this section is brought may Clause 178. Stands. A proposal to amend section 235 of the Code is now
    (a) declare that any money or secutity for money so seized is forfeited, before Parliament. If the amendment is made, it should be written into this
    and clause.
    (b) direct that anything so seized, other than money or security for The CHAmMAN: That amendment has been made by the Senate. That was
    money, shall be destroyed, " the bill we had before us in connection with race meetings, and it is in the
    if no person shows sufficient cause why it should not be forfeited or Commons now, so that section 178 in the bill will be amended by incorporating
    destroyed, as the case may be.
    these provisions. The report continues:
    ( 4) No declaration or direction shall be made pursuant to subsection
    (3) in respect of anything seized under this s~ction until Clause 180. Passed.
    (a) it is no longer required as evidence in any proceedings that are Clause 184. Passed.
    instituted pursuant to the seizure, or Clause 186. Section 241 and following sections of the Code refer to
    (b) the expiration of thirty days from the time of seizure and such failure to provide necessaries, and, if death is caused or life endangered, or
    further time as it may be required as evidence in any proceedings. health has been or is likely to be permanently injured, penalties are provided.
    (5) Nothing in this section authorize.s the seizure, forfeiture or The destitution or necess~ty of the person injured is thus a prime element in
    destruction of telephone, telegraph or other communication facilities ,the offence.
    or equipment owned by a person engaged in providing telephone; tele- The CHAIRMAN: This is where they get completely off base again. The
    graph or other communication service to the public or forming part of essence of the offence under the Code as it stands is the destitution or necessity
    the telephone, telegraph or other communication service or system, of of the person injured; that is, the harm done to the public. The report continues:
    such a person. The Bill drops this prime requisite entirely, and places a "leg a, duty" on
    Clause 174. This gives the police power to bring a person accused in the parent, husband, guardian, etc.; to provide necessaries, and provides penal-
    connection with a disorderly house before a magistrate, where he may jbe ,ties for he who fails "without lawful excuse, the proof of which lies upon him,
    examined on oath, and in event of his refusing to answer, may be dealt with to provide necessaries."
    as a witness appearing before a Superior Court of criminal jurisdiction, that is, In view of the fact that the legal duty is pronounced by statute without
    sent to jail for contempt of court. This is a most drastic inquisition. The qualification, the only lawful excuse for not providing the~ would be such as
    'Y#
    " ,
    :~!~~-;;.
    24 STANDING COMMITTEE • '0i~' BANKING AND COMMERCE 25

    adulterjT in the case of a wife, and perhaps inability on the part of the accused.
    j.~.
    procuring, by false evidence, the conviction and death of that human being
    Thus the wife, child or ward might be rolling in wealth, and far better off than ;i~tby sentence of the law." A more despicable method of securing the death of
    the husband, father or guardian, and yet the latter be guilty of a criminal 'W"'"Q fellow creature could hardly be imagined. No explanation is given for its
    offence for not adding to their abundance. This is a complete change in the ;'~continuation in the bill.
    principle of the law. The subcommittee ordered the section to stand so that Hon. Mr. ROEBUCK: And we are asked to swallow this thing holus bolus!

    r'
    the provision with regard to destitution or the endangering of health could be ;',;;' The CHAl:RMAN: What we are,doing is, we are raising for your consideration
    reinserted.' '
    '~'\~'iwhether or not a person who 'causes the death of a human being by procuring
    We feel that the basis of the offence of failing to provide necessaries has
    been removed. As a result, they say that in law there is liability and, if you
    by' false evidence his .c~nviction and his death by hanging should be exempt
    are guilty under this section, it is a criminal offence, without taking into account \,t,!rom a charge of homICIde. '
    the quality of the person to whom the right is given. After all, the concept a
    Hon. Mr. FOGO: For example, perjurer.
    must be harm resulting from what has been done or neglected. )!:t . The CHAIRMAN: Yes. That might be one way. He might be a material
    Hon. Mr. DAVIES: Does this bill come to us straight from the Commission, ~wItness.
    or has it been reviewed? ;,~~~~: Hon. Mr. FOGO: That is, if his evid~ce was the key evidence leading to
    The CHAIRMAN: It has been reviewed in the department. :::"":~onviction, and that were capable of being established.
    Hon. Mr. DAVIES: It is the minister's bill? :~~): The CHAIRMAN: Yes. (Reading)'
    "

    The CHAIRMAN: Yes. Clause 198. Passed.


    Clause 202. Passed.
    Hon. Mr. ROEBUCK: You mean, it comes from the department.
    Clauses 204 and 205. Passed.
    The CHAIRMAN: (Reading) Clause 212. Passed.
    Clauses 189 and 190. Passed. The next clause deals with attempts to commit suicide:
    Clause 191. Criminal Negligence. This clause says, that "everyone is Clause 213. It is suggested that attempt to commit suicide should be an
    criminally negligent who shows a wanton or reckless disregard for the lives or offence punishable on summary conviction and should not be indictable. Our
    safety of other people (a) by doing anything". This actually says that everyone feeling was that a poor persor\. who had made his attempt had had considerable
    by doing anything shows a wanton or reckless disregard for the lives or safety punishment in the course of trying to commit suicide, and if he ever recovered,
    of other persons and is criminally negligent. . and r.ighted himself, there should be some penalty because it would give the
    The subcommittee ordered subclause (1) to be redrawn to read as courts some jurisdiction over him to give him treatment if he needed treatment,
    follows:- but that that was more de~irable than simply inflicting a long term of years
    191. (1) Everyone is criminally negligent who as punishment. ' ,',
    ( a ) in doing anything, or Hon'. Mr. ~OEBUCK: You cannot make'an attempt at suicide no offence at all,
    (b) in omitting to do anything that it is his duty to do, because if the police come upon somebody who is attempting· to commit suicide
    shows wanton or reckless disregard for the lives or safety of other it is most necessary that they shall be able to arrest' him and carry him into
    persons." custody, but such person should be taken before a magistrate, and one can
    You may recall that, when the minister had finished his explanation in hardly imagine the man being indicted and taken before a jury. It should be a
    the Senate, I asked him about this section, because the way it read seemed to . summary offence.
    be rather unusual. As defined in the bill: Hon. Mr. FOGO: It may be a question whether a magistrate might be liable
    191. (1) Everyone is criminally negligent who shows a wanton or to be more severe than a jury.
    reckless disregard for the lives or safety of other persons Hon. Mr. llOEBUCK: But the magistrate would refer him to a psychiatric
    (a) by doing anything, or hospital for examination.
    (b) 'by omitting to do anything that it is his duty to do. The CHAIRMAN: We have made it a summary offence, which means a
    (2) For the purposes of this section, "duty" means penalty of $500 and/or six months.
    (a) a duty imposed by law, or Hon. Mr. ROEBUCK: That is right,-or both.
    (b) a duty for the breach of which a person may be found liable in civil The CHAIRMAN: (Reading)
    proceedings." ,
    Clause 216. Passed.
    Those tests present all sorts of difficulties, because there may be a civil Clause 217 (b) is questioned.
    proceeding pending, the judge is trying a criminal proceeding, and he is going It is questioned mainly because we do not know what they mean by the
    to adjudicate in effect on the civil proceeding by telling the jury "This man language. The section says: ..
    has committed an offence of which he may be found liable in civil proceedings". , , 217. Everyone who administers or causes to be administered to any
    That is an instruction he gives them before the civil case has ever been tried. person or causes any person to take poison or any other destructive or
    We thought that was a very back-handed way of trying Jo define "criminal noxious thing is guilty of an indictable offence and is liable
    negligence", so we have made the definition which I have quoted. This seem:r' (a) to imprisonment for fourteen years, if thereby he endangers the life
    a direct and straightforward way of stating the offence, and if you compar~ . of or causes bodily harm to that person, or
    the two you will realize how much more intelligible it is. (b) to imprisonment for two years, if he aggrieves or annoys that
    Clause 194. Homicide. Subclause (6) exempts a person from an accusation person or does it with intent thereby, to aggrieve or annoy that
    of homicide, "by reason only that he causes the death of a human being by person.
    ."",.

    26 STANDING COMMITTEE
    BAN~lNG AND COMMERCE 27
    Frankly, we did not know what that meant, and you can understand why question, and then the. bill goes on to give an alternative, "or is adequate to
    we have been proceeding cautiously and hesitantly in examining these sec- warn them that the opening exists". Although an act may be adequate to
    tions. We have "questioned"-that is a mild way of putting it-this particular warn, a warning is frequently not adequate to prevent accidents, and this
    section.
    new law, the sub-committee ordered deleted, that is to say, they struck out
    Hon. Mr. DAVIES: Do you think what they mean is that if it is given by the words "or is adequate to warn them that the excavation exists" and
    a doctor of medicine it is not given to aggrieve or with intent to annoy? . Qrdered the clause to stand for further discussion as to whether "the legal
    The CHAIRMAN: No, this deal with one who "administers or causes to be duty to guard it" sufficiently expresses the prohibition.
    administered to any person or causes any person to take poison or any other :t. "Tho CHAIRMAN: We did not think it did.
    destructive or noxious thing". The penalty is two years if he aggrieves or Hon. Mr. ROEBUCK: I have been thinking about this since, and I think we
    annoys the person; that is, if a noxious thing or a poison does not do its should make that "and" instead of "or". Let it read:
    work and endanger the life or occasion bodily harm, but only aggrieves him.
    ~:":" . . . to guard it in such a manner that is adequate to prevent persons
    What is the quality of aggrieving or annoying a person' or the "intent" to
    uggrieve or annoy"? from falling in by accident, and adequate to warn them that it exists".
    We struck out the words "adequate to warn them that the opening exists"
    Han. Mr. ROEBUCK: If they had said it does bodily harm we would have
    understood it. because to do that alone is. not sufficient. You might put an ad in the news-
    paperd and that might be described as "adequate to warn them that it exists"
    The CHAIRMAN: That is in subsection (a). but that should not relieve them from the obligation to protect it.
    Han. Mr. ROEBUCK: Yes, but in subsection (b). ; Hon. Mr. DAVIES: Should it state what is adequate?
    The CHAIRMAN: We think it has no place in that section. Hon. Mr. ROEBUCK: The Code itself does do that, but they have dropped
    Han. Mr. ROEBUCK: It is new law, by the way. that out froin the bill.
    The CHAIRMAN: Yes. . The CHAIRMAN: We think that the provisions of the old section are good
    Clause 220. Section 282 of the Code states with considerabJe particularity and possibly should be restored.
    the offence of epdangering lives by interfering with a railway such as throw- :';~. Hon .. Mr. DAVIES: Some of the protections around manholes are very
    ing a log on the track and so on. The bill substitutes the words "common inadequate. .
    carrier", and in so doing places outside the protection of the criminal law, ~";;,- The CHAIRMAN: The brief continues:
    railways which are not common carriers, and there are many in Canada, .~;:rB';Clauses' 231 and 232. Passed.
    running to mines, or in the lumber woods, or industrial plants. .;f~Clauses 266 and 267. Passed.
    The clause has been redrawn to read as follows:- -'Clauses 269 and 270. Passed.
    220. Everyone who, with intent to endanger the safety Qf any ~"'4 Clause 273. Section 351 of the Code refers to obtaining electricity and
    person le'iephone and telegraph service. "Gas" has been added in the Bill. In carry-
    ( a) places anything in, upon or near, or iog the section into the Bill, the wasting of gas or electricity is not covered as
    (b) does anything to the word "maliciously" has been omitted. The sub-committee ordered that the
    any property that is used for or in connection with the transportation wQrds "maliciously or" be inserted before the word "fraudulently" in the first
    of persons by land, water or air is, if death or bodily harm is likely to l~ of the clause so that the prohibition would cover both the taking of it for
    be caused to persons thereby, guilty of an indictable offence and is ~e":~by the thief, or the maliciously wasting of it.
    liable to imprisonment for life. :,~ ,Clauses 283 and 284., Passed.
    "hL Clause .287. Passed. .'
    Clause 221. Subclause (2) requires everyone in char~e of a vehicle
    '-,~,Clause 292. In subclause (4), line 42, page 96, "aeroplane" was struck
    involved in an accident to stop his vehicle, offer assistan<;e and give his name
    and addl ess. He must offer assistance whether it is required or not, and outr-and the word "aircraft" substituted therefor.
    "vehicle" is wide enough to cover everything from a locomotive to a wheel- ".~Clauses 293 and 294 .. Passed. . .
    barrow. W·Clause 299. This clause is amended by inserting before the word "theft",
    Thi~ sub-committee ordered the paragraph to stand for reconsideration iIi;JJ,ne36, page 98, the words "the off.nce of".
    and redrafting, so as to insert "when required" after "offer of assistance", ·(.;~r· The CHAIRMAN: This is really one of the wonderful ones, is it not, Senator
    and a reconsideration of the word "vehicle". Roebuck?
    Clause 225. Passed. Hon. Mr. ROEBUCK:' Yes.
    Clause 227. Passed. The CHAIRMAN (Reading):
    Clause 228. Section 287 of the Code places a burden upon persons cut- I
    Clause 301. Under the present Code, it is permissible for the Crown, when
    ting holes in ice, cl.igging shafts for mines, or excavations upon lands, to Cparg\ng receiving or retaining stolen goods, to rebut the presumption or
    fence the dangerous property.' "
    evldence of lack of kIJ,owledge that the goods were stolen by evidence that the
    The bill has omitted all particularity, substituting the "legal duty" to
    accused was on a previous occasion guilty of having stolen property in his
    guard it in such a manner that is adequate to prevent persons from 'falling
    possession. This is of course extraordinary proceeding, for it puts the accused
    in by accident. This is literally the equivalent of the detail previously men-
    on trial for previous offences, while the policy of E{lglish criminal law is to
    tioned in the Code, but nevertheless the loss of the particularity is open to
    exclude the record of the accused, and try him on the offence charged.
    28 STANDING COMMITTEE BANKING AND COMMERCE 29

    In carrying this provision to the Bill, this privilege of the Crown is widened include any article or substance which a provincial legislature made unlawful.
    so that evidence may be given of the possession of property obtained by "an The Code is thus placed at the disposal of the provincial legislatures in
    offence punishable by indictment". Property may be obtained by offences banning inter-provincial trade.
    punishable by indictment totally different in character from the theft of goods, The subcommittee ordered the word "anything" to be struck out, and the
    such as forgery, false pretences, a rubber cheque and numerous other such words "intoxicating liquor" to be replaced, thus, preserving the law as it has
    acts. The clause as drawn may put the accused on trial for his entire record. been in the past. .
    The sub-committee ordered the clause to stand to be redrafted and to be The clause is amended as follows:-
    limited to evidence of receiving or obtaining, that is, the possession of stoien Page 115, line 24, strike out "anything" and substitute "intoxicating
    goods only. liquor". /
    The clause as redrawn reads as follows: Clause 350. Passed.
    301. (1) Where an accused is charged with an offence under section Clause 353. Passed.
    Clause 355. This clause is amended as follows:-
    296, 297 or paragraph (b) or (c) of subsection (1) of section 298 in
    Page 119, line 4, after "is" insert ", unless the Court otherwise
    respect of stolen property, evidence is admissible at any stage of the
    proceedings to show that property other than the property that is the orders".
    subject matter of the proceedings. Clause 362. Passed.
    Clause 365. This clause -is amended as follows:-
    (a) was found in the possession of the accused, and
    Page 122, line 22, after "railway" add "that is a common carrier".
    (b) was stolen within twelve months before proceedings were com-
    menced, Clause 366.' Passed.
    Clauses 368 and 369. Passed.
    and that evidence may be considered for the purpose of proving that the
    Clause 373. Passed.
    accused knew that the property forming the subject matter of the pro-
    Clause 377. Passed.
    ceedings was stolen property.
    Clause 384. Passed.
    (2) Subsection (1) does not apply unless Clause 387. This clause stands at the request of the Department of
    (a) at least three days' notice in writing is given to the accused that in Justice. Representations are being considered from veterinary organizations.
    the proceedings it is intended to prove that property other than the Part X-Clauses 391 to 405, both inclusive. Passed.
    property that is the subject matter of the proceedings was found The CHAmMA.. : These sections deal with currency offences, and there
    in his possession, and will be a new Act with respect to that. The report continues:
    (b) the notice sets out the nature or description of the property and Clauses 406 to 408, both inclusive. Passed.
    describes the person from whom it was stolen. Clause 413. The subcommittee is of the opinion that an offence by the
    Clause 302. Passed. holder of a judicial office should be excluded from the operation of sub-
    Clauses 314 and 315. Passed. clause (2). .
    Clause 318. Passed. The CHAmMAN: Mr. MacNeill, would you very briefly explain the purpose
    Clause 320. Subclause (1) (c) makes it an offence to destroy, damage or of this? '
    obliterate an "election document, which by subclause (2) means any writing Mr. MACNEILL: This is the clause which authorizes a court of criminal
    relating to an election held under the authority of an Act of the Parliament 'jurisdiction to try indictable offences other than those enumerated. The sub-
    of Canada or of a legislature". Any writing relating to an election may be committee felt that an offence committed by the holder of a judicial office
    almost anything, and the sub-committee ordered the clause to be redrawn .$hould not be tried by a judge but should be tried by a judge and jury.
    making it clear that the document is issued by an official with respect to any f. Hon. Mr. ROEBUCK: We did not think that a judge should be under obliga-
    election held pursuant to any such Act. • 'tion to try another judge.
    The amendment reads as follows: The CHAmMAN: That is right. It does not make sense.
    Page 106, lines 20 to 23, both inclusive, strike out subclause (2) and Hon. Mr. FOGO: He would not be able to elect.
    substitute the following: j

    The CHAmMAN: That is right.


    (2) In this section "election documents" means any document
    Hon.' Mr. DAVIES: But it is done now under the Act?
    or writing issued under the authority of an Act of the Parliament
    of Canada or of a legislature, with respect to an election held Hon. Mr. ROEBUCK: Official corruption under the Code must be tried by a
    pursuant to the authority of any such Act. jury, and we have left it to that.
    Hon. Mr. DAVIES: You do not mean that if a judge commits a criminal
    Clause 321. Passed. offence he cannot be tried by another judge?
    Clause 323. Passed.
    Hon. Mr. ROEBUCK: No, not a criminal offence, but official' corruption.
    Clause 331. Passed. : .. Then he must go to a jury.
    Clauses 336 to 342, both inclusive. Passed. ':' The CHAmMAN: The report continues:
    Clause 344. section 412 of the Code makes it an offence to obtain the
    The clause has been redrafted to read as foUows:-
    carriage of intoxicating liquor by false billing intq a county, province, district . /
    or other place, where the importation is unlawful. This provision is carried 413. (1) Every superior court of criminal jurisdiction has juris-
    diction to try any indictable offence.
    into the bill but was extended to the carriage of anything, so that it would
    '.
    ,.
    t!,
    ;". BANKING AND COMMER.CE 31
    STANDING COMMITTEE
    30
    Our next proposed amendment deals with a' case where, the evidence of
    (2) Every court of criminal jurisdiction has jurisdiction to try an
    the witnesses called on behalf of the prosecution having been taken down and
    indictable offence other than read;"'the justice shall address the accused as follows or to the like effect."
    (a) an offence under any of the following sections, namely, In the bill they just insert these words:
    (i) section 47, . Having heard the evidence, do you wish to say anything in answer
    (ii) section 51, , to the charge? You are not bound to say anything, but whatever you
    (iii) section 52, ~. do say will be taken down in writing and may be given in evidence
    (iv) section 53, .. . against you at your trial.
    (v) section 75,
    (vi) section. 76, We feel that the old warning was much better. I will read our recom-
    (vii) section 206, mendation:
    (viii) section 207, Clause 454. The subcommittee recommends that the form of address to
    (ix) section 210, the ~ccused be restored to its original wording as found in section 684(2) of the
    (x) paragraph (a) of subsection (1) of section 316, Criminal Code, which reads as follows:-
    (xi) paragraph (a) of section 408, (2) • . . . Having heard the evidence, do you wish to say anything
    (xii) section 411, or in answer to the charge? You are not bound to say anything but whatever
    (xiii) section 412. you do say will be taken down in writing and may be given in evidence
    (b) the offence of being an accessory after the fact to treason or murder; against you at your trial. You must clearly understand that you have
    or nothing to hope from any promise or favour and nothing to fear from
    (c) an offence under section 100 by the holder of a judicial office. any threat which may have been held out to you to induce you to make
    any admission or. confession of guilt, but whatever you now say may
    Clause 416. Stand. be given in evidence against you at your trial notwithstanding such
    Clauses 418 and 419. Passed. promise or threat.
    Clauses 422 and 424. Passed.
    Clauses 427 and 429. Passed. In other words we thought that this full warning is necessary and advisable
    Clause 432. Passed. and should be given.
    Clause 433. Passed. Clause 460. Passed.
    Clause 434. Passed. Clause 461. Passed.
    Clause 435. Passed. Clause 463. . Passed.
    Clause 445. Passed. Clause 464. Passed.
    Clause 446. Passed. Some representations had been. made to us in connection with the next
    Clause 447. The subcommittee recommends that the clause be amended clause we deal with:
    to restore the original requirement of proof being made on oath or affirmation Clause 727. Under this clause, appeals are to be heard on the evidence
    of the handwriting of the justice who issued the warrant. I taken at the trial. Under the present appeal provisions of the Code the appeal
    This is the case of where a warrant is issued in one jurisdiction and the from a summary conviction offence is a trial de novo.
    accused is or is believed to be in another jurisdiction, and the warrant has to The subcommittee has had representations made to it to the effect that the
    go to the justice in the other jurisdiction and he endorses it so that it can be clause should be. amended to preserve the present method of hearing appeals.
    executed there. We thought that the signature of the justice on the original The. subcommittee recommends that this change be made in the bill.
    warrant should be verified in some way before the second justice is required As stated, at the present time an appeal from a magistrate going to a
    to act on it. county court judge may be by way of a trial de novo unless the parties consent
    Clause 450. This clause should stand for further discussion and to malte use of the transcript of the evidence before the magistrate as the basis
    clarification. for arguing the appeal. The new bill proposed to do away with the provision
    It is a complicated clause, dealing with elections, and there are a number for a trial de novo and simply states that the transcript of evidence before the
    of things in it which we thought were not clear, and we wanted to have a magistrate would be the basis for disposing of the appeal. There have been a
    discussion of it with departmental officers, which we have not had, so we lot of representations that the trial de novo should be restored. Very often
    decided that the clause should stand. the man who comes ·before a magistrate does not appreciate the importance
    Clause 451 deals with "powers of justice": Our report states: of the charge against him; he does not even have a lawyer; so there is a
    Clause 451. This clause is amended as follows:- perfunctory sort of trial, where he has not a proper concept of what is good
    Page 154, line 24, before "informant" insert "prosecutor or". or sufficient evidence; the case is tried, and if the new section in the bill should
    Page 154, line 44, after "adjourned" add "with the consent of both become law he is locked in with that, and on that ,basis he has got to argue
    the prosecutor or informant and the accused or his counsel". his appeal.
    The first amendment we suggest is in a case where a prisoner comes Hon. Mr. ROEBUCK: He is "sunk".
    before a justice, and the inquiry is adjourned, and he is at large on bail. We The CHAIRMAN: We have said that if all the parties, the Crown and accused,
    thought that the old section was the proper one, that, with his consent and are satisfied with the transcript, the judge may deal with the appeal on the basis
    that of his sureties and the prosecutor or informant the man might be remanded of the transcript; if they are not, then the trial takes . place all over again.
    for more than eight days. It is too much trouble running about trying to find We think that is a very good and wise provision and should be retained, so
    an informant who may not be in court when the case comes up. So we thought
    we recommend it.
    it would simplify matters to add "prosecutor" as well.
    3.:'~.,,\

    32 STANDING COMMITTEE
    BANKlNGAND COMMERCE 83
    Hon. Mr. ROEBUCK: Some of the judges have expressed a desire that we
    do not pass this clause, because, they say, they want to see the witnesses. How disposed of in Bill
    A Bill
    The CHAIRMAN: (Reading) No.

    I. . . .
    ~:;- ·Corroboration now required
    The subcommittE:e notes that its examination of the bill is far from complete. Retained cl. 47 (2).
    74 ........ Treason ...... ···· .. ····,··· .. · .. • .... ····,········ .. Retained cl. 115.
    There are 748 clauses ir. the bill and many of these have not yet been considered.
    The considerable number of amendments recommended in this interim report ~rt::::::: ~~j~:lt~~· ~i'Si~i ·b.ii";"e$ i6'~nd'
    is:::::::::::::::: •i43: ::: .. Retained cl. 131 (1).
    212....... Seduction under promise of marriage ....•........... 144 ..... . Retained cl. 131 (1).
    indicates the necessity for a complete examination. 2i~"I: ~ . . .... Seduc~lon of f08ter child. 8tep child or ward; Seduc- 145 ..... . Retained cl. 131 (1).
    Hon. Mr. VIEN: Is this report of the subcommittee to be printed? '. ductwn of female emPlioyee ..................... .
    214. . . . . .. Seductjon of female pasilenger on vesseL ......... . 146 ... __ . Retained cl. 131 (1).
    The CHAIRMAN: Yes. 215. (1) ..• , Parellt or guardian prO!l\ll'ing defilem.e.nt .......... . 1Ii5 ...... . Retained cl. 131 (1).
    Retained in part in 184 (3).
    Hon. Mr. VIEN: Where? ,210: ...... Procuring· .. · .. :· .. · .. ·•····· .. ······ .. · .. ········· 184 .... .. SeeBbelow.
    The CHAIRMAN: In the proceedings of the committee. It~ has been taken
    ;~i;.,..... HOUllebolder permitting! defilement ...•........... '1 156 .. , ... DroPMd, see,B below.
    218: ...... Con8pi~acy to defile .. : ................ : ........ :; .. 408 (c} •.. Dropped. see B below.
    down; it will be printed, and the appendices referred to will be attached; and 219 ....... Carrial:knowledge of uiiotll or deaf mutes ........ 140 .... .. Retained as to part 01 section.
    retained. See B below.
    it will be distributed.
    Hon. Mr. ROEBUCK: Then we meet again and discuss the details that you
    220•... :.·.
    301........
    ProStitution of Indian ~men; .. : ............... 'J'......... .
    Carnal knowledge of girl under 14 ....... ;:.. ....... 138 ....•.
    Dropped. see B below.
    CI. 134 applies.
    wish to discuss. .~. Carnlllknowledge of girl between l~d 16 ........ 138 ...... . See B below .
    ,307':'; .. :.. Communicating venereal disease ........ " .. ,... ... 239 .... ,. Retained cl. 239 (3).
    Hon. Mr. VIEN: Next week, or later? :300 (2) .... Procuri:ng feigned marril'ge ......................... 242 ...... . Retained cl. 242 (2).
    '4 ., ..... Forgery ................ ; ........... ·.,.... :·;·· .. ···· 310 (1) .. . Retained cl. 310 (2).
    The CHAIRMAN: Yes. 41},;
    470.
    ..... For~r.y.:: ............. ~ ............................... : ..... . Repealed 1950.
    .: , r
    Hon. Mr. ROEBUCK: In the meantime we are going on with this tre- 1003 (2) .. , Thisntquires corrob oration in cases of havini .'
    mendously laborious job of checking these sections. . . .' attempting to have carpal knowledge of a girl under
    14 or. in cases of indecent assault under IleC. 292
    The CHAIRMAN: You have got to read every section. wheJ:e the evidence o( a child of tenp,1Il' ye""s is
    admltted unsworn. : . . ."
    Thereupon the committee adjourned. Section! 16 of the Canada Evidence Aot requires'
    corroboration of the lUIsworn evidence of a llhild
    . of tender lear8 in all cases. .
    Subsection (1) Of section:lOO3 which a:ove).'llS the ad-
    mission of suoh evidence'hae been dropped and
    left tp the operation of' Sec. 16 of the Canada
    " Evidence Act. The:y:have been held to be co-
    extensive and their history ,hows them as comingl
    frogl 'the same source •.
    ClaUlleIi66 retains the requirement that suchevi-
    de~ be corroborated: and it will apply generally.

    B
    Showi~g' where the requirement of corroboration has been dropped, replaced or added.
    :~'216. Procu~j.ng.' Dropped in'lespect to 134(1) (i)-Living on; the avails of prostitution).
    . It l':1UI ~n,idered tol~ incon~istent ;with the presnmptiO'll :railied by clause 184(2).
    217. Blouaeholder pex:mitting defilement. This has been held to apply to houses of assigna·
    tion:' It was thought that there wal no more"realon for rl1Auuing it in such cases than
    in bawdy houle cases whete the Code doea Jlo.t now requir~ It. ,
    218. Conspiracy. to de.file. . It was felt that it would be rarely, if ever, that the victim would
    . be able to· prove the COllspiracy Jl,nd that ther.e wae .no 'more reason for requiriug cor-
    roboration ,111 such cases t)lan in other cases of consplracy.
    220. Pl'Ostltutioll of Indian Women. This was dropped at the request of the Minister of
    mtizenship. 'and Immigration. In & letter da>ted Juue 15,: 1951, he stated iu part that
    Indians'should be in the lame position as other citizens under the Criminal Code.
    301. 'l'he requirement in clauae 134 setting out an instruction to be given to the jury is
    substitlllted for the requirement of corroboration. There have been a number of instan~es
    of attacks upon very youUg girls committed under circumstances where it' is difficult. if
    not impOlll,ible, to obtain corroboration otthe evidence of the victim. Jt is probable
    .tha.t in sOme .of such cases the offeneee, a;re committed by cl'imjnal sexual psychopaths.
    It is, feU..that the issue of credibility should be. left to the jury under such a safeguaru
    a8 clause 134 provides. : ' :
    .\ Clause '134 involve. an' addedproviBion.""A .rule of practice requires .that the instruc-
    tion set out in the clause be given in case. ,of rape. This rule of practice has hen codified
    . to cover rape and attempts to oommit rape.
    In dealing with corrCJIborati,on it may be mentioned that a similar rule of practice
    , , applies with regard .to the evidence of accomplices. It has not been codified in that
    respect and is mentioned here only because it might. apply in cases of incest.
    219 .. 'Thil appears in clause 1400 omitting the reference to deaf mutes. This omission is
    consequellt upon ,the case of R. 11. Probe, 79 C.C;C. 289. where it was held that it IllUHt
    . be ahown that the woman was, by reason of .her infirmity; mentally and morally iucllpllble
    of reaietmg the solicitations.
    59664-3
    34 STANDING COMMITTEE
    BANKING 'AND COMMERCE S~ I
    !
    SECTIONS UNCHANGED OR CHANGED IN FORM ONLY
    SECTIONS UNCHANGED OR CHANGED IN 'FORM ONLY

    Bill No. :1
    Code No. Bill No. Code No.
    Bill No. . Code No. Bill No. Code No. I
    'I;,
    125 ............ 1 185, 189, 190. .. Changed in form
    only. 172 ............ 1 640............ Changed in form
    only. 219 ............. /281 ............ 1 Changedhlform 256... .. ....... 321............ Unchanged.
    . only.
    126 ............ 1193, 194, 195. .. Changed in form 257 ............ 322 ............ Unchanged.
    only. 173 ............ 1640,641 (1) ..... Changedinform
    only. 221.. ......... , 285(2).. .. .. .. . Unohanged.
    258............ 323............ Unchanged.
    127 ............ 1191,192 ........ Changed in form 222.,,...........
    only. 175 ............ /230. .. .. .. .. . .. Changed in form ,', 2811(4) ......... Unohanged.
    only.
    ;

    259 ............. 324............ Unohanged.


    223 ............ 2811(4)(a) ..... Unchanged.
    128... ......... 186............ Unchanged. 260............ 325............ Unchanged.
    176 ... .' ... '. ... 228,229 (1) .. ,.. Changed in form
    . only. 224:0.:'.}; ..... 285(4) (b) to
    131 (2) ........ 214 (2) ......... Unchanged. (e) ............ 1 Unchanged. 261 ............ 331 ............ Unchanged.
    131 (4)........ 211 (2), 213 (2), I
    177 ..... : ...... 235 (1)......... Changed in form
    226 ... ;;~ ....... 1285(5) ......... Changedinform 262 ............ 319 ............ Unchanged.
    301 (4)........ Changed in form only. only.
    only. 179 ............ 1 236,442 (b) ..... Changedinform 263 .• : ......... 327 ............ Unchanged.
    135 ............ 298 (1) ......... Unchanged. . only. 229 ............... 1288.289.595 .... 1 Changedinform
    only. 264............ 328............ Unchanged.
    •
    137 ............ 300............ Unchanged. 181 ............ /442 (a) ••.• , ... Unchanged •
    230. "~';.,. ..... 290.·........... Unohanged. 265............ 326............ Unchanged.
    141.. .......... 292 (a), (b) .... Changed inform 182............ 228,229 (2). (4).
    (6). (7)....... Changed in form 233 ... <;;~ ...... 1297 ............ 1 Changedinform 268 (a) ........ 335 (tl) .. ...... Changed inform
    only. <;\. only. only.
    only.
    142 ............ 1204 ............ 1 Changed in form//183 ............ /li29 (8) .......... 1 Unchanged. 234 ...:II!...... 313............ Unchanged. 268 (b) ........ 335 (hJ ........ Unchanged.
    only.
    185 (a). (0) 235......... ... 315............ Unchanged. 268 (e) ........ 335 (j) ......... Changed inform
    143 ............ /211 (1) ....... :. Unchanged. and (d) ....... 1 240 ............ 1 Unchanged. . only.
    236 ... , ........ 316 ............ Changedinform 268 (d) ........ 335 (k) ........ Changed inform
    144 ............ 212 ............ Changed inform 187 ............ 246 ............ Unchanged. ..',.' only. only.
    only.
    146 ............ 1214 (1) ......... Changed inform 188............ 248............ Unchanged.
    237 ... ,·, ....... 303.304 ........ Changedinform 268 (e) ........ 1335 (/) ......... 1 Changed inform
    only. only.
    only. 194.... .. .. .... 250. 252. 253... Changed in form
    147 ............ 1 202............ Changed in form only. 238.;:·......... 305 ............ Unchanged. 268 m........ 335 (8) ........ Unchanged.
    only. 195 ............ 251............ Unchanged. 239 ............
    ',.
    1. 307 ........... . Chani6d in form 271....... ...... 348............ Unchanged.
    151 ............ 1 207A. .. . .. . . .. Changed in form
    ",~~,(
    only.
    196 ............ 257............ Unchanged. 272 ............ 349 (1) ......... Unchanged.
    only. 240 .. ;;· .... : .. 13~; ......... ;. Changed in form
    197 ............. 258............ Unchanged. only. 274... .. .. • .. •. 352............ Changed in form
    152 ............ 1208 ............ Changed inform 1"1:; . .
    only.
    . only.
    199 ............ 256 .... : ....... Unc~anged. 242"';';!'1.,~.':.~ .~09 (2),1002(d). U,nc~ged.
    153 ............ 1209 (a). (b) .... Changed in form ";.') , . 275 ............ j3M ............ 1 Unchanged.
    only. 200 .. : ......... 255 ...... : ..... Unchanged. 243... " ........ 310.948 ........ Changedlnform
    ii" only. 2~6...:.: ...... 355 ............ Changed inform
    201 ............ 259............ Unchanged. only.
    155 ... " ....... /215 (1)......... Unchanged. 244.·~;~i. :...•••.. ~11 .•.....••... Changed in form
    156 ............ 217 ............ Changedinform 203 ............ 261............ Unchanged. .i only. 277 ............ 1356 ............ 1 Unchanged.
    only. 206... .. .. .. . .. 263............ Unchanged. 245:. ;'t;;...... 312.;.......... U'nchanged. 278 ............ 357 ........... . Unchanged.
    158 ............ /205 ............ Unchanged. 246... 198 .. ;......... Unchanged. 279............ 378 (2) ....... .. Unchanged.
    207 ............ 268 ............ Unchanged.
    161............ 199. 200, and
    208... ......... 268A........... Unchanged. . 247 ... :'......... 2 (23) ......... . Unchanged. 28~ ........ " l ' 285 (3) ........ . Changed in form
    201.. . .. .. .. .. Changed in form only.
    only. 209 ............ 306 ............ Unchanged. 248;.:!~ .....\." ,317 .......... .. Unehanged.
    282 ............ 1390 ............ 1 Unchanged.
    !
    165 ............ /221,222 ........ 1 Cha.;gedinform 11),10 ........ : ... /264 ............ Changedinform' 249;;..·.··1.'. r...... 31,8, .......... . U.I1ohanged. ...111"~I... '1 '
    -only. ~~. ~~.I·h" ,.' . • : ,:.: .. ::~:
    " 3~. 431 (4).-
    106 ............ 1 136 ............ Changed inform 250;:~~....... <133 ........... . Unchanged. 'c.. ~~; 638 and 990 .. _, C:nl'i!ed in form
    251.~'~': •.. :.:·~ lJ34~.: ......... ..
    only. 211............ 267..... ........ Unchani6d.
    Unchanged.
    : . II 286.,....... :.:.1 396 ........... . Changed in form
    '~:
    167 ............ /237 ............ Unchanged. 213 ............ 270 . .' ............ Uno4anged.
    252.3tf'..:,\1' ••:••:; ... ::,•• Chani6d inform' . . ~nly.
    169............ 985,986 (1). (2) 214 ............ 271 ............ Cli.angedinform only•.
    and (3)....... Changed in form only.
    ·V· 288..., .~~N; .. .. /445. 446. 448 .... Changed in form
    .' • 329 ... : ... , .... 1 Unchanged. only.
    only,
    170 ............ /986 (4) ......... 1 Changed in form
    only.
    215 ............ /272............ Unchanaed.'
    218............ 276............ Changed inform
    2M'J~''': .j!.. 1'330•........... . ChaniBd in form
    &;,17·""" only.
    289"";"""'1
    , l:r
    .
    .'
    i
    447 ........ • .. • .. Changed
    only. inform
    only. ~-',' '

    ..255;J:~4r-Sl
    ••,t, .....• ;1'310........... 1Unchanged.' :290 ............. 449: ........... Unohanged.

    ;;,'If~~~-1
    G6 . STANDING COMMITTEE . BANKINGAND.cOMMERCE) 3~

    SECTIONS UNCHA:NGED OR CHANGED IN FORM ONLY SECTIONS UNCHANGED· OR CHANGJ!lD IN FORM ONLY

    Bill No. Code No. ..;..


    Bill No . : CoM No. Bill No. Code No.
    t Bill No. Code No.

    I
    291... . . .. .. ... 450-454........ Changed in form 376 ............ \, 541 pt... L .... Unchanged.
    only. 334 ............ 14,28 ............ 1 Changed in form 1£23 ........... . 586, 587 ... ~ .... 1 Changed in form
    only.
    295. . . . . . . . . . .. 464............ Changed in form
    only. 378.: ...•.•.... 516A .... J•...•. Changedinform I

    . only. 335 ............ 417 (a), (b)..... t;rnchanged.


    I only. I~25 ........... . 604 ............ 1 Changod ill form
    only.
    296 ............ 399 ............ Unchanged. 343. .. .. . . .. . .. 4.14............ Changed in form 379 ........... '1 624 .:. .... I. .....
    Unchanged. , i
    only. 380 ............ 526 ...... ~ ..... Changedinform 426 ............ 1 606 ............ Changed in form
    297 ............ 399............ Unchanged. .' only.
    I only.
    345.. . .. .. .. ... 417 (c).. .. .. ... Changed in form
    298... . . .. .. ... 364, 365, 400 ~28 .. ·.......... , 645,714,787.... Changed in form
    and 869. . . . . .. Changed in form
    only. 381""""""1 527., ... .l ..... Unchanged. . only.
    only. 346... . . • . . . ... 408,410........ Changed in form
    pnly.
    382 ....... : .... 529.L .... fI ..... Changedinform
    only. ~30.;, •...•.... 630 ....... ~. ... Unchanged.
    303.. .......... 404............ Unchanged. i

    304... .... .. ... 405,407 (2).. ... Changed in form


    347 ............ 409 ............ Changed inform
    only. ,
    'r
    383 ............ 1 530 ..... i ..... Changed inform
    only.
    436 .......... .. 649............ Unchanged.
    only. 1137 ........... . 600.. . ......... Changed in form
    348 ............ 411 ............ Unchanged. only. '
    385 ............ 1 536 ...... ~ ..... Changedinform I
    305 ............ 406 (1) ......... Unchanged.
    349 ............ 486 ............. Changed inform
    . only. i1I39 .......... .. 653. 604 .... .••. 1 Changed in form
    '. only.
    306....... ..... 406 (2) and (3).. Unchanged. only. 386 393.537 m, .... '1' Changed
    only.
    in font;l
    307 ............ 407 (3) ......... Unchanged. 351 (1) ......... 488 (1).489 ..... Ch"ngedinfprm ~ ............ I 655 {I}, (2}'and
    only. (4). 658' (3)
    308 ............ 443 ............ Unchanged. 388 ............ 1 543" .......... 1 Changed in form and 659. (2) ... Changed in form

    r
    only. only. .
    351 (2) ......... 488·(2) ......... Unchanged;
    309... .... ... .. 466............ 1!nchanged.
    351 (3) ......... 336............ Unchanged. 389 ............ 1 544 ••.... : ..
    .
    ".1 Chan~dinform
    only. l ............ , 658.782 (l)i .. .. Changed in fdrm
    310... . . . . .. ... 468, 1002.... ... Unchanged. only.
    390 .............. 1 545 ...... t..... \ Changed in fofm
    351 (4) ......... 335 (n) and (w)
    311.. . . .. . . . ... 467............ Changed in form 341 and 342 •. ;. Changed in form .42 ............ \659 (1). 660 (2)
    only. only. ..'
    . only.
    .
    407." ....•.... 1'69 (d). 57~pt... Changed in form
    - i and (3) and
    664 ...... , . . .. Changed in form
    312... .. .. . . . .. 471,472,473.... Changed in form 352 ............ 1 488 (1) (a). (e) only.
    only.
    313 ............ 474............ Unchanged,
    and (~) and
    494. . . . . . . . . .. Changed in form
    only.
    only.

    408 (a) ... : .. .. \266 (a) .. ; ..... \ Unchanged.


    ~3
    I I '
    ............ 660 (1) .... : .... ChangedinfOl'm
    only.
    316.. . .. . . . . . .. 265,516,537 (1) 354.... . .. .. ... 490A \........ Changed in torm
    408 (b).. .. .... '178 ...... i . .. .. Changed lD form ~........ .... 660 (4) and (5) .. Changed in form
    (e) and 538 ... Changed in form only. only.
    only.
    only.
    4C)8 (e) ........ 573: ..... \ ..... Unchanged.
    317 ............ 1477 ............ 1 Unchanged.
    357.. .. .. .. .... 992............ Changed hi form 448 .. ······· .. · 667 ....... i···· Changed
    only.
    in fofm
    . only. 409 ............. 496.497........ Unchanged. ! '
    ~19 ............ 479 ............ Changed in form 358............ 430............ Unchanged. 410 (l). . .. .... 590 ...... , .... • Changed in form ti9 ... :.,........ \ 668 ............ \ Changed inform
    only. I only. '.
    1 only.,
    359 ............ 432............ Unchanged.'
    322 ............ 1 335 (m), (0), ~53 ............ 682.683,6814 (I) Changed in form
    (v), (x), (y) 360....... ..... 433............ Unchapged. 410 (2).. .. .... 2 (4l} .... !..... Unchanged. only.
    and 88. (2). Unchanged.
    324 ............ 209 (e)......... Unchanged.
    361.. .......... 434(2).{2)..... Unchanged. 411 ............ 498 ...... ; ..... Changedinform
    i only.
    ...... u,.'
    .55 ............ \ 685 ....... '..... \ Unchanged.
    325 ............ 444A ........... Unchanged.
    363 (1)......... 436............ Unchanged.
    ~~t- :--~

    412 ............ 1 498A .... I .. · .. 1 Changed in form t.56 ............ 655 (2) and (3), \
    6 6 6........... ChangedlDform
    .'
    only. only;'
    364... . ........ 991............ Changed in form
    326 . ., ......... 231,987 ........ Unchanged. only. . 414 ........... . I./m. . . . . . . .. ... Changed in form 457 .............. \ 678 ............ \ Changed inform
    327 ............ 231A........... Unchanged. only. . only.
    367 ............ 502A .... :.; .... ,unchanged.
    328 ....... ., .,. 419............ Changed in form 371.. .. .. .. . ... 509. 541 pt.. .... Changed in form • 6s1A. • ••...... ;Unchanged~ 458 ............ 1669 ............ Changed inform
    only. only.
    only, (I), (2) .... 1 888............ Unchanged~.
    329 ............ 420............ Unchanged. 372 ............ 1 See sees. noted
    in Bill. p.125.:1 Changed in form
    330.... ........ 421............ Unchanged. only.
    332.. .. . .. .. ... 426............ Changed in form 374 ............ 1 5U. 513 ...... .. Changed in form /'
    only. only.
    333. .. .. .. . .. .. 427............ Changed in form 375 ............ I 512.514 ....... . Changed in form
    only. only.
    ,./,. .,....
    \.:,
    I."
    'to
    '38 STANDING COMMITTEE 39
    BANKlNG AND COMMERCE
    SECTIONS DROPPED NEW PROVISlONS.
    l ,
    '~ (
    Code No. Code No. Code No. Code .No.
    . .,. . '
    l~'::
    Bill No. Bill No. "il
    I,
    i
    No.'
    Bill No.

    2 (1) 223 408 (d)


    366-377 /sUi (3)-(6) .. 2 (6) 85 (2) 186 (3) (d)
    Para. (3) 224 378 (1) 540 . ., , 419 (d)
    (6) "Ji4{. S (7) 87 191}
    (9) 1- 192
    232
    (10) 379-385 549 (2) 2 (10) 92 ! .<., ,'-,' 193 , 420 (1)
    (16) 233 421 (3)
    (18) 386 (2) 568 2 (26) 116 .~/ :l~;~, .~21 (1)1
    (20) 247
    (26) 388 578 , 2 (27) 120 ... 241 (2) 431
    (28) 275 432 (3), (4)
    (35) 389 588 2 (32) 121 280
    (37) 285 (1) 392 (d) 589 2 (37) 134 , ".
    3.63 (2) 438 (1)
    14 285 (6) 450 (2), (3)
    393 592 7and8 154 '.' 370
    38 302 451 (e) (B)
    395 594 11 162 372 (1)
    100 314 452
    401 596 50 (a) (ii) 185 (b) .397
    104 335 (1) (a) .,
    403 597
    107 335 (1) (b) .. '
    407 (1) 598 SECTIONS IN WHICH THERE ARE SUBSTANTIVE CHANGES
    , 108
    335 (1) (e) 412 (1) 599-602.
    109 335 (1) (e) 415A (a), (d), (6) 603 Remarks
    Bill No. CadeNo.
    110 335 (1) (e) /;lnd (f) 422 605
    130 335 (1) (i) 423 607
    131 335 (1) (p) 424 (2)-(5) 619 124.'. , ........... 1 187,188 ................ ".1 'As re<lrawn includes everyone in custody and not only those
    132 335 (1) (q) on a oriminal charge.
    429 620,621
    140 335 (1) (r) 129 .............. 1 196 ... •................. 1 Definition of escape redrawn to make certain that it includes
    431 (1)-(3) 623-626 .... "breaking prison" •
    . 170 (2) 335 (1) (t) 441 627,628 130 .......... : ... 1 197.; ........ · ...... • .. I···Guardian" unohanged in effect. Referred to in secs. 145
    179 (1) 335 (1) (u) and 165. . •
    493 636
    181 337 "Publio place" clarified so as to include places where public
    495 643 ".' hare access in fact but not as of right.
    184
    203
    338
    343
    500
    503
    656 131 (1) ........ "'j ,1002 {o) ..... ; .......... COrrobomtion no longer required under sec. 156.
    663 131 (3) ........... 210 ................. : .. Widened to include carnal knowledge of girl between 14 and
    205A (2) 16.
    211 (3)
    349 (2) S04A 665 (1) ,
    132 .............. 1 294 ..................... This may be widened by inclusion of the offence of carnal
    350 505 (3), (4) 688 knowledge.
    220 353 506 689 133 ............. ·.1 215 (7),1140 (1) (0) .... ;1 Corroboration no longer required in cases of a householder
    222A 358-363 permitting defilement. cl. 156.
    508
    ""13&. ,' ..• ',', ''';;';;'•• 1299 •. ; ....... ,' .. ',; .. "j Death.penalty for rape abolished.
    1("1)
    I' 138 .............. 301' (1)-(3) .......... :,. ~rroboration no longer required by virtue 01 the provisions
    of 01.134.
    139 .............. 1 298 (2) ................ :1 The rule which applied to rape is extended to cases of carnal
    knowledge. .
    , .
    140 .............. \219 .. ,., .... , .. '.' ....... \ The ~tion no 10~ger covers women ~hO ~re de~f and du~b.
    B5 ............... 213 ..................... Suhsectloll (2) 18 dropped as bemg Inconsistent Wlthn
    /. l ' I. Hl0duction".
    ..... H8 ........ ; .... ,\206 ... , .• , "',';:"" ....;.\ Widened to Include al.1 act. of gross indeoency irrespective
    _~ . d~ .
    .:,; if'150 .•••.. :....... 207 .•.. , .• , ••..... '., .••. Widllne<l to include phonograph records.
    ,t~
    ".~ '(

    ~I.'

    40 . STANDING COMMITTEE.
    BANKING ,AND COMMERCE 41
    SECTIONS IN WHICH THERE ARE SUBSTANTIVE CHANGE8-Conti,jued
    SECTIONS iN WilICH THERE ARE SUBSTANTIVE CHANGE&-Continued
    • ... r,:"

    Bill No. Qode No.


    -~.:
    ~%~~,:
    ..::=) = = : : : : i : : : : : ; : = = = = = ; = = = = = = = = = ; = = = =
    Remarks
    ··4 Bill No~ Code No. Remarks
    , "j:~;~
    {;t' l;I, ~:,' ,,' ,
    157 ....
    \{~~~;......
    215 (2)-(6) ..•. Age of child raised from 16 to 18 :to conform to Juvenile
    Delh)quents Act. COVIlfS conquct likely to endanger ... ::: . 269:: '.'.:: ::':: .: .::,":, :~::.::.-'II';i~en~~'to c.o~et, cases in which suicid~ dQes not follow.
    ,
    insteiLd of an irrebuttable pr~sumption arising from
    certa.in conduct. , .')),6: ........... ,:. 273 ............... ;';,... The emphasIS h$.S been placed on' the mt.tnt rather than on
    Illegitimate are in same positiop as legitimate. ." ;' . , . , "the ·means. The word "lawful" has been omitted in re-
    159 .. " . 205A";,,, .. ,., .. , .. '" Provisi04 requiring consent 'of' AtMrney General has been spect of an II,rtest as it was felt that discharging a firearm
    dropped. ! , should not be condoned even though the arrest was
    , "unlawful. i ;
    160 .. 100. 222B and 238 (e) (e)
    and ~a) .... ... , " .... 1 Fighting 'has been included. 217 .............. 1 277,278 .. '... :.','.::.'. :.:1 Para: (b)'iB'chaqged by adding "aggrieves or annoys".
    161. .. , , ....... , . 199. 20l1. 201. ... , ...... , Widened: to include obstructing a :clergyman in' the per- 282 .................. :, ... . Wid~ .tq 'oo~ef all common carriers.
    formMce of any duty. i ,(2).; .~ ....... 286 (2) ................. . Widened to ~cluae all vehicles.
    163 .........•... ,I 51OA, ............... ,., "Alarm'~ has been added in Para. (a~.
    164 ..... ,.,., ... ,1 238 (a) (d) (i)(J) (k)239 Para. (b) of sec. 238 is dropped. Par•. (b) the provision for a
    ......... ..... . 285 (7! ~d .(8),.,. , .... ~ Wid~ned t:? ,?9yefoases of impaired driving .
    .............. 286 ...•...•.. , •. , ... '," Widened to covet all cases and not only those of shipwrecked
    certificate has Qeen. dropped. Para, (d) the word\\ "it).
    whole or in part "have been substituted for "the most
    ··'~DS; .. r, ,"
    part." Para. (e) widened to cover all the offences for " L!'">;'f:': " I
    ,which./Ul.offender
    psychopath: . .mav . . .• be
    . .founp.
    . , tp. b.......
    Y r
    criminal sexual
    . '. t
    287: ..• :. ;-.: .... : ... : .. One ne'W offenCe !hIlS been oreated.' .
    . 168 ... : .......... [ 225.226,227; 229 (3).985 .. , ." . !
    and 986 (2) .......... . The definitions are drawD from the sections of the present 274; 29t, 295.'.:.::.. ::.:' :The'oltences of wounding and C&using'lttiavous bodily harm
    Code mentioned in column 2. Subsec. (a) has been . in sec. 2U have been merged with the offence of causing
    • ac!tUal bOdily harm. . '. .
    iDserted to remove any doubt as to whether it was
    incumbent OD the accused to bring himseU withiD the 275 (b), 296:.:: .'.::: .. ,'; Assaulta'ooJ'mhitted on election day hav~ been dropped' as
    exemption, that being a matter peCllliarly within his cC)vered otherwise.
    knowledge. . , • ". • <.,' ;" ~., .' ,. •. .

    171. ... ,., ...... ,1641.,., ............... . It nOw limits seizure to things which may.be evidence. of the ~~2, 9~a, ,947 ......'., .... V The proviaioJl., s&c. 912 (1), about notices;
    . ", :.
    ~ ~ ~"",' .
    is dropped. . '

    commission of any of the offences mentioned thereiD. ........ ' ..... 1 9~:.,., ......... :... : ..... .. The referflllce to: criminal information is dropped. Subseo .
    174. " .... , ... , .. 1 642, ....... , . , ...... , •. 1 Sec. 5 of the. Canada Evidence Act is niade applicable to . (2) of ¥C.' 11M ill dropped. '
    persons exaniined thereunder. Subsec. 3 of sec. 642
    referring to opium joints is dropped, III! it is covered by .I
    270..... ; .... 1344-347,,861 (e) . ",' .','. We have ~clud.et:;~hese for examination.
    the Opium and Narcotic Drug Act. ,. J "Ga8"'h~ been t.dded.
    351. ............. : ....

    i~lll1'. :, ............,39t,.,
    j' .. , .. :~; .. ;":':"I
    178" , , , ... , . , . ,.1 235 (2)-(6), ... , . , .. , . , , Subsec. (1) (d) (ii) changed by adding "six heat races of two
    heats ooch" . This change was approved by the Minister -:~ 9hs:a~8C)
    "as to include a refusal after ~ployment
    . term-

    EJ~-, ......:......... ~~opped


    of Agriculture. ,
    180 .............. 1 234 ........ _............ Widened. to cover aU public conveyanc~s. The power to '392." ... : .... ,'. '.' ,::: . pan:. as it appeared unnecessary in view of thl) (d)
    . arrest is no longer obligatory. ,. . '., '. :. of the Animal CODtagiOUS I?iseases Act. '~viaious

    184.. ........... ,I 216, 1002 (e). 1140 (1) , 397 .. \I:' 1.: .. ,.......... J. The worda ~'~apable of heing stole'!" have be!l'! dropped.o.s
    (e) ................. ,. Corroboratio,n no longer required under.sllbsec. (1) (i). . .. . , . . . these wordS have been dropped m the prOVISIonS defimng
    . .. ' theft.' :
    186", ........... 1 241. 242 and 244 .. , . , ... 1 The present law makes a person "who is under a legal duty
    to provide necessaries" criminally responsible for failure 455-461 .. : .... :.'.'::' .. :. 'The onty change is to extend the provisions to vessels, aero..
    to do. so. The section as redrawli declares tM duty .' .. . . . ~~ and trailers. .
    which exists in law and effects no real change. Subseo.
    (3) (d) is new. ' .. ...... ,':i .':'/ 462. : ..'.. ::;'. : '. .r. ~':. :: :'Tbe}ioUt.yon ofthis offence to night is abolished.
    •.•• J ' ., ! .... ' . ,
    189 ...... , ..... "1245 ........... , . . . . . . .. The age limit h,ja been increaSed to ten years. . ............ , 340 ............ :, •.•. ,",. )Vi!iene4 ~,ilJ9hide a tetllpOra,ry as.well o.s a perman~t
    ~'," q~", ; ,t 'l!:r I ,. t' I
    ., .. '"" .... , ...... ft,f· ortei1:fq}·' i . t . , · ... ' "~,1

    190~ .. :.:'..... ·... T'h.Ii:~:been Widened tooove~ all c~ where a ~as~r


    I '.' '" ..., ' " . '-" . , '.":,," _j" I ,".'

    243,249 ...... : .. ;.. '.',': .. '. ~l'i.,· "~" ..: ., II '01,/·1,. ,...J, ",.,," ...."'li.,.J ~ . .'Of '~".' ...' I ,.• ,
    .... ......... 3""; ..... ::.; .. ; ..• :;:, 'vnaenea W'mclu'l'e the offence re~eMitit.
    . , hasco'!trac~d to provide neceasad«f to a servant o.r
    ",,' ':" ,:~. ';:;., ·~,'.:t;~~~tl.~~ ; : . ~~~\ l' ' 1.1 ~ t"d:,'; ;,~'~. t·, r;..;..U:~~ :"'~f. ~ -I'f.·f'·h~·~~ *t.,_·
    . t ",: . . ' "'\' , . 0".__:' I ;-.;
    'ILI
    .... ::;: .. :".... : Wl .. ~: ~: ,.'........: .... ~' Wl.i:lllii.el.tto1Dclu~e the olience ofretallri'tlid.
    , ... ,,', ,'" ,<" :., ," "",,1'1'1« ';'1,,11' ~
    198"""""""f 254".,., .... "., ........ This is widened ,to include cases in WhiCh.' death is cau.sed 301.. ............ 993 .................... Made applioAbl ~ all~.
    !,,,,,,, "".;;n~~ :I'(I~'''!'~'''. 'l."~:;iiMf~~~.'~
    ,e!!,t~~. 'f~b.
    ' 1 1:,:' ' . ' : " '(". d :; f.' ,', ':"~'": c; ,,'!. by..erimuuU pegligenoe. tld)!. ~,~J. rec;eivil'l' nd retaining a!,d
    ' , . ' '.. tto r600 I D lfon y. Italsopermlts
    20.2 ..... ,·".,........ 260,;., .. ; ... , ...,."~ ..,. This has been· changed by deleting thl!.~ords "of its UIIe'- /
    ~'~r\~~"""'"
    b.. ;""'.!.(' ',".y fl"." ned through the
    .. ' . which appea~ at the end of para. ( d) of the present section,' I ~'~l J.,"I/, ·.::'fI~·r:l!!. I'.' J. ' ·~/,L·;.. d·((J\$' -:.d.! ~r~ .~. ():~ ..,,fflffl~.<T7.?1'f" i.,~""o.,\~ru~~'·.!: .,,·;'~t~·: ,
    t
    ,~,206.... , ,. " d 262,;.; ..'c. ,:,. i.,"' .. ,', ., L ,The. definitiol)'oiinfanticide is taken the English Arl. ttoni ~o.1.'·'· y. \'" !:,.. i.~ .., "liilA'" "'·I';".:!. ;,,' .. kq.!~; i.M·d,~:;· tIr.;·i!Ii. '~n .........,j' i-re'~·Vi.M" d ta"
    1:·'111··~V·;"~·i}·~·· /. ",i"f". l$"J: . . . ~\·;~U-;..:.J.'V l-tHl"/:' ~ '[78'/<:1 ·,tR'i~~~ofl~f11;,,\;'" .. j~.o·~ -(~ ""'.1n. L rF':R j. re lnIng.
    tiIte.

    It-fixe. the age of a newly-born child at one year and ~141.." ,,:' '. 'ic 4ti1 . i, l.,.,,;~.:;. ",i "J",u 'W1tlilnea' w:i{ic}ude eia:lIle~ani~ !~llii> !messages
    3),~j~j,::;·;,;:;:;:;,~~.~:;, ':~lQ,i;~::::;::,;:; :.~;:;';::,;::~,{:; :';~tJl~~jtt?~"!~~~~~~;~I1~;~~~;~lf or radio:
    includes cw in which the mind is disturbed from the
    effects of lactation. ~ :J, ': .\
    .~~~I .... '

    ,Ir
    "

    42 STANDING COMMITTEE BANKING AND COMMERCE 43


    SECTIONS IN WHICH THERE ARE SUBSTANTIVE CHANGES-Oontinued SECTIONS IN WHICH THERE ARE SUBSTANTIVE CHANGES-Cominued

    :: ~
    Bill No. Code No. Remarks 'Bill No. Code No.
    ,.
    ',,,, Remarks 'j
    :,11

    318 .............. 1 478 .................... 1 Changed in form. The reference to testamentary instrument.
    has been replaced by a general provision coveriog any <~:l ,:~,
    instrument issued under the authoriW of law.
    The following changes are to be noted:
    320,321. ......... 1 48G-483 and 528 ......... ' Widened to include all public re~sters. Paras. (b) and (c) Paper money now partly covered by ss. 549 and 550, and otherwise by the
    " of sec. ~1 have been droppea because covered by 01. 287. ""h
    'M':
    ,:;.iIj,t:,;~
    forgery sections, are fully covered in Part X of the Bill. Counterfeiters nowadays
    323 ........... ,... 1 444: ........ , .......... 1 Intent to defraud has been made an element of the o~ence are more apt to make counterfej~pa,er money than coins. '
    created by sub-sec. (2). . , It has been made olear that there is a right to sei.fe counterfeit money. (Cl.
    405 (2». . , . .
    331.. ............ 1 425 .................... 1 Changed by being put in general terms. Knowledge is no longer an irigredient of the offences under cis. 393 and 395.
    (Cf. sees. 550 and 563 (b) (e)., It was felt that the words "without lawful justifica-
    tion or excuse" protect the person who unknowingly has possession of counterfeit
    336 .............. 1 412 (2) ................ . Widened to include admission. Subsec. (1) covered by )I1j;' money. '
    forgery or the new cl. 397. It.~~\ The Bill is designed tocop,e with the methods of counterfeiters who do not
    337 .............. 1424 ................... . Subsec. (2) and subsec. (5) of sec. 424 have been dropped. give large amount. to "paasars' at anyone time. Clause 397 is new.
    The present sec. 549 (2) i. dropped. This dealt with the issue of tokens other-
    338 .............. 637 .................... The powers of the justice have been widened. wise than by publioauthority. It waa felt that this waa not likely to be a matter
    of such general importance that it should be included in the Code.
    339 .............. 424A................... "Oil well" has been added. "Yl')l

    340... ........... 413,415,418,484,485... Changed by being put in general terms.' ~.;, ........... / 570, 571, 572 pt. 574 and
    , 575 ................. . The only change is to make an attempt to commit a summary
    341.. ....... .;. .... 415A (b), (c) ........... Paras. (a), (d) and (e) have ~n dropped. conviction offence or being an accessory after ·the fact to a
    summary conviction offence, an offence punishable on sum-
    342 .............. 416 ........... ,' ........ Changed by being put in general terms. mary conviction instead of by indictment.

    344... . . . . . . .. . .. 412 (3)..... . .. . . .. . .... Widened to cover contraband other than liquor. :~~;!.,:,.!'" ... 1218 ................... . Corroboration i8 no longer required for this offence as it
    would be rarely, if ever, that tile victim could testify to the
    350 ........ : . . . .. 487.................... Widened to include name or initials. ~('r'';I'J\,! ,~.•
    agreement hence there did not appear to be any greater need
    to require corroboration for a conspiracy under this provision
    353 .............. 490 ........... ~ ........ Mens rea has been made an element. than under any other.

    355 (2) ........... 1491'635,1039 ...... : .. .. This removes a conflict between these provisions. .l~: ;~{; ••• " : ..• ;11i,8O (1), 582...,.-nd 583 .. ·1' T~e following l!st 8ho~ the offences which will not be ra-
    j. i.-I 5! ' , , quired to be tried by JurYI
    356 .............. 492 ................... . The reference to a government department of the United
    Kingdom is deleted. ~It"; Difelice ., '
    362 .............. 1,435 ................... . Identity card added in (c) and (4) at request of Department
    ;':w:.
    i~~y
    Oode No. Bill No.
    Seditioul ot!encee ........ ; ... i .................... ; ... , .. 134 61
    of Natipna\ Defe,nce. " 'J .:,~ Libela on foreigD sovereigns:; .. ; •... , .................... . 135 62
    365 .............. 1 499 .................... 1 A breach of any contract depriving a community of essential A~."·,,!f.':.~f..l: .. SPJ'!B.ding falslt newI .. ~ ..........,' , ...................... . 136 166 "
    Judlo181 cor\'\lptlon ................ '.... ' .. , ............. . 166 100 (1)
    services has been made ,an offence; This restores the >1~.~~\~ ~ I:':, ~ Corru,Ption of offiderl enf.c:>rcitig criminal law ............ . 157 101
    effect of the section lUI it read originally. 'Frauds on gdvernment.:, .... , ... :, .. "I'" .......... ,.. 158 102
    . ~;\:J'~ Breach of trust by pubbc officer ....................... , . ,100 103
    366 .... , . , ....... 1 601, 502 ............. , .. , Para. ((J) of clause 366 added. There was duplioation ill II,il,:!~~It\: . Munloipal corruption. :;:.•. '.,.; ..... : .. , ...... , ......... .
    , secs. 501 and 502. - 161 104

    ff::~::~~i:'::: ::: ~::::::: ::::::::::::::::::::::::


    162 105
    368 .............. 1 504 .................... 1 Subsec. (4) is dropped thus permitting a charge to be laid 299 136
    under either cl. 368 or 336. 300 137
    Defamatory bbel. .... ,,' ........................ : ...... . 317-334 250-251
    369 .............. ~ 505 .. , ................. , Subsec. (4) dropped. Subsec. (3) dropped as unneceseary. .' Acc;essory after the fact to, an attempt to commit or a conspiraoy to commit, any
    373 .............. 1 539,740 (1) ............ The value of the property to which the section applies has of the I!obove, offenC9!l, ,bribery or undue influence, personation or other corrupt practice
    been increased from $20.00 to S50.00. Subsea. (4) is ta~ll under the Dominion Elections Act.
    from 740 (1). Acceseory after the fact to, an attempt to commit or conspiracy to commit, the
    followi~: .'
    377 .............. 5,15 (1) and (2),,'::,.: '.' 'Wide~~d,to cove'r all fires; . Intimidatinll Pe.rliament or A.le&ielature, . ' ,. i
    act. inteildea to alarm' Hlil Majeety or cause him bodily harm,
    .

    384... .. .. .. .. ... 531, 532 .. , ..... :1;. ..... InternaHonal boUndary h~ been "dde!i, , b" ,i}loitinc to lII,utiny, piracy 94' piratical acta. , .' . _ i
    d!' Offence. ~iIiat'se(l'. '130 and'131 relating 'to falslt'oathsl,w'hich were included in
    387 .............. 542 ......,.............. This section has been redrawn. Anr.
    changes that have been seo. ~ we~ drQpped,in t.h!\ revision. ' ; i
    " "'", ",." ;
    made appearin (a), (b) and (c. "
    Part X. Section. 391-406 ' . 581~':" ..... ;; : ..• ; ".',H "./. 'wid~;ed 'by the 'inclusion of 412. In addition it has been
    ,. reworded to briny it into harmony with the provisions
    This Part replaces the present Part IX (ss. 54~9) and the other seotions noted
    opposite p. 132 'of the Bill. ' , , ',: , ,of the Com,bmes nVIl!l~igation Aot., ;
    It is designed to alford a complete Code for the protection of the ourrenoy and to '!, ,\
    cover the defacing or debasiog of the coinage and the making or,poesession of counter.. ~ :,~, i , ,.
    feit money or of the instruments for making it, the utteriog of it, and the sei.ure and
    forfeiture of counterfeit money, the instrument. for making it, as well ae the deali~
    or trafficking in it. 't ;, '.j,
    The old Part ie almost wholly included in the DeW but by includlog in the defiAi.,
    tion of counterfeit money a good deal of the descriptive matter now set out in. the sec- ;',l'l;:;;l~ I • d'H'
    ,;; .
    tions, it haa been possible to effect 110m" coooolUlation.
    \

    44 '. STANDING ,COMMITTEE BANKING AND COMMERCE 45

    SECTIONS IN WHICH THERE ARE SUBSTANTIVE CHANGES-:Continued SECTIONS IN .WHICH TlJEJ;tE ARE SUBSTANTIVE CHANGES-Continued

    Bill No. Code No. Remarks /1," Bill No. Code No~ Remarks

    418 .............. 1 580 (2) ................ . This provision h~s been made general. I~ the present Code 461. ............. 1692.694................1 Theofprovillions of'these sections have been retuined in respect
    it applied only in the
    ,
    Province
    . of Quel)ec.
    , wimesses only.
    419 .............. 1584 .................. .. Para. (d) relating to offences committed i,l. aircraft is new.fI ,463 .............. 697.698, 700 and 702 .... These sections have been rewritten for simplification. Pro-
    Para. (e) has been widened ~ include all olIences committed . . ' . vision.has been made for a CRsh deposit in lieu of sureties.
    in the course of a journey, It now app.jies only in respect
    of certain offences relating to the ma1lt 404 ... :.. :.... ;::1699 ................... . This. provision h".. been reworded to reconcile a conflict iu
    the decisions. In Manitoba it was held the section
    422 .............. 1585 ................... . This provision has been made general. ~t now applies to applied only after committal for trial. In British Col.
    Ontario only. i . umbia it was held to apply both before and after com.
    , \ ~,.,
    ·mittaIIOrtrial. .
    424 .............. 1 See secs. in Bill, p. 143. The changes are as follows: I
    (1) Reference to Quo Warranto lias been drop~!!.;;
    (2) Sec. 576 (3) has been drop~d as unnecel!lliU1'
    ·485... :: .. .'.. ·r· :/5 (1) (a) .......... ..... , Reference to criniinal iliformations has be~n dropped.
    because tile Supreme Court Acit of Ontario created a , '~ ...•.•.••...• , 873 (5)-(7).... ..•.•.... Northwest Territories and Yukon included in subclause (I).
    .new court, the Supreme CQurt. to renlace the Supreme In subclause; (2) Deputy Attorney General is included
    Court of Judicature;, I for all instead of only for Quebec. .
    (3) Secs.· 1021 (15)-(17) requiring approval and
    tabling of rules made by a court of appeal are not con·
    tinued as there was no similar provisidn. rel.atJng to r~
    ·4;m......'. :: .... '..': I 962 ............... : ..•. 1Bill P;o-rldes that recognii~ce is vaca ted when proceedings
    " . stayed.
    made umler sec. 576. i ' . l'
    498 ..... ~ .. .'..... /865: ............... . :.... j Present eection refers to body corporate. "Person". by
    427 .. , ....... :.;.1644 .. ·............•... , .. A juvenile may be charged jointly wit!), an adult. The . .' interpretation includes corporation.
    proTision tbat the trial must be witnout publicity will
    still apply. ' 1101 .... ; ........ '.. 856 pt. 857. 858......... The only oliange is that therrovjsp in 857 (2) respecting the
    trial at the same time 0 charges of thelt. not exceeding
    429 ............... '1629. 662, .............'" Wid.ened to include offences under all Aots ·ofpe.riil"m~~. ,";"
    three. is not carried into the Bill. The court is to ha v
    . I . full discretion.
    432 ....... ,...... 631. .................. , .. New provisions added. Provision is madll for dealing with
    thiQgsseized
    . .
    under cl. 431. 'I ~ ...... :; ...•• .1849 (1) pt. 849 (2) 954 ... 1 Widened 80 as to include (1)-property obtained by indict.
    able offence other than theft; (2)-retaining property so
    433 .............. 1 633 .................. .. This provision was enacted at a time when &11. forfeit11l'ef obtained.
    ~L .. :::; ..• , ..I 874,875.. ..............1The Bill is apecific that witnesses examined before the grand
    went to the Crown in right of Canada.. In 1900 a change
    was made whereby certain forfeitures went to the
    provinces. As enforcement falls on thil provinces it was jury must be sworn. .
    felt that thl'Y should get the forfeitureil.
    507 ..· .......... ..
    434 .............. 1646 ................... . Widened to include all indictable .offflnces.',
    I
    510 (I}......... ..
    .<.-610 (2 .......... .
    819
    898
    889
    (1) ............... :. "or remain in attendance" added.
    (1) ................ . Demurrer omitted. Objection to be by motion to quasb.
    (1) ................. . ChaD.ied in form. .
    435... . . . . . . .. . .. 647.648. 652 pt ..... , . .. Changed to bring it in line with ·Q\.'434. . 510 (3 .......... . 889 (2) ............... .. The ollange is thait the matters proposed i,n amendment must
    be disclosed by the evidence.
    445 .............. 661. ................... Tpe seven mile lilpit fodresh pursuit h~ been abolished. .610 ~4) ...... ;.~ .. 889
    ·~110. Ii).; ....... .. 889
    ~2) (6) ............. .. Changed in form,
    4) ............... .. Changed in form.
    446... . . .. . . . . ... 662 (4)-(6).883. 941.977 This section provides the procedure tp ~ure the attendance '.'.:.!il0 6) ......... .. 889 6) ................ ;. Changed in form. As there are now no reserved cases. that
    '~'Jio (7) ...... ; .. ..
    of a prisoner who fs required 'in .any bourt to answer a reference is o.\llitted.
    charge or as a witness:. Whlll'e the. prisoner is outside 889 (3). 890............ . Chaageli in form.
    the province the order must be ma<hl by a judge. Where 610 (8) .......... . .845 (3) ................. .. Unolianged.
    the prisoner is within the province. the order maY be .510 (9) ......... .. 841 (2) ................. . Unchanged.
    made by a magistrate. SUQsecs: (5) an</. (6) deal with the
    passing of sentence where a prisOner u~dergoing sentence ~l'2 ............. . 6~1. 894-896. ~: .. : ••.••. / Ten cents perfoli~ (instead of five cents) to:be paid lor copies.
    is tried.
    6'14 ......... ,:: .. 695 (3) (4) ... ,.......... Widened~. include a magistrate.
    I
    447 .............. 1 662 (1)-(3).:. :'........ : The.pro.vision ;"'quirini. pr()()f of ~h(lsignature of the issuing
    ~ustlCe b"" been omltted,.
    . ' . . I; 'j j
    516 ................ 905 (1). 006.; ........... Changed 10 that: the issue of autrefois ac q. uit or convict is
    450 .............. 1 796 ................ "'.1 T\li.'S is practic.a.ll.Y.~ n.e..VI • .l..t .requires .a~·ustice to remand
    ..' .. . ~ be decided by the judge and not by the jury.
    ' . . , ' .. I CaB(lS to .1,10 • In.Ijgl.trati). wqere a magIs ate has absolute
    " :.... ,.:,'" jur~djqt.i!>n'•. j ~t:P,rq¥,i9~.J!l(an electi afte! tbeju~ic:e
    , ,.' .: .• ,hll-s, dr(ll. d~.d,.tii. c.<llnPl,l.t ,tli~....~used. or trlal. Tbls 18
    ;~l,~19 ... :'.: .. :.... ~ '~ ....... .... ::; .... :';.~~i~ as to inQlude infanticide.
    .. ' .. " '<til"'" 4tq·.·,tta.iii~wij,etli,er-.th(l used wishes trial ~:ii!
    by~ orb~a"juage ·arone":t·tli~"rJliest opportunity. ,t·,·. .', . .
    ..,'" 't'. . '.. This provision has received the approv~l of the provincial
    a!1.tho
    .. rjtiell..wh. 0 attended the jointl,PlI*lting
    , .... ; ··:';~···;in.~ilWnber·la8t.·· ., ," in . Toroll'A
    .~"
    1I.23.1iU.626...... 966.967. 968 .. ;~ ...... .. Cliauaed 10 as to ~clude a court acting un~er Part XVI •
    '~Ii)':;'; ~
    ".: : ..... 918 .. .:.. :.,' ........ :.: The length of notice is changed from two to seven days.
    451.. ............ 1 673. 679~·680;~i': .... :'::. 'he;~~i~'!"';hang~ is the clarification of ihe provisions re-
    lating to bail and the power to remand for mental exam·'
    ;'; 63P.............. 926 ................... . C~ 10 that the judge. and not triers.' decides the issue
    ::~~~~.: ( " ' . . ' " : ; ',' ! ~
    ination a woman who has been charged with an offence'
    , raised by a ch.w.lell&e to the array.
    arising out of the death of her newly·born child. ~......... ; •••• ·1121 ...... ~ .. : I ....... " ChAna:ed ooly In .ubclauae (3) (b) ~ confQrm to tho chango
    l~+, , '., -'", ,::~ made in cl. 639.. ;
    \~~:.,:.i ... :..... m(6).~:: ....... ..1 ChaaPdwinclude Yuko~and Northwest' Territories.
    454 .............. 1 684 (2) and (3),686 ...... 1 The only change is in the form of address to the accused.
    460 ..... 687,690 ................ 1 The provision relating to corporatiOlll is new and ~ cure an
    omission. '{':t:
    ...•
    ::'f"'f!T!t
    .~~'~;.
    ~"

    46 STANDING COMMITTEE

    SECTIONS IN WHICH THERE ARE SUBSTANTIVE CHANGES-Continued


    :,r BANKING AND COMMERCE

    SECTIONS IN WHICR TRERE ARE SuBSTANTIVE CRANGES-Continued


    47

    ';.r:-

    Bill No. Code No. Remarks Bill No. Code No. Remarks

    J~l
    545... . . . . . . . . . .. 938 pt....... .. . . . . . . . .. Changed so as to drop joinder in challenges. . 'G.·IIS............. '1 1017 ................... / This is included for examination but it is submitted. involve s
    547 .............. 935 .................... Para. (e) is new. ~. only a olwl&e in form.

    552 .............. 929 ............ ; ....... Changed to include Yukon and Northwest Territories. 600.............. 1 1024 (1) (2) ............. Subsection (3)and (4) of sec. 1024 omitted as bein,; covered
    'Jurors' instead of 'men' to cover cases where women . ~ •
    by reoent.auiendment
    ' i
    of the Supreme Court Act.
    may act as jurors. 621 (1) ........ ~ .. 11028. . . . . . .. .. . .. . . . . . . This is not ohan&ed.
    553 .............. /929A .................. . Changed to include Yukon and Northwest Territories. . (2) ........... 1029, 10M .............. The conoluding clause has been added to resolve a conflict
    : .of Judicial opinion .
    . (3) ........ : .. This is inserted for olarity.
    556........ ...... 945 (3)-(5), 946, 959 .. . Under the Bill the jury is to be kept together unless the ,(4) (a) ..... .. 746 (2), 1055......... ..• This does not involve change.
    judge orders otherwise. Changed also to provide for (b) ...... .
    cases where women may act as jurors. (c) ..... .. 740. 1035 (4)............ This Para. (b) is new to cover a contingency not now provided for.
    is amplified to cover all contingencies.
    558 .............. 1 944 .................... 1 Subsec. (5) is new. Subclause (4) would include a private 622 •............. 1 1035 (1) (2)............ Chenged so as to make olear that there cannot be a fine in
    prosecutor.
    lieu of a mandatory minimum term of imprisonment.
    559... •. ......... 958.................... Mention of costs ·eliminated. The Bill provides that the 623 (1) (a)....... 1035 (3) ....... " . . . . . .. This does not involve ohange.
    judge and the accused must attend. (1) (b) and
    (2)......... New. See also 01. 627.
    56l... . . . . . . . . . .. 96l.................... Proceedings. on Sunday limited to. taking a verdict.
    565 .............. 984 .................... Widened by being put in general terms. 624... . . . . . . . . . .. 10MB.................. The omission of 10MB (4) as to waiver of appeal will (by the
    operation of 01. 624 (1)) be for the benefit of the convicted
    569 (I) ............ 951 (1) (2).952 ......... Cha~ed so that the conviction may be for a summary con- person who has been sentenced to a penitentiary and
    VIction offence. pute him on the same footing as one sentencod to gllol.
    572 .............. 1 851.963 ............... . Changed to provide that if the Crown seeks an increased 625 .•............ 1 1035A.................. Subsecs. (4) IlIld (5) of s.I035A are not included. It is thought
    peanlty it must show that notice of the intended appli- , that this can be regulated like other accounting.
    cation has been given to the accused before a plea is taken 626 ........ : ..... 11036.1037 .............. The only change is in dropping 1036 (2) (moieties). This
    from him.
    , accords with the repeal by 1950. c. 11. s. 18, of sees.
    573 .............. 1964 .................... 1 In the Bill. this section is wholly a matter of evidence in , ' . 1041-1043 respecting moieties. See note to el. 627 infra.
    rebuttal. If increased penalty is sought there will have 627 .............. 1 1~-1l41 ............. . Penal actions will no longer be brought by private informers
    to be an application under cl. 572.
    and there will be no moieties payable to them.
    578 .............. 1 1010 ................... 1 Changed by being'put in general terms. : 628 ...... ; .... · .. 11048 (1) ....... , ... ; ..... The limit of 11.000 is dropped. Subsec. (2) of s. 1048 which
    579 .............. 11011.. ................ . Changed by dropping references to special juries and p~o­ provided for the entry of the order as a judgment is
    ceedings in error. not included and the order will be effective as to money
    in the poesession of accused when he was arrested. The
    58l. ............. 1 1012.. ................ . Definition of 'sentence' changed so that there may be an order can be made by a magistrate under Part XVI.
    appeal where sentence is suspended. Definition of 629 .............. 1 10411 ............ '...... . Clarified
    'appellant' dropped as unnecessary. -.w property obtained by crime other than theft.
    584 .............. 1 1013 (2) (4) and (5) ... .. Changed to make clear that acquittal includes acquittal of
    630 ............... 11050. 7115 ............. :. Clarified U above. Reference to writ of restitution dropped
    a principal offence although there has been conviction as in modern praotice this applies only to restoration of
    for an included offence. real property. Clarified to show that the property must
    be immediately available for restoration. There is
    586 .............. 1 1018 .................. . Subclause (4) is changed-(l) to cover fullr. cases where the authority for saying that this is the law now (Tasche-
    Minister exercises his powers under c • 596, instead of reau's Code, p. 903).
    cases where he orders a new trial, and (2) to clarify 631,832 .......... , 10411.1047 ............. . Although s. 1047 is listed as dropped. and sec. 1045 as new.
    proced ure where proceedings in appeal make necessary
    a new time for execution of sentence of death or whipping. they are in reality replaced by cis. 631 and 632. Provision
    1018 (5) is covered by cl. 624 of the Bill. . for coste ill retained only in respect of criminal libel. They
    are to be fixed by the court and not taxed under the
    587 ............. . 1019 .... ".............. 1 Acting chief justice may designate judge to aet on application !' tariff provided for civil actions. An order for CORtK HIllY
    for bail. be Ilntere<l Un judgment and onforced liS in a civil Mtion.
    !JlI*.·,~··;··:.: .... ·ll006.1056 ............ . Sub-cl. (1) comes from s. 46 of the Penitentiary Act.
    fr """
    588 .............. 1 1020 (1)-(4) .......... .. Changed-ell to specify that tra~rip1;"iof evidence and
    other material required for the appeal is to be furnished Sub-cl. (2) comes from the opening words of s. 1056. It wiII
    by appellant. and (2) by omitting the provision in 1020 cover 8. 1006 where there has been a change of venue.
    (3) that the judge's certificate shall prevail. Sub-cl. (3) combines 1056 (a) and (b) with the added provi-
    aion that if the~jlenitentiary term is set aside. the other
    589 ............. '11021 (1) and (8) ...... .. 1021 (1) (e) omitted so that there may be cross-examination. lesser terms will be served in a common gaol. As drawn
    it obviates the need for para. 1056 (d) which came into
    592 .............. 1014.1016 ............. . The changes are-(l) Subclause (2) redrawn to accord with;' the Code. as to Manitoba. in 1901, and as to British
    Welch •. R .• 1950. S.C.R. 412. (2) Subclause (4) am- Columbla in 19011.
    plifies 1013 (5). (3) Subclause (5) altered so that there Sub-ci. (4) covert 1056 (c). and sub-cl. (5) is para. (e) which
    will be no new election where there luis already been came into the Code in 1949.
    one, but new trial will be before another judge or magis-
    trate unless otherwise ordered by Court of Appeal.
    . !
    ~' .....
    .~3
    ,.
    ";

    ~,~ ,-1
    . (

    ~!I STANDING COMMITTEE. BANKlNt1 AND OOMltl~acE ~9

    SECT~ONS IN WHICH 1'HERE ARE SUBSTANTIVE CHANGEs-C""tinued SECTIONS I~WHICH THEU AU SUBSTANTIVE CHANGEs-;..continwed

    Bill No. Code No. Reml!I'ks


    Bill No. Code No. Remarks
    • 1"-' --------i-----
    !
    }OOO.............. 1675B. 5700 (1) ....... .. Chana;ed as follow.: "
    ~~- . (1) The indictment will not all~e that aocused is
    635 .•.... : •...... This replaces s. 1057. but there will still be cases under other
    ,;-.•.:i;.
    , an
    habitual c r i m i n a l . · .
    . where hard labour maybe orderred. Su1>-cl. (2) covers . (2) U preventive detention is'sQught it mUllt be
    a point whicQ. has arisen in practice. .The cases are not
    'uniform as to the right to file an amended conviction ;~:.~ applied for ill accordance with cl. 662,
    . (3) "On at least three separate and independent
    and warrant qf commitment on certiorari or habeas corpu,. occ&sions" substituted for "at least three times pre-
    See s8. 1124 and 1130. . ;£~~;:;;:; ., VIoUsI .....
    .<4f
    "Five years or more" substituted for
    ,
    "~t least
    631 .............. 1748 (1).1058."1059 .... .. Changed as follows: (1) Recognizance· may be for two tiveyears". .
    years. Under 748 (1) it Can be for one year. (2) Provi-
    sion for one year's imprisonment in default of reco-
    gnizance not· in~luded in view of provision' for review'
    ";~¥ 'ri':'~~;:;r~:r;' :. l054A (1), (2), (3) Slid.
    (6) .................
    . ... •.
    ;·f .Chlulgeel
    '.
    .. follows:
    .
    ' "
    (1) Wid8lled to include gross indedenoy. buggery and
    after two weeks. (3)' Review will be on application by ·'.·~i~~f~ .;~ t)'~~;;~.~· \ ,.' .' ' beailAUty ud attempts to commit these offences.
    accused rather than on notice l;Iy sheriff. (4) Stipendiary " ' . (2) One psychiatrist to be appoih.ted by Attorney
    magistrate in Yukon included. . . Geperal inetead of Mhiister of Justioe. ,
    . , . . ,!¥.,,' '
    638 .............. 1 1081. ................. . Changed as follows: (1) The consent of Orown counsel re-
    . !luired by 10&1 (2) is not continued. (2). The recognizance
    lImited to two years. (3) Sentence cannot besuspende<j.
    i • • ;; : • • • • • • •• •• 3700 (3) (4) IOSU (4). • ChaDaed as folloWll:
    I il>
    'i""~"'~
    '
    ,...
    " . llf The pro!IeCutor is to give the Ilotice.
    2 . The Ilotice mUllt be filed.
    when a minimum punishment is prescribed by 11!.w. i:Ji.:.~,' , . .3 YVhere the tr~l is befo,:,! jud~e and j~ry. the
    :;".~.' ;. applioat.ioll. fOr. preventive detentlon will be declded b.y
    639 .............. 11083 .................. . Changed (1)-to provide for a summoll!J on brea\lh of re- ", l~ the ;udce alQU. '
    cognizance instead of immediate w~t. and (2) to
    provide for qases where judge or magistrate by whom !~."
    . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . -676D: .................
    ",./-
    WidAmed.J~.ITtoperaons
    psycho' ."
    alleged to be criminal sexual
    sentence was />USJl6;Ilded dies or is unab~e to aot.
    '~.~: .............. 676ll'. 576G.(I). 1 .. , '. ;" . '.c,,· .. . , ..
    641. ...... 1060 .................. . Some of the de~ils as to execution of se~tence of whipping ':t,; .':' ., . (5),.................. Chana;lid as folloWs:
    have been olP-itted to be covered by:regulations of the :~~" . '," . ., (1) Redrawn to remove apparent confliot between
    Governor in 'Council. . .. . .' 1ili ~,' 675F and ~750 (1).
    :~.:.' . "(2) Powtr to commute to preventive detention will
    643 .............. 11063 ................... . Subseo. (3) of S. 1063 is changed as follows: (1) "stipendiary ~:tw'( applyais9 tooriminal sexual psychopaths.
    magistrate" omitted. (2) Provision i~ made for a case
    i~ Ne~:
    I
    where it becomes necessary to' appoint a new time for (1)........... PrevQtj.ve detention will run at least 3 years. (See
    executing a sentence of death. . "., .' eJ. G66) $,' , . '

    , ' > '} (2).;; .. : ... ,. 5760 (2) (3) ............. Chaa.cect i"f~~ only. .
    '~+,tJ~.. .,. , .
    645 .............. 1 1065.1066.1067 ........ . The words "within the walls of the pr~n in whioh the
    offender is confined at the time of execution" in S. 1065 o;{joT •... : .•..•.••.. 37GB. . . . . . • . • . • . . . . . . .• Widened to allow an appeal by the Attorney General and also
    changed to "within the walls of a pri,¥>n" to enable the ':t·:, ," . by a ~n sentenced as a criminal sexual psychopath.
    establishment of a central place of eX'¥lution as' recom-
    mended by the Archambault Commission. 811 ...............1i120, ........ ~, .... ; ...: Chanfec! to make ~Iear that it applies. bef!>re or after oon-
    . VlCtioa~
    This 18 to resolve a conflict m the cases. It
    646 .............. \1068 ................... \ Su1>-cl. (2) is notrmandatory upon the sheriff. a,Ppear8 (Hansard 1892. Vol. II. col. 4448) to have been
    deeigued originally to permit defelaoo evidence in extr....
    650.............. 1071 ................... Commisioner of' Yukon Territory and or Northwest Ter- ~ ," ,
    ditioa proceedings. .
    ritories adde!i.
    682 ........•..•. .11121,1122.1129 .. : •.••.. , There are conflicting decisions as to whether there is a right
    653 .............. \1075 (1) .............. "11075 (2) as to tabling re~lations. not continued. . . . to oertforari after appeal is launched. Tremeear. 5th
    . ed •• p.15~. .
    654 (1)....... . . .. 1034 (1) ...•...........'.. Changed by dropping the provision that »ension payments
    cease. . 683 .... ";" ~:_.: ... 1124, .• \., ....... ,' .. '1' This has ~ widened to inolude convictions or' orders
    1
    Provision as to pardon also omitted. other thaa those made by justices. It has been ampli-
    (2) ..........'11034 (2) ................ ,"or of a legislature" added. L,
    (3) ........... 159.162,434 (3); ....... This combines several disabilities enac~ in the Code.
    fied aI80 to set out the power to correct sentences. (Tre-
    meear, 6tla ed .• p. 946).
    , 434 (3) was re-enf\cted by 1951. c. 47. 8.17.;
    686.;;,.~ •...•.•• 1 1126.................. . WideDed timilarly to 01. 683. Su1>-cl. (2) added for clari-
    655 .............. 1 1076 .................. . The change from ~'the Crown" to "the Goternor in Council" fioil,tioa.
    in su1>-c1. (2) is really a change in forIll as it conforms to
    the instructiQns to the Governor Ge~ral. Sub.-cl. (3) 687 ..,......... :..'.j·1128 •...•.•.•.•.•••••.. / WldCllled IimUarly to clauses 683 and 685.
    seta out the law as it is shown .by authorities.
    I 688 ............... 1130..................... Wideaed ';';' inolud~ proceedings other than those under
    656 .............. 11077 .................. . This is redrawn to simplify the provlsioljS (107·7 (2» as to '" Part XVI•.
    notice of con:imutation.
    I
    .
    '
    ,
    ·$92 ............ ..1706 .................... 1P~. (b~Ol) and. (e) are derived from s. 706 (b).
    659 ............... 1 fi75A.I054A (8) ...... .. The Bill gives ti> magistrates acting under Part XVI the
    same powe~:to deal with habitual ,ffenders as they
    have now to deal with criminal se:tual psychopaths.
    'Preventive ~etention·. is defined to pimplify drafting.
    ! \'I'~ (6)' ................ . Para. (g) i. derived from 8. 707 and s. 708 (5).
    Paras. (0) (a) (f) and (h) are new to conform to the pro-
    visions in tile Bill that all summary conviction pro-
    • ceedinga are to be commenced by information. and that
    an information may include more than one count.
    59664-4
    ,'
    "~'
    "'"

    ,50 SI:ANrmW COMMITTEE ., BANKING 'AND COMMERCE 51


    SECTIONS IN, 'Y.§~Cl:l.THERE .ARE SUBSTAN:rIVECHANGEs-;.-Continued . 'SECTIONS' INWHlCB: THERE ARE SUBSTANTIVECHANGE8-'-Colltinued
    '"
    Bill No. Code,No. ltemarks Bill No. 'C04e-No. RemiLrkB

    ·716 (1) .......... 735 and 736 ........ ";' .. It has been held that the costs to be awarded are thoae set
    693(l)":"':~":1' 706 .............. : .. .. This is a change in form. out in t.he tariff.
    1142 .................. . The change is that under the present s. 1142 the limitation
    ..~:~ ~:~.~~~.;.;.,: 737.'.; . .-.; . .'... ': .... '... . No change iII effect .
    (2)........ . ..
    . iil the Northwest Territories and the Yukon is twelve 738;: ....... : .......... . lteferenco'to distress omitted. Sub..c!. (5) embodies what is
    m()nths. set"out in the warrant of committal and authority to
    694 (1), ......... ,I 1052 (2), ....... , .... , .·1 This replaCes 1052 (2) but goes further to provide a general
    ,
    .. . issue It.. '
    penalty for summary conviction offences. It obviate. '.717 ............... 1748 (2):-(5).'.... : .... :.• , T~l' change is that the proceedings will be commenced by
    the need for a great deal of repetition. information ,on oath. Otherwise the procedure is set
    694 (2) and (3) .......................... .. These are derived from s. 739, omitting the referen.,.,'· ~
    out in fuJ.ler detail.
    distress, which has been dropped throughout. The
    impriliOnment provided has been changed from 3 to 6
    719 .............. 1749 (1) ................. 1 Changed as to the Northwest Territories (cl.
    . .. . . also 01. 721.,
    719 (0». See
    months to bring it into conformity with sub·c!. (1).
    720 749 (1) ......... : ....... ChaDged to give an appeal against sentence and also to
    695,696 .......... 1 70s (1), 7io ........ , .. ,' Changed as follows: 8jlOC.Ify a right of appeal on the part of the Attorney
    (1) Informations for offences as well as complaints General of Canada or of a province.
    will be commenced by an information on oath.
    , (2) The information is not limited to one matter 721 .............. 1749 ........ .'........... . This embodies provisions as to British Columbia (s. 749 (1)
    but may contain more than one count. '(d), Saskatchewan (s. 749 (1) (fJ), Alberta (s. 749,
    (1) (LI», ·Yukon and Northwest Territories (s. 749 (2».
    699, ....... , ' .... 1 709, 732. , ' .. , ........ ,.1 This really drops s. 709, but the circumstances set out there '. , ,,".:,
    are regarded, as reasons for the exercise of the discretion 722.............. 1750 Vi) ............... : .. This lllodifies s. 750 (I» in several respects:
    ;ll' u)J.der s. 732. (Brief pp. 1~150) •.. . •<2:) the notice of appeal is to set out the grounds of
    apWiiJ,;; .". ,
    700 .............. 1 711 pt ................ :. This':timits the reference to witnesses (dealt with in Pait . , , (2) 'there can be alternative service only where the
    , ",Xp~:,of the Bill) also the reference to orders ex Parte 'reipondellt is a person engaged in enforcement of the law.
    , which. is considered to be unnecessary. It could apply, e.g .. where a policeman respondent is
    transferred during the pendency of the appeal;
    701. ........ , .... 1 723, ....... '.... , ~ ... , .. .. This a~pli~s to summary conviction matters the provisions (3) the notice is to be filed within seven days alter
    in Part XVII of the Bill which relate to particulars and ; service is completed. '
    to the sufficiency of indictments.
    750 (e) ..........,.. ,.: :.' Changed as follows:
    704 ............... ,1,724 ... , ............... , This adapts to summary conviction matters cerlliin 'pro- '" (1) An Wormant appellant (except the Attorney Gen..
    visions as. to amendment which appear in Part XVII ~al of Canada or of a province)must give security.
    (CI.' '510) of the Bill. The provision for motion • '(2) The appeal court may permit the substitution
    ,to' quash in 'cl. 704 (1) and the provisions of sub-clauses . 'of a new and better 11lCOgnizance. This adapts the pro-
    (2), (a) andl (5) are therefore new in this relation, but visi9ns of 01. 735 (4) (s. 762 (3)) as to stated cases. .
    are designea for uniformity. Present provisions of s.
    724 (2), .(3) and (4) that are peculiarly referable to sum.. 757 (1) ........ , ........ . Sub-cl; (1) makea clear that transmission is required only
    . (,·,il fllllry convictions, are contamed in cl. 704 (4) and (6). if there is an appeal. It appears that the practice whore
    705 ... : ..... , .•... 1 707 ...•. : _•..•;.'•... ,.:I.:paii,,(i{~~.' 707 (2) is in the definition of 'summary conviction
    there is no appeal varies in the provinces. Sub-c!. (2)
    , ,. ,court' 'in c1.: 692 (g). As to the proviso, see cl. 419 (b). is new. There is some reason to think that a right to
    , ,;' There is, hQwever, a change in that· counselling or/ro-
    : 'certioiwi exists in the circumstances described but that
    might not be wide enough to cover all cases. Sub-c!.
    :,.: cudng will be tried where the offence counselle or (3) is new hi this Part and is designed to fill a gap. It
    "j ;;,>
    t>r~~llfed is ~ommitted. adapts sub-ol. (2) of c1. 588 (s. 1020(2)).
    "

    708 ............. ,1 72 1. ...;.,., ............ . Sub-c1. (4) i~ added in view. ~f. th~ provisi?n that there
    may he more than one count m an Information. '
    753 and 7M (1).: ....... Sub-cl. (1) effects a notable clw.noe in doing away with a
    . r:;; :'1",1" trial de novo on appeal. Sub-c!. (5) comes from s. 754
    SulHll. (5) adapts· to these proceedinge the provision con- , (1) and sub-c!. (6) (0) comes from s. 753. The rest of
    ~;; II .n; i:t ',,". . tained in c1. 562 (s. 978). \ the clau.ee adapts (for uniformity in view of the aholi tioil.
    .~(, .,. Subsec., 721 (4); as to character evidenCjl is not continued.
    " It appears to add nothing to the geJ)eral rulesb Sec. 12
    -;','!
    'of trial de novo) some of the procedure relating to other
    , .. of the' Cana,da Evidence Act alld th:e rules as' to cross- , apf83la (clauses 689 and (92).
    exam.irw.ti?l1: will apply. '. ',:' I '.', 756 (1) pt...... o' ....... The provision in·s. 760 as to 8ix days' notice of abandonment
    is not included.
    710 (1)........... 722 (1) ............... :'j'
    There is nb change here. . ;
    (2),...... i .. " l " 722 (4) ............... "',"', T\le.re, is.. ,:11. ,change in the add. iti.onal.p.~OYisiOn for a deposit 760 .•.. ',;'-' : ...... .-.. is'.• ma~ter affecting oosts which ~e, by c!. 730, in the
    :'1 This'dieoJetion
    , ' . . . !l' lieu oHur.ety. .. i of the appeal Court.
    (3) ........... 718 and 722 (5).: ....... Th181nvolves only a change m form,,;, , • 754 (1) pt., 756 (1) pt., .
    (4~" .......... 722 (3) .... ,••...•... ,.... T,1t~ ,¥!.J1!,()~ed .. It is thou!th~ that a ~ufficient procedure 760 pt. c..... : ........ 'This cOinbiiies the provisions as to costs now appearing in
    ~,." ' . .' . ' ',: 18. proyideiI Wlthout contmumg subsec. (2) of s. 722 in " the 8eot.iOIl8 noted. This is essentially a change in form,
    , ;; ",' . . .. ' ,,' ita preilent form. '; . ,
    '.< ;' . . " " ! although iII •. 760 the word 'shall' is used.
    .. 712 ............ , .• ,. 7~~A ...: •..••.• ,:,..,.:.••.•: There ill, a Il)4terial change in sub-cl.. (1)' in that application The chAn&e 18 'that the provision fordi8tress in 8. 759 (2) is
    . " 'forBJiiniireal\lld penalty is subject.to notice totheaccUsOO
    , tha.t 'i~ will. be asked for. Sy.b-cl. (2) of 01. 696 forbids " ~~'~':i~"';:::::::-:::: :::}
    759 1 ..... : ......... .
    'omitted from cl. 731 (4). The Bill does not provide for
    dia~.
    refetence in ,an informatioll .¥ 'a 'previous coll:!iction. I 759 2. (3) .......... ..
    Sub-cl. (4) as to proof, adapts totliese proceedmgs the /.t~
    ,pro,visi9.'!5,of,c1. 574 (s. 982),. :4' ;i
    .>.: :;'~'.
    :) ~::.~~):.~~)::::::::::::}I Provision for distress (•• 766) omitted from cl. 732 (2) •
    ~tl .
    ~;. 757 (4) ............... .
    """"r.,"',.' ""': ...... ~,.,"\ .. -tc"" ','-',
    :"" i,e :t~;
    i ~...
    ~fi~,
    I '-,/
    :52 STANDING COMMITTJ;J: ' BA#iKlN,G UD CP!4MJl~Jl G3
    SECTIONS IN WHICH THERE ARE ~UB8TANTIVE C~ANG;ES-C~lawl --, PAaT ,XVI
    . Olla.,.. itt B.b,~" ,. ~"

    Bill No. CadeNo. Reml!,l"ka Pallt XV.! Isaoon80lid~tion of the preaent pariixyr .nd' XVlII., Thia hall made poS:-
    sible the elimin:a.tion. of ... great deal of repetition. &8 m~y proViaiooil wer.· c®llllon to' both
    Perts. ' ,
    " This P...nt 'was 'submitted .to and NCtlived 'the approval oithePr!>Vlneial ,representatives
    724 (1) .......... '1761 (1) ................ . Justice'8 refusal to state a case III dealt with in .01. 738. " pretent at' a join.t meeting wLth the Oommiuion In September ;ta,t;' '
    (2) ........... 761 (2), (3) ........... .. Changed as follow8: . The main eh~ge8 under the BiU oaJ'e<&s foUowa1 . '..
    , (1) Time for stating ca.se rllduced from 3 months to
    1. The jurisdiotion. conferred. on magistrates is to be exerci~ by those specia.llY appcinted.
    1 month. ,
    (2) Time for filing and transmitting case increased
    . - ' .
    from 3 days to 7 days. Sub-cl. (3) is derived from s. 763. ',2. The asalute juri8lIiotion of magi.trates bas 1Ieen increased in ,the .folk>willi !'espeots;
    (a) 01111 offe:ocei of l'9OIIiviq ~dretaiDi'Di oare.,included where the y.aJue is '50,00 or aess;
    735 (.1).: ........ . 762 (1) ................
    (2) .......... .
    1
    The only ohange is in the insertion of 8ub-cl. (3) which is
    "'.
    (b) the v·alue in 1'Ie8Jle9t <1l theft &ad Ialee pret~8 i. increlised from $25.00 tto $50.00;
    (0) attempted :rieceiving, retaining e:nd obtoalnins by false pretence. are included; .
    (3) .......... . new.
    (4) .......... . 762 (2) ............... . (d) offences uuder clause 179 (lotteries) are included. .
    (5) ........... . 762 (3) .............. ..
    .3; The oabaolute 'jurisdiCltjQn (If m&iiatrate. hal \MIen ~ednced in the f~ni respects:
    743 .............. 1 769A ................... 1 The exception in cl. 743 (1) (b) limits the right of appeal to a (a)ajitempt to commit .theft ~ limited to caSes where <the ,,&lue is $50.0() or. lees;
    case where the stated case did not go to the Court of . (11) ,'the plf~cetI of indece~t assault de8Cribe~J/lJ1 seCtion 773(d) are eliminated;
    Appeal as it may do in British Columbia, Saskatehewan,
    Alberta and Manitoba. ,to)
    . .':the offence of being en .Ilmaie of .. bawd,. bouse ,
    i. elimin8ited.
    .,' (

    It was felt that there should be provision for costs here as in


    preceding steps in summary conviction proceediup. . ,'" .4. Thejurisdiotion with consent'is i:oe~c1 <Me uote to clause ~13).
    744.~ ............ 1 770 .................... 1The item8 relating to distreBII are not included. IS; The form of the election i. changed. ' ..
    .: 6. Thit iliuiitationof aeUteooes in retpeat of ,O~CH over which magistrateehav'\l absoilute
    "Reasonable COlts of transportation" substituted for "reason-
    able livery charges". jurisdiotJ(nl' is dropped. None' of the oIj1JlOe11 over 'Which, magisj;ra.tes> have absolute
    jufildfetion is punishable with ~re -than tw()
    , ' ' ,
    ,.ea.rs. "
    ~;,.' ~
    . ' ' .' "
    , ,'" ~ ' .. : ( '. I . ':' •

    7. Charges may be joined in the one indictment ,with power to om eep.I\of~. trial~.
    "

    8;' The ~ewba,t involved provl.lon. of p.Ut XVIII l'Ieiardiug eleotlon mel. noeleetion hILve
    ·been made lmifo:rm &ad have been simplified 80 as to provide ·tha.t, .witbche, consent of
    " the Crown,. there may be eleetion or re-election withw., U dill-)"I 9f. ~~ ,ju/-,y ~i:tt~ugs but
    ',I ,~::not otherWIse., , , ' ' : , ,: ;"" '" . . r"
    , j,'f-The .following t6ble giVes the 8Ou~e o.f Ith~ cia-uses of tl\e BiilI .in 80 far, ~ it is Vossible
    to fto 80: . " . ,;.,,:,' " ", ," ".:: "
    ,":~ . .. :,'-' .,J
    't "' :'(
    BiUNo. Code No. BiUNo. ':' . : g~N~.

    I;
    466 823 6oJi, 771 U6 . i""~,tlS)"
    773 477 '832 ' .
    !i'mend (2) 781 (1) aDd (t) .
    786
    478 ',; . 827(3)
    $84<
    "
    468 (4)
    469
    471)
    781 (4)
    784
    7U
    'm·,;.
    UL C".'t
    "716,825 (5)
    .' sal. "
    829 ,
    ' .. ;
    471 New' ~ ... ',' ,.181 (4);,' ,
    472 825 (1) , '790,193.
    473, '.1 824 . , .... ",,' ·194..,791J.:'-
    ~i,~t"
    474 New
    476 823,830 483 If)' " ~ 1 )

    -,
    484
    ..~
    ,
    .:J··,m·
    i, ) " , ': JL ,.0, •
    ./ ... ' 1.""\,;:- ...
    '.\ i-'" ~.:·L·~~L:J··;- t; .,1, .'·'-.:'l~ Ii.'

    ~-"f'1! '.n·,l"' ~.·r','. ~'j') :~1 ::'.' ,


    '.,;; .. ;f,;, ',> ',.~ :f1 .. ~JL'·'" \~ .~!.'}

    "

    .I
    ,'.,: )" ~: :. '.' .
    "
    .:.
    , ,,~ ','
    , ••
    . ,¥
    ;'t~, ,~

    BANKING AND COMMERCE 55


    54 STANDING COMMITTEE
    BILL-PART XXII
    BILL-PART XIX
    This is a complete redraf,t of the .present Part XXII and is designed <to provide a simple
    This is a compilation from the se"ti~ns scattered through ,the present COOe in respoot of 'al _11 as a uniform procedure iil. respect of broken reco..iUizances.
    the attendauce of witnesses. Nothing that is in the Code now is dropped and no new material " F '
    is introduced except as follows: ' ," 668. This refers to the Schedule which appears at p. 233 of the Bi1~. That Sc~edule embodies,
    I. A magistra,te acting under Pal't XVI will have ,power to deal with a rec,alcitl'ant wit. as <to eI\~h province, ,the oourt of cour,ts, and the ~cials, desIgnwted by I,t.

    1
    ness as for, contempt. This 'was obviously a casus omissus ,from s. 788 .as. other couNa This includes provisions now appearing'in ss. 698(3) ,and 886(2) hut is widened by
    (and even a justice by ss. 674 (2) and 711 (1)) have thwt power. ' being put in general tenus. It will be ,noted that the provision for notice in s. 886 (2)
    2. C1.603(3) prevents 'the arbi,trary issue of a warrant fo~ ,a wi,tness in the first instance: is not ~ntinued.
    3. As to cl. 608 (1). A subpoena issued out of a superior coul1t has effect outside the .670." 'This ClImes from s. 1092 without change in effect.
    province. It is felt that a warr,ant so issued should also ha\;e ,that effect. 611. This is a new .provision. It sometimes hapPens that an accused who is at ilarge on bail ;1
    4. As ,to cl. 610 (3). The note next preceding applies to <this also. commits a new crime and is arrested therefor. It is thought ,that the subsequent arrest,
    which is an intervention by the CrQiV1l,' should not operate to discharge his sureties.
    5. A magistrate acting uruler Par,t XVI will have power (el. 616) to appoint a.
    sioner to take the evidence of a ,wituess who is out of Cooad-a. 672. (1), (2). Redraf,t of s. 1088 without. change in effoot.
    (3), (4). Redraft of s. 1090 'without change in effect.
    6. The prOVISIons of ~ 996; as to the attendance of the accused when evidence is taken
    before the commissioner, are varied (el. 617). Such provisions, however, continue ,to be 673: This oomes from s. 1091. No change in effect as c1. 675 provides for a new 'application.
    discretio~ry. 674. "This is s. 1093 without change. It preserves the common law right of render by surety.
    7. As t? cl. 613(1) (ii). The provision for inability to 'attend fox: "some o~bllT gO,od and 675. ' Redr8lft of s. 1089 without chanie in effect. '
    suffiCient cause", extends ,the present 995(1). .
    The following is an allocaJtion of the clauses: 67.0. This replaces ss. 1094, 1098 ·and 1099 and, as to Quebec, ss. 1113 ,and 1114.
    .A,s the Bill provides for a deposit in lieu of sureties, sub-.cl. (4) is necessary.
    602. Speci,al provision for the attendance of wi,tnesses who ,are prisoners appears in cl. 446. i .~" • • .

    There wiU bea single form to be served on a witness. This cl'ause provides how it is to
    677. ,This effects major changes. ," 1
    603.
    be issued. Sub·.cJ. ,(2) is taken [rom ss. 673 (1). and (2) and 973. It extends the dis·
    ' . (l)There will 'be an application to the court designated iu the Schedule. I
    cretion given to the justice hy eL 440, but provides <that a warrant <to arrest a witness
    'lt wil!! be on notice and will give the principal and sureties a right to be heard.
    '(2) The levy by execution has been IlEIparated from capias. The levy by execution is ~
    who is evading service shall not be issued unless there has been an unsueeessful attempt not new. It is provided for in 88. 1105 et seq., and, as ,to Quebec, in ss. 1115 et seq.
    to serve a suhpoena. '
    604; This does not change the law as set out hi Code sections 676, 711·713 and 974. Provisions 678. This is. an adaptation of 88.1107 'and, with re[erence to Quebec, of S. 1116(1). It adopts
    I
    1
    for service appear in, clauses 606 et seq: the principle that the .procedure to realize upon a forfeited recognizance is a civil matter. ..~
    This accords with <the law in Quebec and wlso with ,the judgment in Re Talbot's BaiL
    Sub.ol. (I) e~mes from s: 671.
    j,
    605. 1892, 23 O.R. 65, "these proceedings, being essenti<a1ly for the purpose of collecting ,a ;[,
    Su!;>-c]. (2) com~s fro~, ,s. 971. ,debt, are civiJ! in their u.a-ture, rather than criminal, and 'are regulated, except where
    there are special provisions, by provinda.1law". Tremeear, 5th ed., p. 1409. ffi
    606. ,Sub-cl. (1) comes from s. 672. See also s. 658 '(4).
    Sub·cl8. (2) and (3) come from s. 676 (2). 679. This adapts ss. 1W6 and 1117. There may be a oommittalby warran<t if fieri facias
    607. ,Sub-cl. (I)' is derived from S. 974. oannot be sllitisfied, but 'a right is given to apply f()r relief by way of petition.
    Sub-cl. (2) is derived from ss. 676 and '713.
    608. (I) This is noted supr,a.
    (2) The note to 601'(2) applies.to this also.
    609. This is derived: from s. 693. Detention is provided for in cl. 616.' As to endorsement, i:/'
    the present S. 662 (1) refers to 'any warrant'.
    610. Sub-cls. (I) ana (2) are derived fromss. 673(1), 842(1) and 972(1). The elciension :c"'1:,<"
    effected by subtlause (3) is mentioned above (Notes 3 a.nd 4). ;
    611. (This is derived trom ss. 674 (1) 'and 972 (2).
    I '
    612. This comes frOITi ss. 674(2), 842(2), 842(3) and 972(3). The pena1tyiis taken from 842(3) "
    and 972 (3). See also Note (1) supra. . :
    613. This is-derived ifrom ss. 716(2), 995 and 997. See Note (7) supra;
    614. Thi~'isd~rived:from s. 995(1). '
    615. This is derived :from s. 998.
    616. This is derived'from s. 997(1), (3) and (4). The ellitension in & 616(1) (b) is men- .,
    ,troDed'supre. -(NQite'o) ; ' - . .. . "

    617. This is a modification of s. 996. See Note (6) supra.


    618. This is derived from s. 997(2).
    619. This combines BB. 999 and 1000.
    -Y'-
    1'"
    Sea. ,1.6. '110 ehaJlifl"•. <-~ •• ~ L../c-r
    ha" been Iub-
    5eo. 30"5. Th' lIOl'dl -dO" anJ'thlngl
    Hove'l'tlf', tb.l.
    ,tltut,a tor the partioular tbing • •

    s.c. lOS. para~aph (b) ot aub"cUoll (1) would appear


    to be -Win,c"IAr,.. 'l'he~o"ll1on about leanllS' C.IIJlada
    to go tbrough ...... bll~aal'l"lage has been dropped til.

    naw ot tbt pro'l'1s1on . .klng....lt 'I!..ottltn~~ :'1".," "


    /'
    OaQadlan to co.att b1g.., anJVbara. fhe new proTt,lon
    gah aVfT
    d lction,

    s.o. m. Penalty haa bHn ~duo.d.

    ,
    I'f-. ;".

    "jA" I
    .
    c Sao. 319.

    ,. Jll.
    fh,1I h . . b"n redroawn to

    N, ,bange. ~
    ""~r..;. ~
    UJll1f7.

    ( ' , .,
    """~. ~I~
    -
    • •-",., .....,!., Cl-W'
    b
    V,,;' ~J'

    1/'t'.) SlOt ~12. R, ob-nlP.

    Sac. 192. Paragraph (a) or 'ub,ectlon (1) 1, couched


    1n mol" genaral tar...
    !h11 •• otlon ocabin,. 199. 200 and 201.
    THE SENATE OF CANADA
    SPEAKER: Hon. Elie Beauregard. P.C.

    Official Report of Debates

    ,
    SEVENTH SESSION. TWENTY-FIRST PARLIAMENT
    1-2 ELI:z;ABETH II

    The Session opened on November 20, 1952,


    and was prorogued on May 14, 1953.

    The Twenty-First Parliament was dissolvee! on June 13, 1953.

    / t EDMOND CLOUTIER. C.M.G., a.A .. D.S,P.


    QUEEN'S PRINTER AND CONTROLLER OF STATIONERY
    OTTAWA, 1953
    6 SENATE

    COMPANIES' CREDITORS ARRANGEMENT The bill was read the first time.
    BILL
    The Hon. the Speaker: Honourable senators,
    FIRST READING
    when shall the bill be read the second time?
    Hon. Mr. Rober.tson presented Bill H, an
    Act to amend the Companies' C.reditors Hon. Mr. Robertson: Wednesday next.
    Arrangement Act, 1933.
    CANADIAN OVERSEAS TELECOMMUNI.
    Hon. Mr. H~ig, I should hope that the pur· CATION CORPORATION BILL
    pose of this bill is to repeal the Act.
    FIRST READING
    Hon. Mr. Robertson: I must tell the hon-
    ourable leader opposite that I have not had Hon. Mr. Robertson presented Bill M, an
    time to study the measure. Act to amend the Canadian Overseas Tele-
    communication Corporation Act.
    The bill was read the first time.
    The bill was read the first time.
    The Hon. the Speaker: Honourable senators,
    when shall the bill be read the second time? The Hon. the Speaker: Honourable senators,
    when shall the bill be read the second time?
    Hon. Mr. Robertson: Wednesday next.
    Hon. Mr. Robertson: Wednesday next.
    MERCHANT SEAMEN COMPENSATION
    BILL NATIONAL RAILWAYS AUDITORS BILL
    FIRST READING FIRST READING
    Hon. Mr. Robertson presented Bill I, an Act Hon. Mr. Robertson presented Bill N, an
    to amend the Merchant Seamen Compensa- Act respecting the appointment of auditors
    tion Act. for National Railways.
    The bill was read the first time. The bill was read the first tim-e.
    The Hon. the Speaker: Honourable senators, The Hon. the Speaker: Honourable sena-
    when shall the bill be read the second time? tors) when shall the bill be read the second
    Hon. Mr. Robertson: Wednesday next. time?
    Hon. Mr. Robertson: Wednesday next.
    FOOD AND DRUGS BILL
    FIRST READING CRIMINAL CODE BILL
    Hon. Mr. Robertson presented Bill J, an Act
    FIRST READING
    respecting food, drugs, cosmetics and ther·a-
    peutic devices. Hon. Mr. Roberison presented Bill 0, an
    Act respecting the Criminal Law.
    The bill was read the first time.
    The Hon. the Speaker: Honourable senators, Hon. Mr. Roebuck: I would suggest to the
    when shall the bill be -read the second time? honourable leader that if the bill has been
    printed it would be to our advantage to have
    Hon. Mr. Roberison: With leave of the Sen-
    copies distributed right away. .
    ate, next sitting.
    Hon. Mr. Robertson: A small number of
    TERRITORIAL LANDS BILL . copies of the bill are available, and I am
    FIRS'l' READING hopeful that the supply will shortly meet
    Hon. Mr. Robertson presented Bill K, an the demand.
    Act to amend the Territorial Lands Act and
    Hon. Mr. Haig: I would also suggest to
    to repeal the Yukon Quartz Mining Act and
    the honourable leader {)f the government
    the Yukon Placer Mining Act.
    that when copies become available they
    The bill was read the first time. should be distributed immediately to the
    The Hon. the Speaker: Honourable senators, members of the special ·committee who
    when shall the bill be read the second time? studied this bill last session. I understand
    Hon. Mr. Robertson: \Vednesday next. that some of the recommendations made have
    been accepted, and if that is so a lot of time
    SAINT JOHN BRIDGE AND RAILWAY can be saved by avoiding unnecessary dis-
    EXTENSION COMPANY BILL cussion. Let the House of Commons do some
    FIRST READING of the work. But I would suggest that the
    Hon. Mr. Roberison presented Bill L, an honourable -senators from Toronto-Trinity
    Act respecting the Saint John Bridge and (Han. Mr. Roebuck), Vancouver South (Hon.
    Railway Extension Company. Mr. Farris), from Toronto (Han. Mr. Hayden)
    NOVEMBER 24, 1952 7

    _who is n-ot here this evening-and Grand R


    He started teaching in a school in the coal~
    -ville (Hon. Mr. Bouffard) be supplied as soon mining town of Stellarton, ~t the <age of 18;
    'as possible with advance copies. That would but with the advent of the First World War
    ,facilitate matters very much. he enlisted as a private in the artillery and
    served overseas for three years with the 2nd
    Hon. Mr. Robertson: I intend to -ask my Canadian Siege Battery. Upon his return
    colleague the Minister of Justice, when the home, in 1919, he resumed teaching, this time
    bill is bef.ore the Senate for second reading, in Sydney Hig}1 School, and the following
    tomorrow or later, to eome here and give us year went to Amherst where he articled with
    the .advantage of an explanation as to the his mother's brother, J. A. Hanway, Q.C.,
    respects in which this bill differs' from the whose partner at that time was the late
    .6ne \vhich was introduced previously. Colonel James Layton Ralston. In 1921 he
    - Hon. Arfhur W. Roebuck: If I may hav-e entered Dalhousie University to study law,
    your indulgence, honourable senators, I and upon being call~d to the Bar, in, 1924,
    -woul-d suggest that we do not attempt to give he joined Colonel Ralston -and the Honour-
    the Criminal Code second reading tomorrow. able Charles B.urchell in their HaIi~ax law
    The minister will be here. I am told that office, becoming a member of the firm in
    1926, when Colonel Ralston came to Ottawa
    some' twenty-six of our sugg-estions have to be appointed Minister of Defence.
    been written into the text. I would like to
    ,(:heck that matter, and also to have some Brilliantly successful as R lawyer, he attrac-
    opportunity, after the minister has addressed ted: the attention of the Right Honourable
    us, to comment on the bill in its present form. C. D. Howe, who. as Minister of the Depart-
    ~ do not think we can pass it tom'Orrow, but it ment of Munitions and: Supply, in 1942 invited
    is all right to have second reading moved then him to come to Ottawa as Associate Co-
    and to hear what the minister has to say. ordinator of Controls in that department. He
    became .one of the government's ace trouble-
    The bill was read the first time. shooters on the production side of the war
    effort, speciaHzing in labour problems. Later
    THE LATE SENATOR FOGO. he became Executive ¥ice-President of the
    TRIBUTES TO HIS MEMORY Algoma Steel Corporation and maintained an
    office in ottawa, where he set up a liaison
    .on the Orders of the Day: between that corporation and the federal
    Hon. Wishart MeL. Roberfson: Honourable government, specializing in questions affect-
    sen,ators, it is on.e of my official responsibili- ing labour. In addition to these activities his
    ties from time to time to draw to the attention wide experience and valuable counsel gained
    :of-'the house the loss of one or more of our him ra place on many important directorates
    members. It is 'always a matter of regret, but closely concerned with the industrial develop-
    ~ometimes our sorrow Is assuaged, in part at ment of this coun-try.
    ~~st .by the realization that our colleague's On the political side he maintained an
    passing represents the termination of a long unswerving devoti'On and loy-alty t'O the Lib-
    ~areer of usefulness in the service of his eral party from his youth. His first political
    ~e"Uow-men. On certain oCf.!3-sions, happily encounter came in 1920, when he went on
    · l~ss frequently, it becomes necessary for me . the hustings in support of Colonel Ralston's
    to d.raw attention to the f'act that, as a result attempt to gain a Cumberland County seat in
    Qt ·the inscrutable ways of Providence, a the Nova Scotia legislature. The late senator
    · .<}olleague has passed in the very prime of continued to maintain an active interest in
    1 +It:e, one whQse accomplishments gave every the Nova Scotia Liberal organization, and,
    I p'romise that he had barely crossed the thresh- although he never ran f'Or public 'Office him-
    : :h~ld .of a ·brilliant 'career of usefulness and -self, his qualities of leadership and political
    accomplishment. This I beIleve can be truly judgment were generally felt ~n the direction
    said of the Honourable Jarn-es Gordon Fogo, of the organization's affairs. From 1939 tb
    Q.C.',' who died. suddenly 'on July 6 -la-st, at 1941, when he was president of the N'Ova
    · Murray Bay, Quebec. Scotia Liberal Association, he gained a wealth
    :Senator F'Ogo was born at Halifax on July . of experience which proved invaluable when,
    9,'1896, the son of Alice Hanway and Adam in 1945, "he was drafted by the National Lib-
    G. Fogo, a locomotive engineer on -the old· eral Federation to 'Organize the successful
    -Intercoloni'al Railway. The family later Liberal campaign in the federal election of
    , mOVed, to Sydney, Nova:' Scotia, where the late that year. Some months later he was elected
    senator left school at the age of sixteen to ,president of that organization.
    Work in the Dominion Steel plant. However, His greatest political task, however, was
    · he ':ilater finished his ·course at Sydney organizing the National Liberal Convention
    ACademy and went on to "the provincial in Ottawa ·in the summer of 194&, at which
    ':N"orinal School. convention the present Prime Minister was
    I
    NOVEMBER 25, 1952 21
    Mackenzie King, initiated a program of unem~ The motion was agreed to, and the debate
    pfoyment insurance and family allowances, was adjourned.
    to be followed later by old age pensions and
    welfare schemes introduced by the present CRIMINAL CODE BILL
    government, under the leadership of the SECOND READING
    present Prime Minister, the Right Honourable
    Louis S. St. Laurent. ' H o n . Wishart MeL. Robertson moved the
    The motivating force in effecting these second reading of Bill 0, an Act respecting
    measures is well known -to the honourable the Criminal Law.
    members of this chamber. Us purpose was He said: Honourable senators, I regret
    cleafly stated by the present Prime Minister, that while speaking to this bill last evening
    prior to and during the introduction of these I unintentionally mislead the house in gen-
    programs, in an expression of belief in the eral, and my honourable friend from Toronto-
    p~lnciple that all Cana~ians should share in Trinity (Hon. Mr. Roebuck), in particular,
    Canada's prosperity. Through these we have in suggesting that my colleague the Minister
    , achieved .a more equal distribution of the of Justice would come to the Senate to ex-
    ~ountry's wealth, materially improved the plain this bill in detail today. Honourable
    positions of low and middle income groups, senators will recall that a similar bill' to
    -which comprise the majority of the popula- amend the criminal law was introduced last
    tiOI~, and established a !fOOl' under the pur- session and was explained in detail by the
    chasing power of all communities. minister. My honourable friend from
    "'The initiation of these programs has Toronto-Trinity said that he would prefer to
    ~ attained a specIal significance in my province, hear what the minister had to say on the
    " Nova Scotia, where in 1933 the gross 'income details of the new bill before expressing
    r from -lumbering and fishing production, two himself. I had not discussed with the minis-
    ~ ot 'our major industries, did not exceed tel' the question of his coming to this house,
    (' $11 million, whereas a purchasing power of but had assumed from our conversations that
    l C?v~r $38 million was created in the province he would be here. When I asked him today if
    f d,uri,ng ~950-51 through the distribution of he would be here, he indicated that he was
    f ~amily allowances, old age pensions, unem- quite willing to come, but felt that he would
    ~ ployment insurance, veterans ,allowances, and serve no useful purpose by doing so, be-
    ; l},ealt4.and welfare services. I could mention cause the bill now before us is substantially
    ! liere the effect of provincial subsidies, but the same as the one presented last session.
    ; I did not include that because it is not really It should be pointed out however, that this
    : i,e~€van~ to the point'! -am making. bill embodies certain recommendations made
    . . ]for almost two decades Canada's progress by the sub-committee of this house as well
    J?a~ be~n spectacular. This has been achieved as some made by the legal profession and
    under the guidance of two great Canadians other bodies. The minister felt that the
    V{h(j;_:by their vision, leadership and tireless present measure should be treated as a general
    , (i€votion to Canada, have made it first among revision of the criminal law. That being so,
    I the peoples of the world who value freedom, he was making preparations to come before
    i p~l~tical stability and sound administration. the appropriate committee of this house to
    .li1'i;1.tiqri'al unity within our own borders, our explain the measure in detail and outline
    'P~oud place in the British Commonwealth of all the recommendation made, some of which
    N!3.tiOns and our unselfish approach to the' are not incorporated in the measure before us.
    : problems confronting less fortUnate coun-
    tri~s are the elements 'which have brought I have felt, honourable senators, that I
    ti~ )0. our present position of pre-eminence owed to the house this explanation of the
    and ga,ined for us respect anci admiration in procedure which the minister intends to
    th~_ ~Quncils of the free nations of the world. follow, and under the circumstances, I would
    '1;I;€ ~continuation of this leadership and the ask the house to be content with a brief ex-
    pursuit of the government's policies in pro- planation which ,I shall now attempt to give.
    motlng production at home and continuing Honourable senators will recall that Bill
    stttnu,lation of world trade'will assure to both H-8, a measure to revise the Criminal Code
    P~~sent and future generations a way of life introduced last session, was referred to the
    ~tld ~. standard of living unsurpassed in any Standing Committee on Banking and Com-
    !)tq.'t 'of the world. merce, which in tUrn referred it to a sub-
    Some Hon. Senators: Hear, hear. committee. Because of the adjournment of
    H parliament, the sub-committee was unable
    on. Mr. Haig: Hon,ourable senators, as a to complete its work and present its final
    Ina~ter of general practice, I think the leader report. It did, however, bring in an interim
    ~~ the opposition adjourns the debate at this report recommending certain changes and
    tiirt~· ] exercise that prerogative, and move suggesting certain clauses be stood over for
    that the debate be adjourned. ' discussion in the standing committee.

    B.C. COURTHOUSE UBR~RY SO~I~T.'l'- I


    VANCOUVE.R
    , --~ I
    !
    22 .. SE!'IAT!;;:

    During the recess the bill has been studied recommendations have not been incor,porated
    by members of the ,legal profession in their in the text. It might serve some purpose to
    -associations as well as by- others, and, repre· go into these matterss but under the circum-
    sentations have been made with respect to stances, particularly as the minister is not
    some-" of the changes proposed by the sub· here, it might be better to refrain from debate
    committee and certain other provisions of at this time and to refer the matter at once
    the bID. The g<overnment has accepted some to- committee, where we can undertake the
    of the changes recommended by .our sub- laborious job of going through the bill section
    committee and by the associations mentioned, by section and of preparing a report for the
    and has incorporated them in the bill now general committee and· -a Teport by the general
    before us, In view, however, of the diver- committee to the house. So I shall have
    gence of .opinion {lUi other proposed changes, nothing more to say at this stage in connec-
    th~ government has felt that they should not tion with the matter.
    be embodied in the bill to be introduced at
    this session, but should .be deferred until Hoh. John T. Haig: Honourable senatorss
    there has been an opportunity .to consider ! do not 'Propose to delay ~he house, and I
    them in .our committee. Both the changes trust I shall not say anything which will cause
    reCommended and accepted and those recom- a continuation of the debates because I
    mended but not accepted can be considered in hea,rtily ag~ee with the honourable govern-
    detail when the bill goes before the Standing ment leader (Hon. Mr. Robertson) and the
    Committee on Banking and Commetce. honourable member for Toronto-Trinity (Hon.
    I hope that honourable senators will share Mr. RoebUck) that the bill should go at once
    the view that I have expressed. It should be to committee.
    borne in mind that even-those recommenda- At this time I particularly want to point
    tions from the' sub-committee which are out to honourable senators who are members
    acceptable to the minister and to the govern- of the committees but not members Of the
    ment, w-ere not actually considered by the legal profession, that it is their right and
    main committee. In view of all the changes duty to take part in the discussion of the bill.
    which have been proposed, the matter can, All of the questions involved are not essen-
    I am sure, be expedited by referring the bill tially legal at all; many of the important
    to the Banking and Commerce Committee as decisions in the administraUon of the criminal
    soon as possible. I will do everything I can
    law are made by juries. When the previous.
    to faciHtate progress in this regard.
    bill wa'S before the -committee I was not as
    Hon. A. W. Roebuck: Honourable senators, diligent in my attendance there <3S were the,
    I must <express disappointment that the Mini- honourable senators from T'Oronto-Trinity
    ster of Justice has not come -to adckess us at (Hon. Mr. Roebuck), Toronto (Hon. Mr.
    this tim<e, although I quite understand his Hayden), 'and Vanc'Ouver South ilion. Mr.
    reasons for not doing so. I thought that F-arris). Not being a criminal -lawyer-if I
    some purpo.se might be served by our listen- am a lawyer of any description-my point of
    rug to what the minister had to say, and by view is more that 'Of the non-legal man. -My
    our taking him into our confidence in the conclusion, .after many hours of delibera-
    matter of objections to the measure. The bill tion by the committee, is this: while I fully
    now presented to us contains a number of appreciate the work of the honourable
    highly .controversial sections, and I beHeve senators I have mentioned, as well as that of
    that some discussion of them at this Hme the honourable member from Grandville (Han.
    would -have served a useful purpose. Mr. Bouffard), and their knowledge of both
    The honourable senator f'rom Toronto (Hon. the essentials and the fine points of the
    Mr. Hayden) -and I discussed, the matter this criminal law, it is the duty of the non-legal
    morning. We agree that it is highly desirable members o:f.the Banking and Commerce Com-
    that this bill go to the committee as soon -as mittee to be present all the time when this bill
    possible so that the work that we were doing is under -consideration. The four distinguished
    at the adjournment of ·.the last session m-ay be lawyers I have refer-red to will readily and
    resumed. . clearly put before their associates the signif-
    I would not be too sure of my figures, but icance of any sectioll: which is in question.
    I believe that some twenty'::six of the sugges- But let me say to our non-legal members:
    tions made by the subcommittee and reported' The opinion of these legal gentlemen as to
    to the general committee have been incorpo- the contents -of these sections is, in the final
    rated in the text of the bill now before us. analysis, worth not a bit more than yours,-
    I have not yet had ,an opportunity to find out Hon. Mr. Roebuck: Precisely.
    how accurately or how satisfactorily those
    changes have been made: that is stm a m·atter Hon. Mr. Haig: -because we are dealing
    for us to look into. ' I have 'als-o checked· and with the liberties of men and women. If
    found that, roughly, fifteen or so of our the bill as amended is criticized in another-

    f;

    , •• l
    NOVEMBER 25, 1952

    place" that criticism will fall primarily not would rather let nine guilty men be acquitted
    upon these four lawyers, but upon the non~ than have one innocent man hanged." The
    legal men and women of this house, and I principle ,of that statement is both good law
    would impress that upon them very and good common sense. I do not like to
    emphatically. see a guilty man 'or woman go free, but still
    .' one' -important feature of the bill-I speak less would I want to see an innocent man or
    subje"ct to correction-is that, whereas woman c,~nvicted. It is our duty to d-efend
    formerly the common law of England ,applied the rights of the people of this country, to
    in this country, ,by this bill all the criminal see that law and order are maintained and
    law qf Cali-ada is to be conta~ned in the Code. police f'Orces respectedj and 10 support gov-
    :., Hon. Mr. Roebuck: Only as to offences. ernment policy to that end. We want the
    - After this Gode has been adopted all the criminal law to be properly administered,
    ~ffen.ces under the -common law will be in
    and we must see to it that the law is so
    the 'Code, but the law ,as to defences, -pro- framed. that this shall be done.
    cedure and so on will still be ·the common For these reasonSJ I am wholly in favour
    law of England. of giving the bill second reading and sending
    it to committee; and such time as I can spate
    .J,ion. -Mr. Haig: But, as I understand it, I will devote to helping -the ~ommittee. But
    the ,offences will be .contained in the Oode. again I plead with our lay members to be
    Hon. Mr. Roebuck: Offences-yes. present at t~e c.ommittee meeting~.
    Hon. Mr. Haig: It is our duty to see to it The motion was .agreed to) and the bill was
    that' all offences are covered. Let me give read the second time.
    one illustration of what I mean. Some of us
    whe··have ·been members of this house ·for· l\EJfE.RREQ '.I.'O .cQl\iMiT'J'~.E.
    a -considerable time will remember that a Hon. Mr. Robertson: Honourable senators,
    few years ago the Attorney General .of with leave I move that the bill be referred to
    Ontario, and perhaps the Attorneys General the Standing Committee on Banking and
    of Nova Scotia, Quebec, and other provinces, Commerce.
    recommended an amendment of the Code to The motion was agreed to.
    provide that if two or more people went into
    a store for purposes of robbery, and one of FOOD AND DRUGS BILL
    them had a gun and in the course of the
    SECOND READING
    . operation shot and killed some person, he
    should be deemed guilty 'Of murder. I am Hon. Wisharf MeL. Robertson moved the
    : not discussing whether such a provision is second reading of Bill J, an Act respecting
    or is not a proper one, ·but the fact that the food J drugs, cosmetics and therapeutic
    recommendation was adopted indicates the devices.
    importance to all citizens of the content of He said: Honourable senators, as I intima-
    , our criminal law. For the most part, the ted yesterday, this bill is substantially the
    ; pr.ovisions of the Code relate not to .rights same as 'Bill E-ll which was given second
    ! regarding money and other property, but to reading and referred .to a committee last
    the very liberty and life of the subject. . June. The changes which have been made
    In what I have said I am in no way reflect- in the bill now before us are 'Of a very minor
    ing on the legal profession. Lawyers, and nature, involving only one or two ·words. I
    especially the able professional men on our would remind the house that Bill E-ll was
    introduced at the last session mere1y for the
    committee, wish to give Oanadians the best purpose of securing its &istribution and m-ak-
    law possible; but their very legal training ing it available to interested parties through-
    may induce in them a one-sided or partial out the country, It was not .contemplated
    :view. The commission which drafted the that the Senate would consider the bill in
    Code consisted almost without ex-ception of detail at that time, but It was hoped that it
    Crown prosecutors and judges-and many would be re-introduced at the present session.
    trial judges are Crown prosecutors befor-e The Department of National Health and
    : 'hey go on the Bench. It follows that the Welfare has been advised that representa-
    I, interests of the defence were but little repre- tions may be expected from certain groups
    : sented on the commission. The onus is all interested in this legislation. As a matter of
    ; the more clearly .on this house to see that fact, the Canadian Manufacturers Association
    : those int~rests are not ignored. I have never has already submitted 1.0 the,minister a brief
    I forgotten the statement which a Chief Justice covering a number of points raiSed in· Bill
    II of my province made when addressing a E-ll respecting food an'd cosmetics. It is not
    number of young lawyers. He said III improbable that various other associations
    l 68112-4,
    146 SENATE

    Honourable senators have been very kind Bill V-2, an Act for the relief of Armand 'I
    to listen to me so long. I did not talte advan~ Frenette.; "I
    tage· of the opportunity ·fo pay my respects Bill W -2, an Act for the relief of Florence
    to the organizer and manager of, the New Brown Boyaner.
    Brunswick election. I do so now. _
    I think Bill X-2, an i\'ct for 'the relief ·of Efleel'1
    he did an excellent job. Mercedes Hudson Walsh.
    Some Hon. Senators: Hear, hear. Bill .Y-2, an Act for the relief of Madeleine
    McCartney Ratcliff.
    The Address was adopted.
    Bill Z-2, an Act for the relief of Kathleen
    DIVORCE STATISTICS Mary Wilkinson Paraskiewicz.
    Bill A-3, an Act for the relief of Georges
    INTERThI REPORT Chaput.
    Hon. Mr. Aseltine# Chairman of the Standw Bill B-3, an Act for the relief of Florence
    ing Committee on Divorce, moved concur- Anna Carsh Laing.
    rence in reports of the committee numbered Bill C-3, an Act for the relief of Beatrice
    44 to 73, inclusive. Miriam Kert Beloff.
    He said: Honourable senators, it has Bill D-3, an Act for the relief of John
    occurred to me that I should give you a Alexander Stronach.
    short progress report. The total numbe_r of -aill E-3, an Act for the relief of Raymopd
    petitions filed to date is 212. Your com- Gelinas. .
    mittee has heard 75 of these; one has been Bill F~3j an Act for the relief of Anna f
    rejected and 74 have been recommended. Madeline Patterson Cotter. .
    Four petitions have been withdrawn. That Bill G-3, an Act for the relief of Claudia
    leaves 133 petitions to be heard" after the Marie Boudreau Leblanc. .
    adjournment, together with any others which Bill H-3, an Act for the relief of Lily Belz~
    may have been -filed by that time. berg Bigman. . ')
    The motion was agreed to, and the reports Bill 1-3, an Act for the relief of Jose~h
    were concurred in. Arthur Le~age.
    Bill J-3, an Act for the relief of Minnie
    DIVORCE BILLS Gruhn Boon.
    FIRST READINGS The bills were' read the fii-st time. ,'
    Hon. Mr. Aselfine presented the following SECOND READINGS
    bllls: Hon. Mr. Aseltine: Honourable senators, a~
    Bill G-2, an Act for the relief of Robert we are nearing the end of this' part of the:
    Gordon. session, I propose to ask, with leave of the
    Bill H-2, an Act for the relief of Helen Senate, that these bills be read the second
    Isabelle Hammo.nd Dadson. and third times this afternoon. '
    £ili 1-2, an Act for· the relief of Harold With ieave of the Senate, I now move the
    Gordon McFarlane. second readings of thel:!e bills. . .
    Bill J -2, an" Act for the relief of Dezso
    Ferenc Cross. The motion was agreed to, and the bills
    Bill K-2,· an Act for the relief of' Eric were read the. second time, on division.
    Ernest "Auclair. THIRD REA"PINGS
    Bill L-2, an Act for the relief of Napoleon The _Hon. fl;le Sp~aker; Honourable sena~
    Jean-Paul Chayer. tors, when. shall these bills he read the thir~
    Bill M-2, an Act for the relief of Marie time?
    Josephte Gilberte Belanger Byrne.
    .Bill N-2, .an Act for the relief of Nina Hon. Mr. Aseltine: \Vith leave, now. I so
    Difiore Statner. move.
    Bill 0-2, an Act for the relief· of Tillie The bills were read the third time, and·
    Tietlebaum Victor. passed, on division.
    Bill P ..2,· an Act for the relief of Elina It being six o'clock, the Senate took recess/
    Iacurto Floyd.
    Bill Q-2, an Act for the relief of Jennie
    Miller Solomon. At eight o'clock the sitting was resumed.
    Bill R-2, an Act for the relief of Ella
    Kuczerian. CRIMINAL CODE' BILL
    " I

    Blll B-2, an Act for the relief of Ruth


    Audrey Lorraine Beauchamp Laderoute. REPORT OF COMMITTEE
    Bill T-Q, an Act for the relief of Phyllis Hon. Salter A. Hayden presented the report
    Newman Lunan. of the Standing Committee on Banking and· I
    Bill U-2, an Act for the relief of Helen Commerce on Bill 0, an Act respecting the'!
    Doreen Cave Crawshaw. criminal law.
    DECEMBER 16, 1952 147
    .The report was read by the Clerk Assistant of creating mischief. In the main their objec-
    as JoUows: tions did- not relate to offences being newly
    'The standing Committee on Banking and Com· provided against in this bill, but to some
    merce, to whom was referreq: BUl 0, an Act that had been covered by the Criminal Code
    respecting the crlminal law, have in obedience to
    tire order of reference of November 25, 1952, for a very long time. I think they did, how-
    examined the said bill and now beg leave to report ever, object ifo some .provisions that were
    the same with the following amendments: . . . added somewhat more orecently to the section
    ·Hon. Mr. Robertson: Dispense. defining treason, which is section 46 in the
    bllI.
    \(See Appendix at end of today's report.)
    In addition ~ve received representations on
    The Hon. fhe Sp.eaker: Honourable sena- behalf of those who were interested in pro~
    tots, when shall this report be taken into viding by some amendment to the Code for
    c~nsJde+ation? the right to conduct what is commonly called
    ,Hon. Mr. Hayden, with leave, moved 'con- dog racing, with pari mutuel betting. Now,
    c1.lrr~nce in. the report.
    notwithstanding the receipt of those repre~
    sentations by the main committee, no member
    He said: Honourable senators, in view of of the committee saw fit to submit any amen:d~
    the 'importance of the bill which has just ments in line with them. And as to the
    been reported to the Senate I thought it treason section1? and others which were
    might be well to say 'a few words on what objected to by the organizations that I men-
    ili.:ay be regarded as some of the highlights tioned, the committee is recommending no
    in' the committee's consideration of this amendments which by any stretch of the
    m'e-aBUre. I can say that it is with a -certain imagination can be said to arise from the
    ~eb.s€ of satisfaction, and also with a great submissions made to the committee by those
    sense of telief, that I see the bill now organizations last Thursday. Further, the
    reported. . sub~committee's report was prepared before
    . :Puring the progress of our study 6f the the main committee heard those organizations .
    bHl this fall it became necessary to set up a Possibly I should refer to one or two of
    ~~~~committee, just as ~e did last spring, the committee's amendments which embody
    w1ien.- \ve considered in the sub~cOmmittee some important changes in the law. I think
    i:)osslbly less than a third of the sections in the committee's most notable amendment is
    ttie ,bill .. What we did then has facilitated one to provide for an appeal from conviction
    I otif work at this session. 'Nevertheless, since for contempt of court, whether the contempt
    ~h~" ~ession began th.e sul?~90mmittee has sat is committed in the face of the court-that
    ~~_. fifteen: days, on mDs~ -of which the meet:~ is, before the judge or magistrate-or as the
    ~gs began in _the morning and extended over result of some act or publication done out-
    't~e_ ~'i.ternoon and' even-ing..That was 'the side the court. This p~'ovision for an appeal
    t?VIY ~p.r~ctical \vay in which a job of this size is something new and unusual, but it was
    cl}uJ.d be done, for if the contin.uity of .con~ the unanimous view of .the· committee that
    slderahon had ,not been ptE;!served a gooQ. there should be some provision for an appeal
    d~ar~,o{ tim,e would. have been wasted :in as a sa~utary check oh any imprbper exer-
    \y~n:p1~ng up to .tbe task.
    cise of authority in 'the circ~mstances. The
    appeal provis~on which was ftmilly decided
    ,i:The 'sub~committee" recommended. more upon arid incorporated in the bill. makes it
    than' on'e litmdred 'amendments -to various possible ,- to appeal from sentence onlyl in
    parts of ·the bill. These were in addition to cases -i..-vhere the contempt takes place in the
    tlfe ,amendments ·suggested .by' the sub~com- face of the ~ourt-~hat is, before the ju,dge
    ~ mittee - last spring, many' of which V/ere or magistrate who finds the' person guilty, of
    incor.porated into the. bill before .it was contempt ~nd imposes tl).e penalty. But for
    teintroduced ,into the Senate at this session. cases in which the contempt takes place but~
    ':fJ;.;ast spring arid agai'n this fall representa~ side the co_urt We provided an appeal from
    ~~_otbS, were received tro~ various organiza.' both the conviction and ,the sentence~ so that
    ~~~.q'~~ pl:"6te.sting against enactments'in a very, either the conviction or the s-entence or both
    g~~,~ral sort of way. Three organizations filed
    may be reviewed by a higher court, depend-
    Q~~~is,., 1'he:y also .re,qciested ~n opportunity
    ing upon, the course of action that the con-'
    ·~O:,.ik~s_erit to the main committee an oral victed
    person decides to take. I think that
    is a notable advance in the law as it relates
    s-g,~{)ji~si6n, in support of' their briefs, and
    to contempt.
    t~af'is.,the reason \vhy they appeared the:r:e
    Another notable advance is that for the
    19-§t .. ~htir:sday. Thek presentations had to do first time in our criminal law any and all
    " rnainJ.y .;;'ith the treason seotions and certain offences for whlch a person may be charged
    sections relating to obstruction in the opera- and tried ,are contained within one piece of
    tion' of a ·.plant, which constitutes the oifen-ce legislation, and as and when the measure
    148 SENATE

    now before us is enacted by 'parliament, it substantial wrong or miscarriage of justice i


    will become the criminal law of Canada. No in a case, and dismiss the appeal, notwith~,
    longer will any person be charged with what standing the fact that the court may also i
    are called common law offences. Unless those conclude that the verdict was unreasonable, :1

    offences have been incorporated into the haying re&"ard to the 'weight of evidence, or
    criminal law-that is, into the particular bill that there has peen a miscarriage of justice
    now before us-they no longer exist in the or some wrong decision on the question' of
    realm of the criminal law of Canada. law. It seems illogical and lacking.in good
    There are several other matters which sense to give to the court the power to say,
    r should briefly m~ntion to the house. Despite on the one hand! that the verdict is unreason~
    some prot~st by the departmental officials, able and agllinst the weight of evidence, and
    Ne retained what is called "trial de novo"_ on the other hand that there has been no
    the right to,have a new trial and to have the substantial wrong or miscarriage of justice:
    witnesses,'heard again. Provision for a new That seemed to us an anomolous situation;
    trial exists in our present law, and" relates and by our amendment to this bill we have
    to appeals from summary convictions. As the terminated it. We felt that there should be
    law now stands an accused person who has no weighing of degrees of miscarriage of
    been convicted may appeal or, in case of an justice.> If in the opinion of the appellate I
    acquittal, the Crown may appeal. The matter court there has ,been a miscarriage, that'
    then is taken to an appeal judge, who may court should not be given power to weigh the I
    hear the case de novo, or by agreement of miscarriage against some intangible thing an~
    the parties he may hear arguments, by both decide whether there has been a substantial ~
    the appellant and the respondent, on the wrong or miscarriage of justice. In our view
    record of the "evidence taken at the original a miscarriage of justice amounts to a denial
    trial. That requires, as I say, the consent of of justice, and the accused is entitled to have
    both parties. his appeal allowed.
    ( It seemed to us that the provision for trial In our amendment to the bill we have CQn~
    je novo was a salutary check on any mis- fined the application of the rule by which
    takes that might occur in the trial of first the court of appeal could dismiss an appe;;tl
    instance, where the lists are so heaVy. Very on the ground that there has beeri no sub~
    often an accused person does not r~alizl";l: the stantial wrong or miscarriage of justice t9
    predicament he is in until a magistrate con- the case where there has been' a wrong
    victs him and sentences him to a fine or decision on the question of law. In thos,e'
    imprisonment, or both. If 1he acc4sed is circumstances the court may examine aU the
    not represented by a lawyer-and very often facts of the case ~nd decide that the wrong
    in the court of first instance he is not-he has decision on a question of la\v w8:S l?-ot iinpor~'
    no appreciation of tbe weight of, evidence tant in the decision of the case, or that tqe;
    agaillst him, and he does not have .the abUity jury Was not influenced against the accused;
    to' cro:Ss~examine the Crown's witnesses- in or that the scheme of his defence was not
    such a way as h~st to bring out the points in affected adversely. In those circu,mstances ~t
    his favour. The common' result is that he may weU be found that notwithstanding the
    allows tije record to consist of th~ Crown's wrong decision in law there has been no sub~
    case alJ,d nothing else.in the way of an effec- stantial miscarriage of justice, arid therefoie'
    tive rebuttal of what the. Crown has 'said; the appeal will be dismissed. In that regard,
    y~t 'when the circumstances pave been fully we have made the amendment which I have
    considered they" may show that he has a per- indicated.
    fectly good defence; and if. h~ is granted a
    new tria-.l he may, with the aid of counsel, We also dealt with the right· of election by
    provide the necessary evidence to gain an an accused person. The provisions of the
    acquittal.,'1 In my opin~on, that is sufficient Criminal Code are quite firm ia' relation to
    to justify the continuation in the Code of the offences and matters of proof. The bill
    provision for trial' de novo. There has been before you provides certain· rights of eleGti9n
    a substantial expression of opini.on by judges by an accused as to ho\v he shall be trfeq.,.
    and magistrates in various parts of the coun':' In that respect the bill is a depa:r;-ture frqI'O:,
    try in favour of its continuance. We felt, the present law, which allows ~n accused to.
    therefore, that we were not flying in the face elect to be tried summarily or by the next
    of public -opiniou' in. maintaining this salu~ court of competent juriSdiction-which means
    tary provision. -=-~ by a judge and jury-and h9-v1ng made the'
    latter choice, he can later re~elect to be: triet)
    May I say something about an appeal to by a judge without a jury. . The bill as it
    the appellate court by a person who has been came to us provided that if an accused elected·
    convicted of a,n indictable offence? Our law before a magistrate to be tried -by a judge
    has for a, long'- time provided that a court without a jury, he would not have a chance-
    of appeal may find that there has been no if he were later advised by counsel that he,

    ,
    DECEMBER 16, 1952 149

    would be better off before a jury-to re-elect should not have been -committed ·to jail at all.
    to be tried by judge and jury., We felt that So we thought a simple method of dealing
    the new law should not put an accused in with the matter would be to substitute, for
    any worse position, and that at the same time the ex parte hearing, a notice to the surety,
    ,ve should protect the Crown by providing who then would make out his case, if he
    that an accused could re-elect .only up to the could) -and a·ccount for the circ1.1?lstances
    rixing of the time for his trial. Once the which led -to the lack of realization out of the
    day of his trial has been fixed he CQuid not assets which were put up on the recognizance.
    d.illy-dally any longer with the court and the There are many situations where the surety
    procedure of the court. Thereafter' he could might be blameless for the situation _which
    J].ot ;m.ake re-election for trial by judge and subsequently developed. F9r instance, he.
    fury 'without the consent of the Attorney might put up securities the market value of
    G(meral or counsel representing the Attor- which at the time of putting up, would be at
    ney Qeneral. So we have provided that safe- least ~qual to the amount of the recognizance,
    guard; and the Crown, by simply fixing, at but which subsequentlY·t when defaul·t
    a.-s early a day as possible, the date of his occurred and ·there was ·an attempt to realize,
    trial, has within its own hands the means might by reason of fadors beyond his control
    to reduce the time within which a convicted have dropped 'to such an extent that .they
    person may avail himself of this right to amounted to less ,than the sum required. In
    re~elect. After that it becomes necessary to those circumstances it would be unreasonable
    obtain the consent of the Attorney General to penalize the surety by putting him in jail)
    6r :counsel on his behalf. sin-ce he had acted in perfect good faith. That
    :' Hon. Mr. Ross: 'Does that right of the is ·the reason we made the change. We thought
    it was in the interest of the protection of the
    a~~used to make .el~ction apply in all cases?
    surety, and it was not against the inter~st o~
    ·,Hon. Mr. Hayden: Wells of course there are -the Crown.
    some cases in which ,the magistrate has I should direct your attention to the fact
    a'!:>:solute jurisdidion. I refer to cases where that we did one, thing whi-ch may be said to
    ~l:l.el·.e is ·the .right of' election. Where the make us leaders in this particular direction;
    rpagistra-te has ·absolute jurisdiction he' .just we struck out in -committee tod-ay the section,
    presides and tries the. case. In swnmary which heretofore was also part of the -com~
    'Conviction ca-ses he presides and tries the mon law that makes it an offence to libel the
    case) and then the defendant has the right sovereig~ of a foreign stat-e. Speakin,g
    Qf -appeal. I am speaking about eases where frankly, we were moved to do that, I believe,
    ·an accused. person with his consent, -that is by by a realistic appraisal of the present wo~ld
    his.-electiou,. ~au be tried before the magis- situation. It did not appeal to us that this
    trate, or he may make these other elections. section should -continue to operate as a re-
    !'There are one -Or two other things to whkh straint on freedom 'of .criticism or -critical
    1 should c'all your attention. I think we have expression in relation to ,persons who may
    improved very considerably .the proceedings temporarily be in the ·position- of, or desig-
    in"respect of estre'at in the -case of recogniz- nated as, sovereign heads of foreign states, or
    ance. Whe,re sureties have entered into a that the measure of an alleged -libel should
    recognizance assuring -the appearance of an be how it was regarded in those countries.
    a:~-c'used person at tbe proper time and pIace f Having given the m-atter consideration, we felt
    and haVe furrtished the necessary securitY't that .provisions whi-ch may not have been
    we have simplified the procedure in the inappropriate in earlier times-when more,
    ~y-ent of default or the .securHy not Qeing
    regard was had for the position ~nd the
    s,ufficient to ,take -care of the_ amount of the dignity of heads of sovereign states t and inter~
    re(J:ognizance which ,was originally put up national relationships_ were on -8' somewhat
    tQ,:s.ecure the appearance of' the accused.. per~ different plane-had become more or less
    5011. ;:It was provided ·in the bill that" when outmoded, if not archaic. It was our opin.ion
    the sheriff had exhausted his remedies as that this provision added nothing to the
    regards collecting the am-ount of the recogni- comity of nations; that its exclusion from the
    zance and was still short of the full amount, present bill would be neither remarked nor
    the ,next step would be an ex parte proceed- regretted; and that therefore we were justi~
    ing .by the Crown for the committal of the fred in striking it out.
    ,surety to jail, and after such committal
    These are some of the prineipal things we
    there was provision wh~reby, upon notice) considered; and tonight I am tquching only
    the surety could make application to be heard on the main sections. A number of others
    by a judge as ,to why he should not have to were amended merely for the purpose of
    ~emain in jail. That 'procedure pre~ented clarification. We did not read into the draft-
    ~any complications. It might turn out that ing of the sections any intent to deprive an
    the circuinstances were such that the surety accused person of all the rights and .pro-
    68112-12
    150 SENATE
    cedures. and defences which have avail-ed him has acquired its own peculia,r significance.
    hitherto, but we felt that something more We felt that, if changing times require it,'
    could be done to make plain what those we shall have to create new .criminal offences'
    rlghts were in particular 'Cases. and .provide adequate punishment for them.
    I think it will be evident to you when, you That is why in the treason section we deleteq.
    read the report that i,ve scrutinized minutely, a subsection. It -may be that in the light of
    line by line, even down to periods and present-day conditions that there should be
    commas, every section -of the bill; and it con- such -an offence and that the offender should:
    tains over 280 pages, 748 sections and quite be punished wHh the full rigour of the law,'
    a munber of forms. In our task we received But let us ,call it what it is, and make it a
    excellent -assistance from our Law Clerk, who criminal offence. After all, criminal law is
    demonstrated once again the .ability in these not static and must !progress as the public',
    matters of which he has given us so freely. need Il'equires. Let us create new offence~
    He was present -at aH our hearings and worked where necessary, hut let us not put them
    on the drafting of all the amendments. We are under headings which are misleading. These"
    aJso indebted to the law officers of the Depart- titles may have acquired ~estricted and qua:U~
    ment of Justice who sat with us, and did an fied meanings over the years. That is what
    excellent job, and to whom we have referred we thought about the word treason. I do
    particularly in the report. not bow to anybody in my desire to ,protect
    Honourable senators, we have got to the welfare and the public interest of Canada.
    remember that the legislation before us is against those, either within or without this
    a revision of 1:he Criminal Code and not a country, who would seek to undermine the
    revision of the ~ubstantive .criminal law of public safety and welfare of Cana<l,a. In
    Canada. It is true that a considerable redut;~ creating new offences with rigorous penalties,
    tion has been -made in the content of the we should make sure that Canada can punish
    Code, some 1,200 sections having been to the full extent -of her criminal law those
    17_educed to approximately 748. Many of the who might attempt to undermine her security,
    arch-aical offences have been stricken f,rom when they are enjoying the protection,
    the' Code l As the Code 'has grown up many hospitality, comfort, safety -and well-being'
    condensed and simpler ways have been found that this -country affords.
    to, express ~hings that previously required
    Some Hon. Senat~rs: Hear, hear.
    much more space. In its general over-aU
    scheJ;l1e the Code is therefore a more simpli- Hon. Mr. Davies: May I ask the honourable
    :q.ed docul!lent today. In lParticular, the -pro- senator a question? I was present at the·
    c~d-ural. sections have been streamlined and hearings of the main committee, and perhaps
    ar~ much. easier to' follow and understand. I should knoW' more about this subje'Ct; qut
    The processes a~e logic.al and reasonable, and it is not clear in my mind what the Criminal
    carI be grasped readily. The Code _is in a Code has to do with dog racing. My under-'
    highly commendable state, but I would warn standing is that certainJegislation would have.
    a~, thE;- same time that a revision of our sub-
    to be passed by "the federal parliament or,
    stantive criminal ~aw has, not been made. a provincial legislature before a person could,
    start· dog r~cing in a:p.y province. What.
    When offences contained in the legislation exactly has the Criminal Code got to do with:
    before the house require overhauling' as a dog racing? I am sorry to be so ignorant e)I),·
    result of .changing conditions, some special the point.
    group may have fa be commissioned to deal
    with the mli\tter. We must -remember that as Hon. Mr. Hayden: The answer is simple.'
    a 'result of social development and changing If you are talking only about' the running'
    conditions, acts that are not offences' now of dogs, the Criminal Code has absolutely·
    nothing to do' with that. If, however, you;
    may have io be written into the Code as wish to have pari mutuel betting in connec-'
    offences in the future. These are matters tion with the running of dog races~ then the'
    which 'may very well become the subject of Criminal Code will have everything to do
    thorough study at some future time. Our with it. At the present" time the Code makes
    committee felt that it should not bring in it a crimihal offence to bet on dog races; it"
    new offences under a heading or description does not exempt dog races ·as it does horse.
    of offences which have acquired a seconda'ry races, from the general provision of the
    meaning. For instance, under the word Criminal Code with respect to betting.'
    Htreason" we think of particular kinds of Therefore, while you could have dog races;
    offences. We did not think it wise to bring without. any regard 'to the -Criminal Code
    in new and, modern offences, which are the at all, you could not have dog racing with
    outgrowth _of present world conditions, and pari mutueL betting. I do not know to what I
    group them under the word Htreason'" which could compare dog r&cing without pari mutue?
    DECEMBER 16, 1952 151

    betting. It would be like spending money and these provisions, and I was afraid that it
    Dot having any money to spend. Dog racing would be impossible to have them restored.
    \vithout pari mutuel betting would mean that I am pleased to inform honourable senators
    yoU would be paying money out with no that the Attorney General of the Province of
    money coming in. That would hardly com- Saskatchewan objected to doing away with
    mend itself to any person, even those of limited trials de novo, and also that many magistrates
    futelligence. in our province asked me, when the bill came
    'Honourable senators, I believe I have up here for fUrther consideration, to say to
    finished. I would like to close with the the Senate that they thought failUre to pro-
    remark that our consideration of' the bill was vide for trials de novo would be a retrograde
    intensive, and although it was carried out step.
    in a shor-t space of time you need not fear I have had considerable experience with
    that it was hastily done or that we took any trials of this kind, -particular:ly in cases where
    s.hort cuts in order to complete the job. We accused persons have been tried in the "first
    feel that we devoted the time that was instance summarily before magistrates. Our
    necessary to do the job, and we think that magistrates are not all lawyers, and quite
    in .
    the document befor~ you we have pre- frequently when a case is heard before a lay
    sented a fairly good product. magistrate "it does not receive the attention
    ~ome Hon. Senators: Hear, hear. that it would have received had he been a
    lawyer. In many of these summary convic-
    . Hon. W. M. AseUine: Honourable senators, tion cases also the accused does not fully
    t -wish to make a few brief remarks at this understand the seriousness of the charge
    : time although I always feel, after listening brought against him. Sometimes he appears
    r fo the honourable chairman of the Banking in court without any witnesses or counsel,
    an.d Commerce Committee (Han. Mr. Hayden)
    I that there is little left to be said.
    "It is my opinion that this is the most
    and before he knows it he is convicted and
    fined, or perhaps even committed to jail. In
    such a case it seems to me that it is only just

    II
    impor"tant "piece of legislation that has been and proper that if the accused person feels
    brought before parliament for many a day. aggrieved he should be able to have a new
    It affects the life and liberty of every individ- trial. And that is what is made possible by
    ual in the whole of Canada. Therefore it is provision for trials de novo, for in the notice
    f of tremendous significance. I feel that the of appeal it is not necessary to state any
    ~ go~ernment of the day is to be congratulated grounds; you are only required to state that
    upon sending such a complicated bill to the you are aggrieved by the conviction. Then a
    . Senate for consideration rather than having it new trial is granted, and you are given the
    '" 4ltroQ.uced in the other house. I say' that advantage of engaging counsel and calling
    ~ because we have among the members of the witnesses, so that when the case is over you
    ; Senate distinguished counsel of nation-wide feel that you have had justice.
    ~ prominence who have freely given of their
    . valuable time in order to study all the Hon. Mr. Reid: To whom do you appeal for
    t different phases and" parts of this legislation. a new trial?
    ! I refer to the chairman of the Banking and Hon. Mr. Aseltine: The district court judge
    , Commerce Committee (Han. Mr. Hayden), the or the county court judge. In Saskatchewan
    r senator from Toronto-Trinity ilion. ,Mr. these appeals are heard by district court
    I Roebuck) and the senator from Vancouver-
    judges.
    South (Hon. Mr. Farris). " Also, the Senate's Furthermore, if you have to rely on the
    Law Clerk is a gentleman with a profound evidence taken down by the magistrate you
    knowledge of the law, and in my opinion one will frequently find when you get his notes
    of the ablest legal draftsmen that Canada has that a great deal of the evidence in your
    ever had. Because of duties that kept me favour is not there at aU. And perhaps some
    engaged in a lower part of the building, I was of the evidence in favour of the prosecution
    able to get up to only. one meeting of the sub- is not there. I understand that in Ontario
    committee that worked on this bill, but at every magistrate has a reporter to take
    that meeting I was deeply impressed by the down the evidence, but this is not so in Sas-
    detailed study that was being given not only katchewan. We have no such facilities at all
    to every section, but,to every sentence, every in many places, and it is only when cases are
    line and every word. I regret that it was not tried in the larger centres, or in- the Court of
    PossIble for me'to attend fUrther meetings. Queen's Bench, and so on, that there is a
    Having practised law in western Canada for court reporter on hand at all times. Often
    some forty years or so, I am much interested if we want the evidence taken down in a
    in the provisions for trial de novo, which have summary trial, we ourselves have to provide
    been fuUy explained by the chairman of the a stenographer, and at many outlying dis·
    committee. The bill as drafted had dropped trict points no stenographer at all is available.
    68112-12<
    152 SENATE

    For these reasons it seems to me that in a Some Hon. Senaiors: Oh, ab. .... ,
    province like Saskatchewan or Alberta, or Hon. Mr. Hayden: An application was made:
    even Manitoba and the northern parts of on behalf of some organization-hot an orga:n~'
    British Columbia, it would be a bad thing ization of dogs, but rather of friends' of the:
    if trials de novo were abolished. As things
    now stand, it is frequently impossible for an dogs---:-to the end that their dog-running
    accused person to have justice done at the might be made remunerative. As no action
    first trial in those territories, and therefore it was taken by the Senate committee witll'
    is essential that there should be machinery regard to that aspect cif the bill, the matter
    for a rehearing. does not now come before us. ':
    I was also asked before I came to Ottawa Hon. Mr. Roebuck: Honourable senators,:
    at the beginning of this session to urge ·if. no one else wishes to address the Senate
    another p()int on the committee studying this at this time, may I ask fhe ,leader if I am"
    bill. That was that there should be a defini- right in assuming that there is no particular-
    tion of "magistrate" w:pich would req1.!-ire reason why we should pass the bill tonight?~
    that he be a lawyer of at .least five ye~rs' It is an 'important bill, and if no other hon-'
    standing. However, after tal~ing over the ourable senator wishes to s'peak to it, I would'-
    matter with the chairman of the committee move the adjournment of the debate.
    I was given "to understand that in rpa.ny parts
    of Canada it would be impossible to put that Hon. Mr,' Robertson: Honourable senators,
    requirement into effect at present, Qut that notwithstanding the' fact that the chairman
    it is the intention arid policy of tlie attorneys of the committee has spoken. tonight, and:
    general of _'the 9ifferent province.s to bring others have expressed their views, I think)t.
    about ~ change whereby only la;wyers of some only proper· that the honourable senator from·
    standing will be appointed as magistrates. Toronto-Trinity CHon._ ,Mr. Roebuck) should;
    have every opportunity to give us the benefit
    Honourable senators, that is all I h~ve to of his remarks. . I know of no reason why
    say about the bill and the committee's report. we should not' resume the discussion tomor-, I
    I ·am ph~ased \vith the way in which the row' afternoon. - .- t ,
    matter has .been handled. The committee
    had a hard task, and it has done a good job Hon. Mr. Reid: May I ask the sponsor of the'
    of which. I think the Senate has every reason bill if it is the intentiori to have this measure
    t~ be very proud. . incorporated - into the new revised statutes?
    Hon. Mr. Horner: May I ask a simple layR Hon. Mr. Hayden: I understand' so.
    man's question? Where do the dogs run?
    Have they any rights under this bill?" The motion of Hon. Mr. Roebuck was'
    agreed to,' and the debate was adjourned;,'
    H~n. Mr. Hayd~~:. Wellt ·the dogs have not . . d
    made an' application before the Senate _comR The SeI?-ate .adjourned until tomo~row. a,t'
    mittee. 3 p.m.
    DECEMBER 16, 1952 153

    APPENDIX 11. Page 20: insert the following as para·


    graph (c) to subclause m of clause 50:-
    '-'~EPORT OF COMMITTEE ON BANKING AND "(c) conspires with an agent of a state 6ther
    . COMMERCE ON BILL 0, AN ACT than Canada' to communicate informa-
    • ,I ' • RESPECTING THE CRIMINAL LAW tion or to do an -act that is Hkely to
    be prejudicial to the safety of Canada."
    "'>~: Tuesday, December 16, 1952
    p
    12. Page 21, line 34: after the word "who"
    The Standing Committee on Banking 'and insert the word flwilfully".
    C~m:lnerce to whom was referred the Bill lion, 13. Page 23, line- 1: renumber subclause 5
    Jhtitul~: "An Act respecting the Criminal of clause 60 as clause H6l H ,
    -Law",' have in obedience to the order of 14: Page 23, line 1: delete 'unotwithstanding
    'referen:ce of 25th November, 195~, examined subsection (4) no person shall be" <Rnd sub-
    the ~aid Bill and now beg leave to. report the stitute "notwithstanding subsection (4) of sec-
    ~saine- with the following amendments:- tion 60 no person shall be" .
    • ,J i .. ,Page -3, line 9: delete the words urecorder 15. Page 23, line 17: Renumber clause "61H
    or" and sUbstitute therefore the words as clause 1/62". '
    ,~fmunidpal judge of the city, as the case may 16. Page 23, lines 23 to 28: strike out clause
    be, or a", 62.
    "<:~2~-:Page 9, line 35: insert after u8/1 the 17. Page 23, line 29: after the word "who"
    figure and bracket'- m. insert the ,·word "wilfully",
    r\,: _," .
    '3, Page 9: insert after subclause m of 18. Page 24, ~ine '3: ,after the words "Cana_
    clause 8' the following subclauses:- dian ;Forces/' add the word "or",
    ,. :01'(2) Where a ·court~ judge, justice or magis-
    19. Pa,ge 24, Hue 5: delete ", or" and insert
    trate summarily ,convicts -a Jperson f_or a -con- -a period .
    .t~rn:pt of, court committeCi in the face of the
    'court and imposes punishment in respect 20. Page 24, line 6: strike out paragraph (c).
    ~hereof, that person may aweal against the 21. Page 26, lines 2 to 5: delete paragraphs
    iiu'nis'hment imposed. (a) and (b) and supstitute therefore the
    "T.,,(3)-Where a court or judge.summariiy con- following:-
    vlc-ts a i:>erson for a 'Contempt of court not "Ca) nhallenges or attempts by any means
    cQtr).mitted in the face of the ·court and punish- to pro'voke another, person to fight a
    menf is imposed in respect .thereof, _that per- duel,
    (b) attempts to provoke a person to chal-
    ~qq, IpfiY appeal .
    (a) from the conviction, or lenge another person to fight a duel, or
    (b) against the punishment imposed. (c) accepts a challenge t6 fight a duel/'
    ,_.(4) ,An -appeal_-under this section lies to the 22. Page 27, line 27: delete the word
    court Of appeal of the province in which the "other" :a:nd·- substitute therefor rthe words
    p;q),ceedings take 'Pl~ce, and, for -the ;purposes "any other dangerou~".
    p~ ,~his section, tne provisions of Part XVIII 23. Page 28, lines 3 to 7: delete paragraph
    'apply; mutatis mutandis. '. . (a) and -substitute therefor the following:-
    _:'J~'I_Page 17, line 33: strike out. the word (I(g) makes or has in his "possession or
    ~~qt4_~rlJ. . . ·under his care ·or control an explosive
    5. Page 19, line 2: aft~r the words uHer substance thai he does n'ot make -or
    .M;-ajest'~ .insert ~', or does her any 'bodHy harm does not have in his possession or
    Y~wIi~g to death or destruct~o.n, m,aims or under his ,care or control- for a Jawful
    'Y?,lJnds her, .or impris.ons or r-estr~ins her". lPurpose, or" ..
    6. Page 19, lines 11 to 14: stri~e Qut _para- 24. Page 38, line 10: delete the word "or"
    lil'!,ph (e), and reletter paragraphs (f) and and substitute the word Uto". .
    (g) as (0) and (f).
    25. Page 40, line 37: delete the words uevi_
    , 7,', J;'age 19, line 33: delete Hi or ,g',,- and· sub- dence for ihe purpose of" and SUbstitute
    stitute the following liar fn. therefor the words "anything with intent that
    ,..8. Page 20: immediately, after clause 48 it shall be used as evidence in".
    jrt~ert' the heading "PROHIBITED ACTS." 26. Page 41, line 28: strike out the word
    ~-,~A,' Pages 20 and 21: transpose clauses 49 "or".
    ati«(~2 and renumber accordingly. -
    27. Page 45, lines 9 to 20: del~te clause 134
    ,BB. )?;ige 23, lines 23 to 28: strike out clause and substitute therefor the foHowing:-
    ~.2. ' '.
    "134. Notwithstanding anything in this Act
    9. -Page 20. Une 37: strike out the word "or", or any other Act of the Parliament of Oanada,
    : "io .. Page 20, line 42: delete the period and where an accused is charged with an offence
    msert therefor ", or", under section 136, 1'37 or subsection- (1) or
    154 SENATE

    (2) of section 138, the judge shall, if <he only (iD the failure to perform the duty
    evidence that implicates the accused is: the endangers the life of the person to
    evidence, given under oath, of the female whom the duty is owed, or causes
    person in respect of whom the offence is or is likely to cause the health of
    alleged to have been committed -and that that person to be en'dangered per-
    evidence is not corroborated in a material manently; or
    particular, ,instruct the jury that it is not safe (b) with respect to' a duty imposed by
    to find the accused guilty in the absence· of paragraph (c) of subsection (1), the
    evidence that corroborates, in a material failure to perform the quty endangers I'

    paa:dcular, the evidence of that female per- the life of the person to whom the
    son, but that the:y are entitled to find the dl,lty is owed or causes or -is likely to
    accused guilty if they are satisfied beyong, a cause the health of that person to be 1

    reasonable doubt that her evidence is true." injured permanently. :


    (3) Everyone who comillits an offence under
    28. Page 47, line 40: after the ,vord "vessel"
    subsection (2) is guilty of • '
    insert the words ~'engaged in the carl,'iage of
    (a) an indictable offence and is liable to
    passengers for hire,". imprisonment for two years; or
    29. Page 50, line 15: after the word "scur- (b) an offence punishable on summary con-
    xilious H add the following words: "but" this viction."
    section does not a-pply to a ,person who makes 37. Page 68, line 1: renumber subGla_use
    'use o"f the mails for ihe purpose -of trans- (3) as (4).
    mitting or delivering anything mentioned in 38. Page 69, lines 1 to 9: delete clause 191,
    subsection (4) of section 151". and SUbstitute thel'efor the following:-
    30. Page 51, line 4: strike out the words . "191. (1) Everyone is criminally negligent
    Hor is likely to endangerll • who
    31. Page 51, line 5: strike out the words (a) is doing anything, or .
    -"or is likely to-render". (b) 'is omitting to do anything that it is his
    duty to do,
    32. Page 51, Hnes 8 to 12:, delete -subclause shows wanton or reckless disregard for the
    (2) and sUbstitute therefor the following:- lives or safety of other persons. > -

    H(2) No proceedings, for an offence under (2) For the purposes of this section, "duty" I

    this section shall be' commenced more than means a dl.,tty imposed by law'!'
    one year after the time when the offence 39. Page 73, line 19: after the word "birth"
    was committed/' insert the words "as a result thereof".
    33. Page 51: add the following subclause 40. Page 74: immediately before clause 221,
    (3) to clause 159: insert the heading
    "(3) No proceedings shall be commenced "AUTOMOBILES, DANGEROUS PLACES
    und-er this section without the consent -of the AND UNSEAWORTHY SHIPS"
    Attorney General."
    34. Page 58, lines 26 -and 27: delete lines 41. Page 75, line 4: after the word Ilassis~
    tanceH insert the words Ilwhere any person
    26 and 27 and SUbstitute therefor the words has been injured"'.
    "a subpoena".
    42. Page 75, line 10: after the word (lassl~)
    35. Page 58: add the following as subclause tance" insert the words "where any person
    (3) to clause 174: has been injured" ~
    H (3) No evidence that is given by a person
    43. Page 77, line 11: after the word "who"
    und-er this section may be used .or received i~~ert the words ", without lawful excuse"',
    in evidence in any crbninal ,proceedings
    against him, except proceedings for perjury 44. Page 77, line 26: delete the word' "ox"
    iUr giving that evidence." and substitute the word "andH •
    45. Page 77, line 31! delete the word ({or'~
    36. Page 67, lines 32 to 38: delete subclause and SUbstitute the word "ahd". .
    (2) and substitute therefor the following:-
    46. Page 98, line 9: after .the words "Canad~
    "(2) Everyone commits an offence who,
    being under a legal duty wi-thin the meaning Post Office," add 'the i.vord' "or".
    of subsection (1), fails without lawful excuse, 47. Page 99, lines 1 to 13: delete parag:nwp.
    (b) and SUbstitute therefor the following;:':"":':
    the Jproof of which lies upon him, to ,perform
    H(b) was stolen within twelve months before
    that duty, if
    the proceedings -were' commenced,
    (a) with respect to a duty imposed by -para-
    and that evidence may be considered for
    graph (a) -Or (b) of subsection (1), the purpose of proving that the accused
    (i) the person to whom the duty is knew that the property forming the sub-
    owed is in destitute or necessitous ject-matter of the proceedings was stolen
    circumstances, or property'!' .
    DECEMBER 16. 1952 155

    48. Page 99, line 22: delete the word ensure that anything in respect of which the
    obtained'l and sUbstitute therefor the word
    fl order is made is safeguarded and preserved
    "stolen". for any purpose for which it may subse-
    49. Page 104, lines 20 and 21: delete para- quently be required".
    graph (a) and sUbstitute therefore the fo1- 60. Page 152, lines 21 to 26: Delete subclause
    lowing:- . (1) and substitute the following:
    "(a) a letter or writing that he knows con- 41447. (1) Where a warrant for the arrest of
    tains a threat to cause death or injury an accused cannot be executed in' ·accordance
    to any person; or". with section 445, a justice within whose juris-
    50. Page 115, line 37: strike out the words diction the accused is or is believed to be
    jlpr by any other means". shall, upon application and upon :proof on
    (: . 51. Page 116, line 31: strike out the word oath or by affidavit of ihe signature of the
    Hundue". justice who executed the warrant, authorize
    52. Page 122, line 18: aft€r the word "rail- the execution of the warrant within his juris-
    .way" add the wordS "that is a common diction by making all' endorsement, which
    carrier/'. may be in Form 25, upon the warrant." .
    53. Page 140, line 8: delete line 8 and sub- 61. Page 153, lines 1 to 7: Delete clause 449
    stitute U(ii) section 49", and substitute the following:
    . 54. Page 140, line 9: delete line 9 and sub- 41449. Where .an accused Who ·is charged
    stitute "CiiD section 51", with an indictable offence is before a justice,
    55. Page 145, lines 27 and 28: strike outthe justice shall, in accordance with this ,Part,
    'the words "or any other Act of the Parlia- inquire into that -charge' and any other charge
    meht of Canada": .against that person."
    . 56. Page 145, lines 32 and 33: strike out the 62. page 153, lines 33 and 34: Delete the
    words "or any other Act of the Parliament of words "stood mute" and substitute the wordS
    Canada", "did not elect,".
    57. Page 146, lines 33 to 39: Delete subclause 63. Page 153, line 40: Delete the words
    (1) of Clause 432 and substitute the following: "stood mute" and substitute the words "did
    "432. (1) Where anything that has been not elect.".
    :seized under section 431 or under a warrant 64. Page 154, Jine 15: After the word
    issued pursuant to section 429 is brought "directs" insert the words "without any
    before a justice, he shall, unless the prosecutor deposit;".
    otherwise agrees, detain it or order that it 65. Page 154, line 24: Delete the word
    be detained, taking reasonable care to ensure j'informant" and substitute therefor the word
    that it is :preserved until the conclusion of "prosecutor".
    any investigation or until it is required to be
    66. Page 154, line 44: After the word
    produced for the Ipurposes of a preliminary "adjourned" insert the words "with the con~
    -inquiry or trial, but nothing shall be detained· sent of the prosecutor and the accused or
    under the authority of this section for a period his counsel;".
    of more than three months after the time of
    seizure unless, before the expiration of that graph 67. Page 155, lines 11 to 13: Delete para-
    (i) and substitute therefor the follow-
    period, proceedings are instituted in which
    the 8ubject matter of detention may be ing:-
    M

    H(l) receive evidence on the part of the


    r:_~,quired".
    prosecutor or the accused, as the case
    58. Page 147: Immediately after subclause may be, after hearing any evidence that
    4. of clause 432, add. the following new' has been given on behalf of either of
    subclause: them;'I.
    ',: !~'(5) Where anything is detained under sub-
    68. Page 155, Jine 18: Delete the word
    section (1), a judge of a superior court of "answered" and SUbstitute therefor the word
    ~riminal jurisdiction or of a court of criminal
    "served".
    JUrisdiction may, on summary application on 69. Page 155, lines 26 to 29: Delete para-
    'behalf of a person who has an interest in graph (a) of subclause (1) and SUbstitute the
    ;what is detained, after thr~e clear days' notice following:
    .to -the Attorney General, order that the person "(a) take the evidence under oath, in the
    by or on whose behalf the application is made presence of the accused, of the wit-
    he permitted to examine anything so nesses called on the part of the prosecu-
    .detained." , tion and allow the accused or his
    69. Page 147: Immediately after the new counsel to cross-examine them; and".
    sUbclause (5) of clause 432 add the following 70. Page 156, line 22: Immediately after
    new SUbclause: the word "trial." insert the follo\ving:-
    (1(6) An order that is made under subsection "You must clearly understand that you
    (5)·shall be made on such .terms as appear to have nothing to hope from any promise of
    the judge to be necessary or desirable to favour and nothing to fear from any threat
    156 SENATE.

    that may have been held out to you to induce 86. Page 195, lines 1 to 13:· renumber sub-
    you to make any admission or confession of clause (4) of clause 569 as new clause 570.
    guilt, but whatever you now say may be 87. Page 195,; lines 14 to 20: strike out
    given in evidence against you at your trial clause 570. / .
    notwithstanding the promise or threat." 88. Page 196, line 12: after the word "con_
    71. Page 160, line 19: Strike out the word viction" insert the words Hin Canada".
    uwho" .. 89. Page 196, line 15: after the word "con_
    72. Page 162, line 38: Delete the words viction" insert the words Hin Canada".
    "or stands. mute". 90. Page 200, lines 36 and 37: strike out
    73. Page "163, line 2: Delete the words the words "necessary or expedient". .
    "stood mute" and substitute therefor the
    words "did not elect". 91. Page 201: Insert a new· subclause (2)
    .. 74. Page 16~, line 9: Delete the words of clause 589 as follows:-'
    .'-'stood mute" and substitute therefor the H(2) In proceedings under this section the
    words ,"did not elect". parties or their counsel are entitled to
    75. Page 163, lil).es 43 and 44: Strike out examine or cross-examine witnesses and, in
    the words "but it is not necessary for wit~ an inquiry under paragraph (e) of subsection
    (1), are entitled to be present during the
    nesses to sign their depositions".
    76. Page 164:· ImIIlediately after subclause inquiry and to adduce evidence and to be
    heard.".
    (4) of clause 474 add the following as sub~
    , clause (5):- 92. Page 201: Re-number' present sub-
    U(5) Where an accused has elected under clauses (2) and (3) as subclauses (3) and (4).
    section 450 or 468 to be tried by a judge 93. Page 202, lines 17 to 22: Strike out suh-
    without a jury he may, at any time before paragraph eii), and re-number the subse:'
    ~ time has been fixed for his trial or ther~­ quent subparagraphs as (ii) and (Iii).
    after with the consent iil writing of the 94. Page 202, line 27: After the word "in"
    Attorney General ,or counsel acting on his insert the words "subparagraph (ii) of".
    behalf, re-elect to be tried by a judge and 95. Page 203, line 8: After the words "sub-
    jury by filing with the Clerk of the court an paragraph m" strike out the words "9r tiD" .
    .election in writing _a.nd the consent, if con- 96. Page.217, line 37: Strike out the word
    'sent" is required, and where an election is "or".
    in
    filed accordance with this sUbsection the 97. Page 217, line 42: After the word
    accused shall be tried before a court of com- "committed" add. "or".
    'petent jurisdibtion with' a jury' and not ofher- 98. Page 217: Insert a new- paragraph in
    wise.". subclause (3) as follows:-
    77. Page 165, line 39: delete the 'words "(d) property hi respect of which there is
    HstObd mute" and substitute therefore the a dispute as to ownership or right of
    words "did:··not elect". -possession by claimants other than the
    . 78: Page 169, line 31: strike out the words accused.".
    "in Canada".
    79--. Page 172,.line 27: after the word "par- 99. Page 220, lines 40' to 42: Strike o'ut
    paragraph (a).
    tictilars u . -insert· the words "and, without
    restricting the generality of the foregoing! 100. Page 220, line 43: Re-Ietter paragraphs
    may order the prosecutor ·to furnish par- (b) and (c) as (a) and (b) respectively.
    ticulars", . , 101. Page 229: insert the following as sUb;,
    . 80." Page 178, line 11: delete the words "in clause (4):-
    sections 50 to.. 53" and sUbstitute Hin sections H(4) The provisions or section 669 and sub-
    49, 50, 51 and 53." sections (1), (2) and (3) of this section shall be
    81. Page IS7j line 8: immediately before endorsed on any recogniz·ance. entered into
    the.' word "sh.aken" insert the word pursuant ,to this Act."
    "thoroughly". 102. Page 232, lines 14 to 46: delete clause
    _82;- ~age 191, line 7: after the word "judge" 679 and sUbstitute therefor the following:-':'"
    inse:r;t the words ", ,in any case tried without H679. (1) Where a writ of fieri facia~ has
    a jury," been issued' undel' this Part and it appears
    83. Page 191, line 23: after the word "any_ from a certificate in a -return made by the
    one" insert the words "other than himself or sheriff that sufficient goods and chattels, land
    another member of the jury," and tenements cannot be found ·to satisfy ,the
    84. Page 192, line 25: delete the word u pro_ writ, or that the proceeds of the execution of
    secutor" and sUbstitute therefor the words the writ are not sufficient ,to satisfy it, -a
    "Attorney General or counsel acting on his judge of the court may, upon the application
    behalf". of the Attorney General or counsel acting on
    85.· Page 193, line 9: after the word "jury" his behalf, fix a- time and place for the
    insert the words. Hand any proceeding inci- sureties to show cause why a warrant of com-
    dental ther~to". . mittal should not be issued in respect of them.
    DECEMBER 16, 1952 157
    (2) Seven 'clear days' notice of the time and (c) by reason of, the_ formal nature of the
    ·place fixed for the hearing pursuant to Bub- evidence or otherwise the court is satis-
    ,section (1) shall- be given to the sureties. fied that the 'opposite party will not be
    if (3)' The judge shall, at the hearing referred prej4diced,
    to in 'subsection (1), inquire into the circum- and any evidence that is read under the
    stance'S of ,the case and may in his discretion authority of this s'ubsection has the same force
    (a) order _.the discharge of ·the -amount for and effect as if the witness had 'given the
    .. which the surety is liable, or evidence before the appeal court .
    .(b) make any order with respect to the (3) W-here an appeal is taken against sen-
    . surety and to his imprisonment that tence, the appeal co-q:rt Shall, . unless the
    he considers. proper in the circum- sentence is one fixed by law, consider the
    stances and issue a warrant of com- fitness of the sentence appealed against, and
    mittal in Form 24. may upon such evidence, if an'y, as it thinks
    ·-(4) A warrant of committal issued pur- fit to require or receive, by order,
    suant to -this section 'authorizes the sheriff to (a) dismiss the appeal, or
    .take.'into· custody the person in respect of (b) vary the sentence within the limits
    . whom' the warrant was issued and to confine prescrilied by law for the offence of
    . 'him- in a prison in the territorial division in which the defendant was convicted.
    which the writ was issued or in the prison (4) The following prOVlSlons apply in
    'nearest to the court, until satisfaction is made respect of appeais, namely,
    or 'until the period of imprisonment fixed by (a) where an appeal is based on an objec-
    ,the judge has expired.
    tion to an information or any process,
    (5) In this seotton and in section 677,
    .~'Attorney General" means, where subsection
    judgment shall not be given'in favour
    ! (2) ,of ,section 626 applies, the Attorney Gen-
    of the appellant,
    ,eral-ot-Canada." CD for any alleged defect therein in
    103. Page 237, Jine 5: strike out the words substance or in form, or
    :','niake ,it ,a condition at". GD for any variance between the
    104. Page 237" line 6: before the word information or process and the
    ;Iquashing~' insert the word "in".
    evidence adduced at the trial,
    , '105. Page 237, line 6: after the word Hpro_ 'unless it is shown
    ~ceeding" insert H, order".
    (iiD that the objection was taken 'at the
    106. Page 241, line 14: after the word 'trial, and
    "required" insert the words '\ except by way (Iv) that an adjournment of the trial
    ,o.f.-rebuttal,", , was refused notwithstanding that-
    )07, Page 242, line 9: insert the word "or" ,the variance referred, to in- sub-
    ,~ft~1,' the word "negatived/' paragraph eiD had deceived or mis-
    ;~,~_ '~08,:_,r~ge 243, lines 37 __~i1.d 38: strike out led the appellant; and
    ,:~he ,worqs H" but it is :O:O,t _necessary tor, ,the (b) where an appeal is based on a defect in
    .W,it,ri¢SSEls to sign their deppsitions". a conviction or order, judgment shall
    , .. ' ,1'09.,_ '.page 250, line 6: after the word n.ot be given in fav.our of the appellant,
    ,I,lpla'd'e'_' insert the words ({in such amount as but the court ,shall make an order
    Jh~;,j1idge 'QT justice directs," ' curing the defect" ~
    ',' '110. Pages 251 and '252: delete clause 727 111. Page 255, line 32: delete line 32 and
    ~nd fiubi;titute therefor the fo1lowing: , SUbstitute: "conviction court dies, _quits Office,
    ;;, ,-':'~?7. ,(1) Where an appeal has been Ipdged or is unable to act, the appeUant may,".
    :Ul a~cofda,nce with this Part from a convic- 112. Page 280, Form ,24: after the word
    ,tiori or order made against a defendant, or "them"- in the third paragraph insert the
    ,~r9,m ~n .order qismissing an information, the words "for a period of 01'/.
    ~~,:peaL.lcourt sha1l hear and determine the 113. Page 280, Form 24: strike out the word.s
    ,~ppeal by holding a trial de novo, and for Hor until is discharged in
    tm:S:PWpos-e the provisions of sections 701 to due course of law" in the third paragraph.
    _716, in!?ofar RS they are rlOt inconsistent with , 114. Page 280, Form 24: strike out the
    ~ectiQ~S 720' to 732,1 apply, mutatis mutandis. fourth paragraph.
    , '(2)' The' appeal court may, for the purpose 115. Page 283, Form 28: insert H669, 670",
    -,Of ...hearIng' and determining an appeal, per- after H638", in the first line of said form.
    ,Il)~t the. evidence of any witness taken before 116. Page 283, Form 28: add the following
    :the )~.unmarY conviction co'urt to be read if immediately after the first line of said form:
    that, evidence has been authenticated in <N.B. The provisions of sections 669 and
    accordance with section 453, and if 670 (1), (2) and (3) must be endorsed on a
    (a),' ~h~ appellant and respondent consent, recognizance. See section 670 (4) )".
    (b) 'Jp.e appeal court is satisfied that the All whicn is respectfully submitted.
    "attendance of the witness cannot rea w
    Salter A. Hayden,
    sonably be obtained, or Chairman.
    DECEMBER 17. 1952 lSI
    : 1- want to thank the leader most -warmly for able legal counsel, Mr. J. F. MacNeill, Q.C.
    the consideration he has always shown me and We are much indebted to him for his wise
    for' .the confidence that he has placed in me. advice_ and tireless aid in this tremendous
    I also want to thank the membets of the house work of revision. I couple with his name,
    for the kindness, consideration and forbear~ although in a different capacity, the Clerk of
    ance with which they treated me on those the Committee, Mr. James D. MacDonald,
    od:~a-sions when I had something to do with who did nearly all the clerical work in con~
    tl1e 'conduct of the business' of the chamber. nection with the revision. And I should men-
    . II -amindeed glad that the honourable act~ tion also the stenographers, who worked over-
    time to have the amendments prepared in
    iug leader oppqsite (Han. Mr. Aseltine) does
    not '-Consider this to be an obituary address. readiness for our consideration at this time.
    The whole staff under Mr. Armst,rong, Chief
    ~}donot. myself -so regard it.
    ~:',(4p, J:ope to att-e~d .~his chamber as f~e­ Clerk of Committees, worked conscientiously
    qtiepJI'y as pos~ible and to take an active part and for long hours in their struggle to get
    in' its debates and discussions, though. per- the work through. And it has all been worth
    '4,aps -:qat in quite ~s 'respon&ible a position while. Speaking personally and on behalf of
    af lhe 'ou_e I have occupied for the last two my fellow members of the committee and the
    ye·~rs: 'Thank you very much. ' others who worked with us, I can confidently
    say that it has all been worth while, because
    CRIMINAL CODE BiLL of the tremendous importance of -the subject.
    Perhaps I can give a more vivid impres~
    /fl_EPORT OF COMMITTEE CONCURRED IN
    sian of what it all means if ·1 teil you that
    The Senate' resumed from' yesterday con- according 'to the Canadian Year Book of
    sIderation 'of the report of the Standing Com- 1951,· which contains' the latest available'
    mittee :bn Banking and Commerce on Bill 0, statistics, the total number of persons convic-
    an:Act respecting'the Criminal Law. ted in -Canadian courts in the year 1948,
    ~<li9,~<Art~ur W. R~'~l?uck: Honourable sena- for offences-'of all kinds, was 918,277. That
    is, there were nearly one million convictions
    tots,' 'I am very happy in _the l1tmosphere that'
    has ,been developed prior to the commence- by the courts :for offences of 'one kind or
    another under the Criminal Code, under other
    m,.:etit', qf rllY _remarks on thi~ subje'ct today, federal statutes, under provincial laws, muni-
    which I· expect and hoile will be our last cipal ordinances, and so- on. That is a very
    s~~~in,g ,~ay. befor~ - the adjourrup.ent. While
    large 'number, out of a population 'of about
    : the"atmosphere is st~lI good I _want to ex.pr~'ss
    14 million. It bears a ratio of 102'.1 to every
    ; my ,,,thapks _to, the, deputy leader of the
    thousand of our population. And remember,
    opposition .<Hon. Mr. Aseltine\ both on behalf that is only the total of the accused persons
    of myself and- the other members" of the sub- who were convicted. 'In ,addition, .many per~
    cominittee of the Banking -a'rid 'Commerce sons accused before the courts 'were- acquitted.
    Cofri:mittee; for the -very 'kind ·remarks vihich Then of course> a large number of _people
    he:'~made in this debate yesterday evening. appeared as complainants, to say ,nothing of
    The task of the sub-committee \vas a heavy those who were called ,as witnesses. I draw
    one; ,but ,there ,was a very great' deal of satis- attention to this because -I think it shO\vs,
    f~,~,W:lI1:,:.'!ltta,ctIed to ~t beSl1use the" importance as nothing else could, the importance of the
    of the subJect -called for the very best work rules of. the gam/2! tpa t .we, are laying down
    of W4ich we were capable. _ . at present, rules ,that -directly affect the lives
    ."1 :al~6 w:i~h to' join with- the ~h~iirman of the -and sometimes may even result in taking
    sp,p3CQIilIriittee an'a of the ,nv,iln. committee, away the lives-of many subjects, and that in
    t ~~:e_~_~ll~tor'~rom Toronto (~on. Mr. Hayden\ a material sense affect the lives of nearly all
    t in.:his' ,references to _the able assist;mce which Of us.
    ! w.(r~~~i.v~d.from Mr. A. A. Mqffat, Q.C., and In the past a person· who was convicted of
    I 1I)'r•.A. J . Ma~Leod of the staff of the Depart- some offence paid a ,fine or served his sep.~
    I 'l1~ntQf Justice. . I marvelled at the detailed tence, and that was the end of it. But today
    t ~o*l.edge of the 'Code '_posse~sed by these if a conviction is registered for a crime that
    '\ g~_.~.~.¥~.m._ ~.n; f~ey COUld. ,state' th~ ,provisions of involves what is called'mor'al turpitude, the
    ~_SEl.c\~pli '~s soon a's its number was mentioned.
    convi<;:ted person is barred from crossing
    Theit fam!llarity with the text of the Code
    ,r~!'0in~ed me of the familiarity of' some
    the international border. Our Immigration
    \ ~_,lVli:tes with the ancient Book. They quoted Act contains the same provision as does the
    , from 'the -law and cited passages with a American Immigration Act in that regard .
    . faCility· that was amazing. And the law officers of the Crown have
    \ 'l'·think it would be a mistake if we did not extended the term {(moral turpitude" to
    also'-acknowledge the assistance given by 'our include even an assault-although I. think
    OWn staff, in the first instance -by our most that sometimes one who commits art assault
    162 SENATE

    should be congratulated rather than con~ our dealings with the sections on treason seem
    demned. I told the Deputy Minister of Justice to have provoked almost undue interest. 1.
    that if we were all subjected to the test of notice in one of the morning papers a head-'-
    whether or not we had committeed assault, ing to ,this effect: Senators vote lighter pen~
    within the meaning of the words Happlying ·alties for treason and espionage. I appre¢iate
    physical force to the person of another person the great difficulty that a newspaper reporter-
    or threatening to do so," 'I did not suppose faces in his· endeavour to write accurately
    there was anyone in the whole of Canada, any about the work of the sUb-committee and of
    male at all events, 'who could legally crosS the general committee on the technical
    the border. I recall the famous statement aspects of this subject. But let me say that
    that John Burns once made in the House of ''Ie did not vote lighter penalties for treason
    Commons at Westminster, that there are and espionage. What we did was to remove:
    occasions when a smash in the jaw is a good one paragraph from the treason section and
    argument. And there are circumstances in put it in another section. In that way we
    which if a person did not apply physical perhaps lowered the penalty from life imprig~l
    force or at least threaten to do so, I would onment or less to fourteen years or less. It
    hold him in contempt. there is any diffi:culty the penalty can very'
    I refer to this simply to show how wide easily be increased. However f fourteen years
    the effect of a conviction may 'be in these is a long sentence.
    modern times. It might involve a person I refer now specifically to subsection (D
    for many years to come. In every applica. of section 46, whkh is as follows:
    tion for a bond, and in various other docu. (1) Everyone commits treason who, in Canada,
    ments, the question is asked "Were you ever (a) kills or attempts to kill Her Majesty-
    convicted of any crime?" And the answer has We have inten'Sified and amplified that
    to be written in. paragraph. We carried into the bill the
    Instead of giving only the' total number words of the present Code which in the
    of convictions for a year, it might be more amendments had been dropped, dropped-as
    interesting to state figures of convictions far as I can see, without any particular justi~
    for important offences. In 1948 there were fi-cation-and we added these words: "
    no less than 48,066 charges of indictable ---or does her any bodily hann tending to death or
    offences brought before the courts of Canada, destruction, maims or wounds her, or imprisons or"
    and, under those charges 41,632 persons were restrains her.
    convicted: That is a startling number. It is apparent that in that way we hav~
    As far as individual cases go, it is not quite extended the treason provisio.Qs.
    correct, because some were charged with I tUrn now to paragraph (c), -which reads:
    two offences at the one time, and some 3,724 (c) assists an enemy at war with Canada-
    were convicted of more than one offence at Nobody would object to that., Certainly"
    the time of trial. In that year non·indictable anyone who assists the enemy commits trea-.
    offences numbered 876,000 odd. Punishments son, according to its ancient definition. But~
    for indictable offences varied. Fines, were the paragraph goes on:
    imposed upon 12,680 convicted persons, and
    the death penalty was made to apply to nine. --or any armed forces against whom Canadian,
    forces are engaged in hostilfties whether or not a
    teen persons. state of war exists between Canada and the coun':'"
    Traffic regulations are of course not ·in this try whose forces they are. -
    Code, but they do account for a great deal The idea of making it treason to assist a
    of activity in our courts. In the year 1948., country" against whom there is neither a
    violations of traffi-c regulations numbered declaration of war nor any statement by the
    no less than 649,000. That, I think, is enough government with regard to it, simply because
    to show that the importance of the subject its forces are engaged in hostilities with our,
    can scarcely be denied. forces, is· entirely new law. . I do not say
    In view of the clear and rather extensive the law is unjustified, "provided the perso~
    review of the bill given last night by the chair. who commits such an offence knows. that he,
    man of the committee (Hon. Mr. Hayden)., is doing it; but I would call the attention ot'
    there is very little left for me to say. That the house to arecent incident when our forces
    will be welcome news to honourable senators. were engaged, without our knowledge, on the';
    However, there are some things which i island of Koje. I would point out to honour·
    -think I should say-I go first to the question able members that our forces are today under"
    of treason. Treason involves the question of
    life and death, the welfare of the state and the command of the United Nations, not of
    the titular head of the state, with all the our own government. Further, by reason
    ancient connotqtions and tragedies; it is a of the activities in Korea, we may be engaged
    subject which catches the publi-c mind and in hostilities with two great nations against
    imagination. Whatever the reason may be, whom there has been no declaration of war" I
    DECEMBER 17, 1952 163

    and no' desire to declare war. My ·only con- sedition. My comment with regard to the
    cern with this particular provision is that section is this. There should be the most
    it- be clarified, so that nobody may be caught stringent ,prohibition of the wrongful giving
    in the crime of treason because of having to others of information which may be .pre-
    assisted the forces not of an enemy country~ judicial to the safety of Canada. In that
    of a friendly country-which happens to be direction you cannot go too far. The man
    engaged with our forces. who knowingly, for the purpose of injuring
    (For that reason the sub-committee suggested Canada, gives away our secrets with regard
    that "the word uknowingly" be added, so as to atomic knowledge, the bomb, and the like,
    _to avoid misunderstanding. If war is declared, is the worst and the vilest criminal among us.
    On the other hand, in attempting to legislate
    that is Cif course a different matter; but in the
    mixed-up state of the world today some care against him let us not interfere with free
    Is required in dealing with oue of the most speech in our own country. Let us not be
    heinous of all criminal offences. The proposed too sweeping. My thought with regard to
    amendment to add the word "knowingly", this clause is that it should be re-drawn In
    WoliS not adopted by the Banking and Com- such a way that that against which we inveigh
    shall be properly and definitely covered. It
    merce Committee. The clause remains as it may require a whole paragraph in the Official
    ,vas drawn, but I am not very well satisfied Secrets Act, or the Code, or elsewhere. What
    with it. I object to about this clause is the draftman~
    Paragraph (e) in the treason section of the ship; I am not satisfied with it at all.
    Code was, I thought, even more open to
    In that connection let me repeat what was
    critiQism than paragraph (c). Paragraph (e)
    said last evening by the honourable senator
    reads: ' from Toronto (Hon. Mr. Hayden).· This pres-
    «e) conspires with an agent of a state othe~ than ent revision is not a revision of the substance
    Canada to communIcate information or to do an
    act, 'that is likely to be prejudicial to the safety or of the Code but only of its structure. The
    ihterests of Canada. ' purpose of it was to clarify, rearrange and
    :~£'~t me deal with the various ingredients condense. The job was given to commis-
    sioners; but -they have gone a good deal
    of. that paragraph: "Conspires with an agent
    further, and have -made quite a number of
    of a state othel" than Canada". The word -amendments to the substance of the Code.
    i {Iagent" could mean any civil servant of any
    Nevertheless what they have done is not a
    c;:ountry other than Canada-of the United survey as such of the sUbstance of the ·clauses
    States ,or the United Kingdom, for instance, of the Code; it is by no means the final word;
    or_bf ~ny of our fellow members of the British it is but a beginning, I think, of the revi-
    ! Opmmonwealth. "Agent" is a very wide sion of our criminal law; and as a result of
    i ¥.3:l:~i there are literally thousands of agents
    the attention that has been directed to the
    ! t~~}lgh ~hom information is conveyed.
    Code through these clarifying, amendments, I
    !'fh~n we come to the words, "to com- look for many other ·amendments in the
    I municate information". What kind of infor-
    i ll1a:tion? Atomic information? It is not stated.
    immediate years to come.· I suggest to the
    government that at the next session, or even
    , It ',~might 'be the 'most harmless and trifling earlier-because there is plenty of time yet-
    iri'fofimition, or something which is well the clause to which I have referred be thought
    I KriO'~lll 'to everybody. No term could be over carefully, with a full realization of its
    t Wider than the word "information", and there importance, and that an amendment be ipre-
    \ is "b'llt one qualification, that it is likely to ,pared and brought in which will make its
    ~ be-not necessarily, but possibly-preju-
    i dicial to the safety Cir interests of Canada. meaning clear to everybody, myself included,
    -and I 'yield to no one in my loyalty to
    \ f';Y~~hat are the Uinterests of Canada"? Does
    ; u9~nada" signify the land ot' Canada, the Canada and my interest in her safety.
    'pepple of Canada, or some section of the In ,passing, let me say that I wish the
    ; people' of Canada-St. James street, for commissioners had given us -a definition of
    1 l!lsta!1ce? Or does it me_an, perhaps, the labour sedition. Here is the present definition:
    , ~qions, the educational in,stitutlons-this, that Seditious words are words that expr-ess a sedl w

    1or the other thing? What, I repeat, are the tious intention.
    : c~l~~,ere~ts of Canada"? If, in talking of trea- When I read this to laymen who are not
    : S?!l; 'you import a commercial or property familiar with it, usually they laugh.
    ! O~nership, are you not 'going pretty far?
    Hon. Mr. Reid: What section is that?
    :What we have done, in this connection is,
    ~o allow this provisio:Q. to stand, but to take Hon. Mr. Roebuck: Section 60 .
    . It out of the treason sections and put it in (1) Seditious words are words that express a
    . the' clauses dealing \vlth prohibited acts, seditious intention.
    (2) A seditious 'libel is a libel that expresses a
    ~ which probably are sedition or something like seditious intention.
    164 SENATE
    (3) A seditious conspiracy is an· agreement Han. Mr. Roebuck: Yes, or Filrouk, for·
    between two or mOTe persons to carry' out a instance. You can say anything you like'
    seditious intention.
    (4) Without Iimiting the generality pf the mean- about him just now; but if, a year ago, you
    ing of the expression "seditious intention", every had said something that would have degraded
    one shall be presumed to have a seditious intenUon him in the opinion of the Egyptians, you,;
    who-- would have been guilty under .our Code and,
    And this is what has been added by the liable to severe penalty. This is true of all.;
    commissioners, and I 'aptlrove it heal'ltily, the princes of India, the .chiefs of Africa,
    because it has made this ,point specific, though and so on. It is time that this kind of
    none other- archaic law was abolisned. Let anybody!.
    -teaches or advocates, publishes or circulates any whether the head of a state or not, come'
    writing that advocates the use, without authority to our courts ahd sue for libel if we have'
    of. law. of force as a means· of, accompllshing a said something abo).lt him.
    governmental change in Canada"
    Now, ,if that is s~ditionJ all right. But it is Hon. Mr. Aseltine: Hear, hear.
    only included in the definition of sedition, Hon. Mr. Roebuck:, He can get justice in
    and the balance is ie:ftt to the comm.on law; our courts too. As'I say, I experienced som'e'
    that is to say, to the doze~s of cases of
    satisfaction upon seeing that go by the board. :
    sedition an-d seditious ~xperien-ce which' you
    Hon. Mr. Reid: Has that section been
    will find recorded in the law reports of Great
    Britain and Canada. The history of sedition deleted?
    goes back many years. A member of my Hon. Mr. Roebuck: Yes, we have deleted it."
    family took part in 1832 in the crirxlinal trials r want to refer the house now to sections
    which followed the. riots and lawlessn,ess 57 and 63. I am not complaining at all that:
    which accompanied the passing of the Reform the committee did not agree with my repre~
    Bill, and one of his statements on the subject sentations while this matter was before them,
    is authoritative law. but I want to put myself on. record as npt
    Now, why should we not take our. courage liking this business of making the Royal
    in our hands, let somebody who has authorHy Canadian Mounted Police a'sacrosanct force.
    to do -so tell us what sedition is, and take the r do not like to see a, police force in this
    chance, if you choose, of making an error? country placed in the category of a 'military
    It is far better that everybody, should know force. The RC ..M.P. is a civilian force and"
    what it is than to leave· the word loosely at the present time is performing police'
    defined or not defined at all. I wish that duties in every province in Canada- except·,
    matter had been' taken up, aild I hope that Quebec and Ontario. Its members for the
    among the am€i1dments which will follow most part, are acting' as traffic cops all over'
    the passing of this' bill, ilsedition" will· be th'is <country, enforcing the law of' ,the land:
    clearly and courageously. defined;···' in just the same way as members of provincial'
    Clause 62 follo\vii. the' ,provi~ions .Telating or municipal polic;e for~es are' doing. I am
    to sedition., I want to· .express '~;atisfa:ctiori' interested in maintaining the civilian 'status:
    with ollr handling of this matter. The report of the RC.M.P ..,...-a force of which we are.
    of ~h~ subcommittee. was 'endorsed unani- very proud-and not allowing it' to ,come
    mously by the Banking and Commerce Com~ into the category of a S\viss Guard or an,
    m~ttee. The section was as fonows: 8.S. force.
    Everyone who, '.vithout lawful jt,Isti/ication, pub~ Let me read to you what section 63 pro..
    llshes a libel that tenus to degrade" revUe or expose vides. It says:
    to hatred
    people of
    and contempt
    a foreign state
    liJ., the estimation. of the
    any person who exercises 63. (1) EVeryone who . I.
    sovereign authority over th.at state is guilty 9f an (a) interferes with, imp(1irs or' influences the
    indictable offence- . loyalty or discipline of a mem"b:er of', a force,
    (b) publishes. edits, issues, circulates or dis~
    and so on. I do not know why in our tributes a writing that advises, counsels or urges'
    Criminal Code we should follow the ancient insubordination, disloyalty, mutiny or refusal of I
    law which makes it an offence to say some- duty by a member of a force, or
    (c) advises, counsels, urges or in any manner
    thing disagreeable ~bout the head of a foreign causes insubordination, disloyalty, mutiny or'
    state. I can understand why .this was an refusal of duty by a member of a force,-
    offence some two hundred years ago, when That is all right as -applied to military
    the head of the state was the government of
    forces. \Ve must be careful with regard to.
    the state. But just fancy ap-pIying .that section
    to Mr. Hitler prior to the declaration of the them, because they may be engaged in hosti1i~
    last war. Fancy charging a man for having ties with our enemies. But on page 24
    reviled Hitler- of the bill you will find these words:
    (2) In this section, "member of a force" means
    Hon. Mr. Reid,: Imagine a,pplying it in the a member of
    case of Stalin ri'ght now. (a) the Canadian Forces,
    DECEMBER 17. 1952 16S
    (b) the naval, anny or air forces of a state other Hon. Mr. Ross:.What section,are you dealing
    than Canada that are lawfully present in Canada, or with?
    (~) ,the Royal Canadian Mounted PolIce.

    i spoke about this matter in detail in com- Hen. Mr. Roebuck: Section 8. This sort of
    thing is not healthy from the standpoint of
    mittee, and indeed on previous occasions in
    this _house, but I do wish that my fellow those who suffer under it, and· it is not
    members would ,join with me in an effort to healthy from the standpoint of the judge. The
    keep _the Royal Canadian Mounted Police a Banking and Commerce Committee is recom-
    Civilian force and not allow it to become a mending an amendment in this bill which
    military force. We do not, want a military will give a person who is aC,cused by a judge
    [,()ree t'a do our police work. of contempt of 'court-not in: the face of the
    .,.I should like .to refer the house now to court-the tight to appeal against the convic-
    ~ection 372, which deals with mischief. I tion and also against the sentence. The indi-
    do not,expect the members of this chamber to vidual who is convictetd of the offence of
    ~gre.e with me any more than did the members
    contempt of court in the face of the court
    of the Banking and Commerce Conunittee in has the right to appeal against the senten-ce
    IllY views on this section. only. The difference is this. 'It is necessary
    to maintain the dignity of the -court and the
    , I read from the section: control of the presiding officer over the court.
    -·372, (1) " Everyone commits mischief who wil~ If a .person interrupts court proceedings, for
    fully instance, and defies an order of the judge to
    ,:;-,a) destroys or damages property.
    (b) ·renders property dangerous, useless, inopera~ sit down, the judge has no option but to order
    tlve or,ineffective, the constable to place him under arrest and
    : :(c): obstructs; interrupts or interferes with the commit him for contempt-and he is kept
    lawful use, enjoYment or operation of property,-
    in custody until he has cooled off. If the
    ':> I submit that no strike ever took place in judge imposes a long sentence, then of -course
    this country that did not do one or under the new Code there ,probably would
    other of those things. Strikes have always be an appeal, but there would be no right of
    4ite,riered in some way with the enjoyment appeal against the conviction itself. Perhaps
    oj:' 'Operation of property. That is usually there should -be, but in the committee we
    the very' purpose of a strike. thought we ha.d gone far enough in providing
    "In 'committee I siIggested that the following an appeal against the sentence in such cases.
    words be inserted: HA lawful act done in I could refer to a number of instances of
    furtherance of the purpose of a trade union conviction for this offence.' I am not holding
    is"hot mischief'. I also suggested that this any',briefs for newspapers, but they or their
    C1~i.tse ·be included in another section, but I employees have been the ones most frequently
    'wilCnot take time to'deal with. that now. I involved. Not long ago,in this very city the
    ~~t*,I. can see the humour of what happened editor of one newspaper was called before
    ; ~~~'~r(hlY in eommittee. There I stood in a judge and fined $3,000 for contempt. of
    splen..tlid isolation, the only one who voted court. I do not say the conviction and fine
    f9r ~fuy .amendment. That is perfectly all \vere not perfectly justified, but, I do think
    right, but ,you will hear about that -clause in that the par:ty who suffered under the decision
    tiie 'f~ture or I am no prophet. would have been better satisfi~d with the
    . "~liere .-is just one more m~tter I wish to justice' of it had he been able to have the
    disCllS,,' and it has to do with the right of ,case reviewed by some higher court, by
    t:!ppeal. There was unanimous agreement on judges who were not so close to the prosecu~
    : this' 'point in committee, and I want to :say tion as the one who testified against the
    'somilthing about the justification of it, person accused, found him gullty and wrote
    ~ ~~(rording to the eommon ,law, which is read the -judgment. It would have be'en a healthier
    fib? ,this section, a judge on the bench has state ·of affairs if that decision could 'have
    the right to call anybody to appear before been submitted for teview by another court.
    him, or if the person is before him,'order him I'do think that this amendment to the Code
    t,o,!s,t~md up, and then in his 'capacity as ..the
    is a really good one, thoroughly justified, and
    that it will be well received by courts across
    t~hi~t,.of the proceedings convict the ,person of Canada.
    I contempt of court and impose some penalty
    I:-~.erhaps.a fine or a jail sentence-and there Hon. Mr. Reid: Would the honourable sena-
    i~s no appeal. In all the offences dealt with tor permit me to ask a question about the
    pn the 748 sections of our Code, this offence, wording of paragraph '(b) of, section 8. It
    fand this offence alone, is the only one in .which reads:
    lthe,decisiqn of the judge Is absolutely final, Notwithstanding anything in this Act or any
    pIe' ~.Gt.s as the witness as to what has taken other Act no .person shall be convicted
    (b) of an offence und-er an Act of the Parliament
    ,Pl~ge, ,he is the prosecuting a.ttorney, he is of England, or of Great Britain, or of the United
    the judge, and he is the executioner. Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland_
    166 SENATE

    Should that not read uGreaf Britain and changes that have been made, and par~
    northern Ireland})? ticularly, perhaps. in that part of the Code
    Hon. Mr •. Roebuck: No. As I stated previ 4
    which designates what constitutes treason.
    olisly, no charge can be laid under the Code I merely rise to say that I think it would
    except for an offence that is within the four be unfortunate if someone did not convey to
    corners of the Code. We are reading out of the members of the sub-committee the apprel
    this Code the statutory law of Great Britain, dation of the main committee itself and of
    of the United Kingdom, and of Great Britain the members of this house as a whole for
    and Ireland. I think that ('Great Britain" in the ,vork which the sub-committee has done;'
    this instance includes northern Ireland, and Those of you who attended the meetings of
    that "Ireland" means southern Ireland. the committee know what a thorough study
    was made of the Code: Had that not been
    Han. Mr. Reid: Thank. you. done, the Senate, I think, 'would have found
    Hon. Mr. Roebuck: The section goes 'on to it utterly impossible to pass intelligently upon
    say also that no person shall be convicted this voluminous bill. We had a great deal Of
    (c) of an offence under an Act or ordinance in confidence in the members of the sub-com_
    force in any province, territory or place before mittee, and I think everyone will agree that
    that province, territory or place became a prov 4
    it was justified. Three or four gentlemen
    ince of Canada,
    learned in the law, leaders in their profe~­
    So the whole law of the provinces of Upper sian, gave freely of services which if one may
    Canada and Lower Canada, of the Northwest judge from the fees that lawyers of their
    Territories and of Manitoba before it be- eminence sometimes' charge to large corpora-
    came a part of Canada, is now a thing of the tions, must have been worth many thousands
    paf:it, so far as the criminal law is concerned, of dollars.
    and one cannot be corivicted of a criminal Hon. Mr. Aseltine: They will be rewarded
    offence that does not come within the four in the next world. . ,
    corners of this Code.
    Honourable senators, I thank you for the Hon. Mr. Euler: They did it without remti,
    kind attention with which you have heard neration. their only reward being the sati.s~'
    me. I am happy about this piece of, work and fadion of having done a' good job. '
    the report which is before us, on which we The few times I attended sittings of the
    shall be voting shortly. I am !3orry that you committee I learned a great deal about th~
    have not. had more time to study the· report. criminal law. In fact, some of the things
    n would have been better if at l~ast several I heard there were almost alarming. It must
    days. had intervened between the time of its have occurred to some (jther members of the
    presentation here' 'and, the, v.6t~ upon it, committee, as it .did to 'me, that one might
    because' the report is re~ny''', voluminous.. ' It commit' a criminal offence wi~hout being,
    recommends no f€~'wer. than 117 amendments, aware of it. I someti:rn!'!s think that the~~,~~
    in additlclli to the ,63 amend~~nts',.' tliat our a tendency in government today-I include'
    committee made last year. It:l __ al.l, we have governments in general-to fall into the hab.it
    suggested 180 <;lmel}d:rPents to th~. Codi? th;3.t of. what may: be called witch-hunting., Per,:,:
    came ,to .us la13t. s·essiori. If yqu wer~ 'to tr~ haps that is too .str.ong a term, bilt .honour-,
    to folloW ,th~ re,P,Ort i~ detail f~ wQul<;l,requi!-'e able senators will understand what' I meqil.'
    some hours of careful study to find out even I repeat that my, main purpose in rising
    wha~ w~ ,v:ere doipg.. , "
    was to place on. the r~cord~ of this house,
    . As I say,' I am sorry that we have not, a on my own behalf and, I am sure, that of
    little ,more time, but·it seems to" be··in the all other members of the, Banking and Com~. I
    public interest that we pass -the bill today, merce Committee, and of the, Senate as a
    I express, my satisfaction in what. ~I- think is whole, our appreciation of the great work, I
    a real improvement to the Code and some which thes,e gentlemen of the sub-committee I
    improvement ·to the SUbstantive criminal have done. I
    law of Canada. If as a- result of our work the
    Code is improved, ': we shall have conferred Hon. T. A. Crerar: Honourable senators,
    a benefit upon thousands and hundreds of before the report Is adopted I should like to .
    thousands of o1,lr- fel1o~ -.c~tizens.' ,_ associate myself with the remarks made by I
    my deskmate, the honourable s'enator fro~~!
    Hon. W. D. Euler: Honourable senators, Kitchener-
    although I am a member of the' Banking
    and Commerce Committee, which considered' Hon. Mr. Euler: Waterloo!
    this bill, I wish to assure you at the outset Hon. Mr. Crerar: Yes. from Waterloo. A~d
    that I have not the slightest intention of I may add, my senior in years by a narroW
    dealing with the sUbjc'ct-matter of. the bill, margin and in experience by a very sUbstan,:;'
    beyond saying that I approve of all the tial margin.
    DECEMBER 17, 1952 167

    . Hon, ·Mr. Euler: Hear, hear. done by the Banking and Commerce Com-
    Han. :Mr. Lambert: How about wisdom? mittee in their consideration of this measure.
    Honourable senators will recall that Bill
    Hon. Mr. Crerar: The bill before us is prob~ H-8, an Act respecting the Criminal Law, was
    ably one of the most important pieces of first introduced on May 12, 1952, during the
    legislation to be dealt with by this house for last session of parliament. The Minister of
    a considerable period of time. Obviously, it Justice came to this house to speak on the
    was . .impossible for a layman like myself to motion for second reading, and on May 15
    ira'sp'its full import. The measure was con- the bill was referred to the Banking and Com~
    fided to the Banking and Commerce Com- merce Committee. The main committee
    mlttee, and the work of that committee is appointed a sub-committee to consider the
    reflected in the report presented to the house measure dause by 'clause, and after twelve
    yesterday. meetings they reported to the main com-
    While the'committee did an excellent job on mittee on June 20, suggesting approximately
    the measure, I should like to direct particular sixty amendments. The main committee held
    attention to the honourable senators from three meetings, considered the amendments,
    Tororito, Toronto-Trinity and Vancouver and subsequently reported to the Senate
    $outh. recommending that, because of the amount of
    ';'
    Hon. Mr. Euler: Why not name them, so work still to 'be done, the bill -be not fUrther
    tp~t ,they will go down in history? proceeded with at that session.
    ';;Hon. Mr. Crerar: I will do that. They are A new bill was presented· to this house at
    the hOJ;lourable senators Hayaen, Roebuck and the earliest possible moment, and on Novem-
    . Farris. They devoted a great deal of close ber 25 it was referred to the Banking and
    attention to this bill. The'se gentlemen-all Commerce Committee. This new bill incor-
    of them eminent in the law-have prepared porated many of the amendments proposed
    by the sub-committee during the previous
    {1, :t~~ort which individuals like myself can
    a:ccept with confidence. ' session. Again the sub-committee set them-
    sel-ves to their painstaking task, and after
    ",O~; other comment that I should like to fifteen meetings reported to the main com-
    lAa~e i~ thi.s: The nB:~ureof the amendments mittee on December 5, suggesting 104 am~nd­
    i,mp'l'~ssed ilpon my mind the fact that the ments. The main committee proceeded to
    committee had done an excellent job in one a detailed ,consideration of the ,proposed
    particular respect. It is ,the tendency of 1a \V amendments, heard witnesses' and reported to
    admiriistrators and prosecutors to attempt to the house yesterday, December 16.
    pave the way to easy convictions. That is an
    insidious danger in the law-making process rt must, of course, be pointed out that many
    of this country. I was happy to note that the of the amendments were relatively minor in
    committee appeared to guard very effectively nature, involving such 'questions as phraseo-
    <lg~in.st that tendency. Indeed, the amend-
    logy; but the ,fact that in the two sessions they
    ments made by the sub-committee, accepted numbered 164 in all indicates that non~ of
    by the main committee, and, now 'before the the 744 sections \vere' accepted without
    house, add many safeguards to .the bill as scrutiny. .
    originally drafted. In that respect I believe I am bound to point out that the .burden
    the· amendments improve the legislation. To of the work fell on the sub-corrimifte~ of the
    tny mind, nothing is more important in the Banking and Commerce Committee. I con-

    i
    19W,m.~}d.ng prQce.ss than to protect the"Uberty, o gratulate all- members of -the commit-tee,-but-
    freedom and rights of, the individual, and to I feel that I should especially mention the
    aSSure that justice will be meted out with
    , caution and fairness. In this I think the com- Chairman, the Honourable Senator Hayden,
    mittee has succeeded. and the Honourable Senators Roebuck and
    Farris, who brought to bear on this important
    I told my colleague from Waterloo that I
    would not speak any longer than he did, so question the wide experience and undoubted
    I must conclude my remarks. knowledge of the law whl,ch has made them
    outstanding in the legal fraternity of Canada.
    Hon. Mr. Euler: You need not keep your Associated with them was the Law Clerk of
    Word.
    the Senate, whose faithful services are so

    I Hon. Wishart MeL. Roberfson: Honourable


    senators, there is little that I can add by way
    j of usefyl comment on the committee's report
    lion this important bill. I only desire to express
    often available to the committees of the
    Senate and are perhaps too frequently taken
    for granted, and also the law officers of the
    Department of Justice, who patiently ren-
    ,my thanks and appreciation for the v~ry dered every assistance. All in all, these
    thorough and painstaking work that has been gentlemen formed a team that for a task of
    168 SENATE

    this kind would be hard to duplicate. I thank The motion was agreed to, and the b~lls
    them one and all for their excellent perform- were read the second time, on division.
    ance. THIRD R~AD~GS
    Some Hon. Senators: Hear, hear. The Hon4 the Speaker; Honourable sena_,.
    The motion was agreed to, and the amend- tors, when shall the bills be read the third
    ments were concurred in. . time?
    TH.IRD READING Hon. Mr. Aseliine: With leave of Ij;he Senater
    now.
    The Hen. the Speaker: Honourable senators,
    when shall the ·bill be read the third time? The motion was agreed to, and the. bills
    were 'read the third time, and passed, 9n,
    Hon. Mr. Roberison: With leave of the division.
    Senate, now.
    The motion was agreed to, and the bill ADJOURNMENT
    as amended was read the third time, and
    passed. Hon. Mr. Roberlson: Honourable senators,
    we have disposed of the Address in reply
    DIVORCE BILLS to the Speech from the Throne, and 'of all
    FIRST READINGS items on the order paper.
    Hon. Mr. Aseltine, Chairman 'Of the Stand- We have passed fourteen government bills;
    ing Committee 011 Divorce, presented the including the Act respecting Criminal Law
    following bills: and the Act respecting Food, Drugs, Cos':
    Bill K-3, an Act for the relief of Jane metics and Therapeutic Devices, 'which were
    LoutHt Donner. maj or revisions .of existing sta tutesj and
    Bill L-3, an Act for the relief _of Roger involved the hearing of witnesses and much
    Loiselle. committee work. 'Ve have passed thre~
    Bill M-3, an Act for the relief of William private bills and seventy-four divorce bills',
    Osear Gilbert. a total of ninety-one.
    Bill N-3, an Act for the relief of George As we have completed, our work, and a~'
    Magner. there is no further business before us and.
    Bill 0-3, an' Ac,t for the relief of Teodora it.is unlikely ·tha,t there will be much for
    Szablity Szentirmai. us -to do until two or three weej{s after the.
    Bill P-3, an Act for the relief of Arthur House of Commons assembles on January 12,:
    Picl).e.
    I would move, subject of course to the
    The bills were read the first time. authority already given to His Honour the
    SECOND READINGS
    Speaker to call us back in case of necessity:
    That when this house adjourns today it stand
    The Hon4 ihe Speaker: Honourable sena- adjourned untfl Tuesday the 3rd day of February.
    tors, when shall these bills be read the 1953. at 8 o'clock in the evening.
    second time? The mDtion was agreed to.
    Hon. Mr. Aseltine: With leave of I1;he Senate, The Senate adjourned until Tuesday,
    now. February 3, 1953, at .8 p.m.
    1952-53

    THE SENATE OF CANADA

    I
    PROCEEDINGS I
    I

    i
    OF THE

    ST ANDING COMMITTEE ON
    BANKING AND COMMERCE
    To whom was referred the Bill (0), intituled: .!
    An Act respecting the Criminal Law.

    The Honourable SALTER A. HAYDEN, Chairman

    MONDAY, DECEMBER 15, 1952


    TUESDAY, DECEMBER 16, 1952

    WITNESSES
    Honourable Stuart S. Garson, P.C., Minister of Justice and Attorney·
    General of Canada.
    Mr. A. A. Moffat, Q.C., and Mr. A. J. MacLeod, Counsel, Department
    of Justice.

    APPENDICES
    "A" Report of the Sub-Committee to the Standing Committee on Banking
    and Commerce.
    "B" Report of the Banking and Commerce Committee as adopted by the
    Senate.
    EDMOND CLOUTIER, C.M.G., a.A" n,S,p.
    QUEEN'S FRINTER AND CONTROLLER OF STATIONERY
    OTTAWA, 1952
    BANKING AND COMMERCE
    THE HONOURABLE SALTER l\.DRIAN HAYDEN, CHAIRMAN

    The Honourable Senators


    Aseltine *Haig McIntyre
    Baird Hardy McKeen
    Beaubien Hawkins McLean
    Bouffard Hayden Nicol
    Buchanan Horner Paterson
    Burchill Howard Pirie
    Campbell Howden Pratt
    Crerar Hugessen Quinn
    Davies King . *Ro bertson
    Dessureault Kinley Roebuck
    Emmerson Lambert Taylor
    EUler MacKinnon Vaillancourt
    Fallis MacLennan Vien
    . Farris McDonald Wilson
    Gershaw McGuire Wood
    Gouin
    ,.. eX' officio member.

    ORDER OF REFERENCE
    Extract from the Minutes of Proceedings of the Senate for Tuesday, 25th
    November, 1952.
    "Pursuant to the Order of the Day, the Honourable Senator Robertson
    moved that the Bill (0), intituled: "An Act respecting the Criminal Law", be
    now read the second time.
    After debate, and-
    The question being put on the said motion, it was~
    Resolved in the affirmative.
    The said Bill was then read the second time, and-
    Referred to the Standing Com~ittee on Banking and Commerce."

    L. C. MOYER,
    Clerk of th.e Senate.
    MONDAY, December 15, 1952.

    Pursuant to adjournment and notice the Standing Committee on Banking-


    and Commerce met this day at 8.30 p.m. , ~'

    Present: The Honourable Senators:-Hayden, Chairman; Aseltine, Baird, 'I ,


    Buchanan, Burchill, Crerar, Davies, Gouin, Hawkins, Horner, Howden, Huges ...
    sen, Kinley, Lambert, McIntyre, Paterson, Pratt, Quinn, Robertson,· Roebuck,
    Taylor, Vien, Wilson and Wood. 24.
    In attendance: Mr. John F. MacNeill, Q.C., Law Clerk and Parliamentary
    Counsel, the Senate.
    Messrs. A. A. Moffat, Q.C., and Mr. A. J. MacLeod, Counsel,
    Department of Justice.
    The Official Reporters of the Senate.
    Bill 0, intituled: "An Act respecting the Criminal Law:," was considered.
    The Honourable Stuart S. Garson, p.e., Minister of Justice and Attorney
    General of Canada, was heard with respect to the Bill with Particularity as to
    clauses 46, 474 and 727.
    At 10.30 p.m. the Committee adjourned.
    At 10,30 a.m., Tuesday, December 16, 1952, the Committee resumed.
    Present: The Honourable Senators:-Hayden, Chairman; Aseltine, Baird,
    Bouffard, Buchanan, Burchill, Campbell, Crerar, Davies, Emmerson, Euler,
    Gouin, Hawkins, Horner, Hugessen, Kinley, Lambert, MacLennan, McIntyre,
    Paterson, Pratt, Robertson, Roebuck, Taylor, Wilson and Wood. 26.
    In attendance: Mi:: John F. MacNeill, Q.C., Law Clerk and Parliamentary
    Counsel, the Senate.
    Messrs. A. A. Moffat, Q.C., and Mr. A. J. MacLeod, Counsel,
    Department of Justice.
    The Official Reporters of the Senate.
    The Committee proceeded to the consideration of the report of the Sub-
    Committee and to the consideration of the Bill, clause by cla,use.
    At 1 p.m. the Committee adjourned.
    At 4.10 p:m. the Committ~e resumed.
    Present: The Honourable Senators: -Hayden, Chairman; Aseltine, Bouffard,
    :Buchanan, Burchill, Campbell, Crerar, Davies, Emmerson, Gouin, Hawkins,
    Hugessen, Kinley, Lambert, MacKinnon, McIntyre, Paterson, Pratt, Robertson,
    Roebuck, Taylor, Vien, Wilson and Wood. 24. .
    In attendance: Mr. John F. MacNeill, Q.C., Law Clerk and Parliamentary
    Counsel, the Senate.
    Messrs. A. A. Moffat, Q.C., and Mr. A. J. MacLeod, Counsel,
    Department of Justice. .
    The Official Reporters of the Senate. 1
    The consideration of the report of the Sub-Committee and the Bill, clause
    by clause, was resumed~
    After discussion it was Resolved to report the Bill with several amendments.
    (See appendix HB" to these proceedings.)
    At 6 p.m. the Committee adjourned.
    Attest.
    James D. MacDonald,
    Clerk of the Committee.
    3
    68169-1!
    MINUTES OF EVIDENCE
    THE SENATE

    OTTAWA, Tuesday, December 16, 1952.

    ·The Standing Committee on Banking and Commerce, to whom was referred


    Bill 0, an Act respecting the Criminal Law, met this day at lQ.3Qa.m.
    Han. Mr. HAYDEN in the Chair.
    The CHAIRMAN: Gentlemen, we now have a quorum, and we propose to
    continue consideration of the Criminal Code and the report of the committee
    which we started last night. Before giving an explanation of the amendments
    which are proposed, Senator· Roebuck would·like to say a few words. Perhaps
    t1:is is as good a time as any to hear Senator Roebuck.
    Hon. Mr. ROEBUCK: Mr. Chairman, I would like to speak first about treason.
    Members of the main committee should I'ealize that in the consideration of
    treason by the sub-committee it was decided that it should be left for the main
    committee and' therefore there was not the thorough discussion of the whole
    subject which applied to some. other sections. There was, however, agree-
    ment between Senator Farris, the Chairman and myself with regard to the
    changes we propose in th~ treason section.
    As I said last evening, treason is as old as the monarchy;· it goes back to
    ·the dawn of history .. It was not until the time of Edward III. that an act of
    treason was passed; however, we have the old .writers on the common law of
    treason even back before that time. It was described as imagining the death
    of the King-that is Granville's language. The definition codified into the
    law in the reign of Edward III, the year 1352, was "levying war against the
    King or adhering to the King's enemies." That amounted to: forming and
    displaying by any overt act an intention to kill the King.
    That definition, honourable senators, has remained all through the stress
    of England's history. True, at times they have become excited and expanded
    the law, made it more severe, and all that sort of thing. For instance, in the
    time of Henry VIII when many revolutionary reforms both civil and ecclesias-
    tical· were ·carried out by that dominating king, there were amendments
    made which were repealed on his death. Then when Mary-whom we know
    as Bloody Mary-came to the throne there were further amendments of a
    drastic character made. That trend persisted through Elizabeth's reign,
    chiefly because of the Spanish situation, and they too were repealed on her
    death.
    Then there was the time of the Stuarts after the restoration of Charles II
    when some more bad law was passed and repealed on the death of Charles II.
    So, as I say, the old definition of treason has come down to us through
    the ages, and has survived the stress of England's history. When we codified
    Our law of treason in, I believe, 1892, we took the English law as it existed
    in England at that time. There has been little or no change from that time
    down to the present.
    We are now proposing to make some excellent changes. We have left
    out of the codification a good deal of immaterial matter which may be
    regarded as archaic and not applying to Canada. This small section ·now before
    Us is rather an excellent codification of what is required.
    31
    64 STANDING COMMITTEE

    The CHAIRMAN: That is injury. This subsection 2 deals with everyone who
    having the care, charge or control of a vehicle that is involved in an accident
    with a .person, horse or vehicle, and so on which is involved in an accident_
    what he must do. That is, if with intent to escape civil or criminal liability he
    fails to stop his vehicle, offer assistance and give his name and address he is
    guilty of an offence. After the word Hassistarice" we add the, words "where
    any person has been injured". He still must stop and give his name and
    address in any event.
    Hop. Mr. ROEBUCK: You see, if you do not put that in, in the case of an
    accident with a horse it would mean that you would have to give your name
    to the horse.
    Some Hon. SENATORS: Oh, ab.
    SOl1).e Hon. SENATORS: Carried.

    The CHAIRMAN: Your subcommittee approved of the clauses 222 to 225


    inclusive.
    Hon. Mrs. WILSON: Does attempted suicide 'come in there?
    The CHAIRMAN: No. We fixed that up .
    . Han. Mr. ROEBUCK: Yes, I think we fixed that to your satisfaction, Senator
    Wilson: .
    Clauses 222 t9 225 inclusive were agreed to.
    The CHAIRMAN: We amended clause 226 as follows:
    Page 77, line l1-after the word "who" insert, "without lawful
    excuse"
    Han. Mr. ROEBUCK: It deals with making a smoke screen.
    The CHAIRMAN: This is a person who has his automobile equipped with an
    apparatus for making a smoke screen. That is an' offence under the present
    Code, but since there may be a military vehicle so equipped we added the
    .words "without lawful excuse".
    The c;lause was agreed to.
    The CHAIRMAN: Your subcommittee approved of clause 227 as it stands.
    Some Han .. SENATORS: Carried.
    The CHAIRMAN: We come now to clause 228. We have amended this as
    follows:
    1. Page 77, line 26-delete the word "or" and substitute therefor the
    word '·'and"
    2. Page 77, line 31-delete the word "orH and substitute therefor
    the word "and"
    That is just a mechanical amendment.'
    Clause 228 as amended was agreed to.
    The CHAIRMAN: Your subcommittee approved clauses 229 to 267 inclusive.
    Sdme Han. SENATORS: Carried.
    The CHAIRMAN: Then we come to VII-Offences Against Rights of
    Property. Your subcommittee approved of clauses 268 to 297 inclusive.
    Some Han. SENATORS: Carried.
    The CHAIRMAN: Next is clause 298, which wili be found on page 98.
    After the word "officell we have inserted the word "or."
    Some Han. SENATORS: Carried.
    BANKING AND COMMERCE-Bill (0) 8S

    APPENDIX "A"

    REPORT OF THE SUB-COMMITTEE OF THE STANDING COMMITTEE


    ON BANKING AND COMMERCE CONSIDERING BILL 0,
    AN ACT RESPECTING THE CRIMINAL LAW

    1. Your sub-committee has held 15 meetings and has considered the Bill
    clause by clause.
    2. Your sub-committee recommends a number of changes in the the text
    of the Bill. This is not a criticism of the work of the Commissioners who
    prepared the draft Bill.
    Your sub-committee is of the opinion that our new Criminal Code will
    be a better Code than tlie one it will replace and a large measure of the
    credit for it must be given to the Commissioners. .
    Your -sub-committee wishes further to re~ord its appreciatio'n of the gi~at
    public service given· by the Commissioners in the performance of a -laborious
    and difficult task. The condensation, rearrangement and clarification of many
    of the sections of the present Code will effect a marked improvement in the
    criminal law of Canada.
    3. Mr. A: A. Moffat, Q.C., and Mr. A. J. MacLeod, officials of the Depart-
    ment of Justice, have assisted the sub-committee in its deliberations and have
    been present at all sittings. The sub-committee wishes to record its apprecia-
    tion of the services given by these officials.
    4. Your sub-committee recommehds that the Bill be dealt with as
    .follows:-
    Clause 1-,-Approved.
    Clause 2-Amended as follows:
    Page 3, line 9-delete the words "recorder or" and substitute- there-~
    for "municipal judge of the city, as the case m'ay be, or a"
    NOTE: Change in wording of the definition made to conform to ·a r~"ent"
    Quebec statute.

    PART 1.

    GENERAL

    Clause 3 to 7, both inclusive-'-Approved.


    CLause 8-Stands for consideration of the main committee.
    NOTE: This clause is -new, and the sub-committee is of the opinion that
    the main committee should discuss the question as to whether or not there
    should be an appeal from a decision of a judge imposing punishment for
    contempt of court. ..
    Clauses 9 to 41, both inclusive-Approved.
    Clause 42-Amended as follows:
    Page 17, line 33-strike out the word "other"
    Clauses 43 to 45, both inclusive-Approved.
    68169-6.
    BANKING AND COMMERCE-Bill (0) 8~ ,

    i8!ause
    I····
    158-Approved.
    fenause 159-Amended as .follows:
    ~:.: Add the following as subclause (3)"
    '~~-.~
    ~' "(3) No proceedings shall be commenced under this section without
    the consent of the Attorney General."
    ~:c NOTE: The subcommittee is of the opinion that no prosecution should be
    .; .commenced under this section without the leave of the Attorney General.
    i Clauses 160 to 167, both inclusive-Approved.
    :' .

    ,,",
    PART V.

    DISORDERLY HOUSES, GAJ\ITN"G AND .BETTING

    "C!aU$es 168 to 173, both inclusive-Approved.


    ',Clause'174-Amended as follows:
    1. Page 58, lines 2p and 27~strike out the words "and section 5 of
    the .Canada Evidence Act applies in respect of a person to whom this
    section applies"
    2. Page 58-insert the following as subclause (3): "(3) No evidence
    that is given by a person under this section may be used or received in
    evidenc'e in any criminal proceedings against him, except proceedings for
    perjury in giving that evidence."
    Clauses 175 to 184, both inclusive-Approved.

    ,PART VI.

    OFFENCES AGAINST THE PERSON .AND REPUTATION

    Clause 185-Approved.
    Clause 186-Amended as follows:
    1. Page 67, lines 32 to 38-':"'delete subclause (2) and substitute the
    following:
    Offence ..
    "(2) Everyone commits an offence who, being under a legal 'duty
    within the meaning of subsection (1), fails without lawful excuse; the
    proof of which lies upon him, to perform that duty, if
    (a) with,Tespect to a duty imposed by paragraph (a) or (b) of sub-
    . section (1),
    (i) the person to whom the duty is owed is in destitute or necessitous
    circumstances, or
    (ii) the failure of 'the person to whom the duty is owed, or causes
    or is likely to cause the health of that person to be endangered
    permanently; or
    (b) with respect to a duty imposed by paragraph (c) of subsection (1),
    the failure to perform· the duty endangers the life of the person to
    whom the duty is owed or causes or is likely to cause the health of that
    person to be injured. permanently.
    88 . STANDING COMMITTEE

    Punishment.
    (3) Everyone who commits an offe'uce under subsection (2) is guilty
    of
    (a) an indictable offence and is liable to imprisonment for ,two years; or
    (b) an offence punishable on summary conviction."
    ~OTE: This clause was considered last session and it was pointed out that
    destitution. or necessity of the person injured was a prime element in the offence.
    The purpose of the amendment is to make this clear.
    2. Page 68, line I-Renumber subclause (3) as (4).
    Clauses 187 to 190, both inclusive-Approved.
    Clause 191-Amended as follows:
    Page 69, lines 1 to 9-delete clause 191 and substitute the following:
    "Crimina! negligence."
    "191. (1) Everyone is criminally negligent who
    (a) in dqing anything, or
    (b) in omitting to do anything that it is his duty to do,
    shows wanton or reckless disregard for the lives or safety of other persons.
    HDuty."
    (2) For the purposes of this section, '~duty" means a duty imposed
    by law."
    Clauses 192 to 194, both inclusive-Approved.
    NOTE: re Clause 194 (6)-This provision was section 2,21. in the Code of
    1892 and clause 168 in the English Draft Code. The Report of the Imperial
    Commissioners, at p. 21, says:
    Perjury may be made the means of committing what amounts morally
    to murder or robbery of the worst :!,rind; and it appears to us that in such
    cases the present maximum punishment (seven years' penal servitude) is
    not sufficiently. sey-ere ..
    Therefore, they provide in clause 120 that perjury committed to procure the
    conviction of any person for an offence punishable with death or penal servitude
    should be punishable with penal servitude for life. The Cqde of 1892 (section.
    146) adapted this to "any crime punishable by death or imprisonment for seven
    years or 'more" and this is the present provision (section 174). The Bill (clause
    113 (1) ) makes perjury punishable with imprisonment for life if it is com-
    mitted to secure conviction .of a capital offence, otherwise the penalty of
    fourteen years applies.
    Blackstone (4 Comm. 196) says:
    There .was also_by the ancient common law, one species of killing- held
    to be murder, which may be dubious at this day; as it ·hath not been ·an
    instance wherein it has been held to be murder for many ages past; I mean
    by bearing false witness against another with an express premeditated
    design tq take away his. life, so as the innocent person be condemned and
    executed. 'rhe ,Gothic laws 'punished in this case, both the judge, the wit-
    nesses and the prosecutor .... And among 'the Romans, the lex CorneLia,
    de sicariis, punished the f",lse witness .with death, as being guilty of ~ I'
    species of assassination. And there is no doubt that this i.s equally murder
    in foro conscientiae as' killing with a sword;· though the modern law (to
    avoid the danger of deterring witnesses from giving evidence upon capital
    BANKING. AND COMMERCE-Bm (0) 89

    prosecutions 1 if it -must be at the peril of their own lives) has not yet
    punished·it as such.
    Chitty's Blackstone, in a note to the above quotations says!
    Such a distinction in perjury would be more dangerous to society,
    and more repugnant to principles of sound policy, than hi this instance
    the apparent want of severity in the law. Few honest witnesses would
    venture to give evidence against a prisoner tried for his life, if thereby
    they made themselves liable to be prosecuted a~ murderers."
    Clauses 195 to 213, both inclusive-Approved.
    Clause 214'-Amended as follows:
    Page 73, line 19-after the word "birth" insert the words "as a result
    thereof,')
    Clauses 215 to 220, both inclusive-Approved.
    Immediately before clause, 221-Insert the heading "Automobiles", "Dangerous
    Places and Unseaworthy Ships" .
    Clause 221-Amended as follows:
    1. Page 75, line 4-after the word "assistance" insert the words "where
    any person has been injured"
    2. Page 75, line lO-after the word "assistance" insert the words'
    Hwhere .any person ha~ been' fnjured".
    Clauses 222 to 225, both inclusive-Approved.
    Clause 226-Amended as follows:
    Page 77, line II-after· the word "who" insert" without lawful
    excuse"
    Clause 227-Approved.
    Clause 228-'-Amended as follows:
    1. Page 77, line 26-delete the word "or" and substitute'therefor the
    word- "and"
    2. Page 77, line 31-delete the word "or" and substitute therefor the
    word "and" I
    Clauses 229 to 267-Approved.

    PART VII.

    OFFENCES AGAINST RIGHTS OF PROPERTY

    Clauses 268 to 297, both inclusi'le-'Approved.


    Clause 298-Amended as follows:
    Page 98, line 9-after th~ word "office" insert the \vord "or"

    Clauses 299 and 300-Appr.oved .

    Clause 301-Amended as follows:


    1. Page 99, lines 1 to 13 are deleted and the following substituted
    therefor:
    (b) was stolen within twelve months before the proceedings were com-
    menced,
    DOMINION OF CANADA

    HOUSE OF COMMONS
    DEBATES
    OFFICIAL REPORT

    SEVENTH SESSION-TWENTY·FlRST PARLIAMENT.

    1-2 ELIZABETH II
    BEING THE 95TH SESSION FOR THE PERIOD 1867·1953 .

    VOLUME I, 1952.53
    COMPRISING THE PERIOD FROM THE TWENTIETH DAY OF NOVEMBER, 1952,
    TO THE SIXTEENTH D~Y OF JANUARY. 1953, INCLUSIVE

    INDEX ISSUED IN A SEPARATE VOLUME

    EDMOND CLOUTIER, C,M.G., O,A., D,S,P.


    QUEEN'S PRINTER AND CONTROLLER OF STATIONERY
    QITAWA, 1953
    931

    HOUSE OF COMMONS

    Tuesday, January 13, 1953 DEFENCE EXPENDITURE


    The house met at 2.30 p.m. APPOINTMENT OF SPECIAL COMMITTEE

    Right Hon. L. S. St. Laurent (Prime


    BUSINESS OF THE f10USE Minister) moved:
    PROCEDURE ON TUESDAYS AND FRIDAYS ON That a select committee be apPoiQ-ted to con~
    PRIVATE AND PUllLIC BILLS tinue the examination of all expenditure of pubUc
    moneys for national defence and all commitments
    Mr. Speaker: Perhaps I should remind the for expenditure for national defence since March
    '31, 1950, and to report from time to time their
    house at this time that at the last session observations and opinions thereoI). and in par~
    standing order 15 was amended. In previous ttcular, what, if any, economies consistent with the
    sessions private and public bills have been execution of the policy decided by the government
    called between 8 and 9 o'clock on Tuesdays may be effected therein, with power to send for
    persons, papers and records and to examine wit-
    and Fridays. Under the amendment, private nesses; and that notwithstanding standing order 65"
    and ·public bills are called between 5 and 6 the committee shall consist of twenty·six member~
    <o'clock on Tuesdays and Fridays. to be designated by the house at a later date.
    i, Hon. Brooke Claxion (Minister of National
    I Defence): Mr. Speaker. as I was away attend-
    FAIR EMPLOYMENT PRACTICES
    ing the meetings of the North Atlantic treaty
    MEASURE TO PREVENT DISCRIMINATION ON council when the Currie report was presented
    (lROUNDS OF RACE, NATIONAL ORIGIN, COLOUR OR to this house and discussed on December 15,
    RELIGION
    16 and 17 I teel that it would be the wish of
    Hon. Milton F. Gregg <Minister of Labour) hon. members, and indeed of others th:r,:ough-
    ~moved for leave to introduce Bi'll No. 100, to out the country, in view of the wide interest
    ,prevent discrimination in regard to employ- attache-d to this important document! that 1
    ~irient and membership in trade unions by shbuld take advantage of the first opportunity
    reason of race, national origin, colour. or of dealing with it on the motion to set up this.
    ;re,ligion. committee and in the course of my remarks
    to indicate in support of the Prime Minister
    Motion agreed to and bill read the first (Mr. St. Laurent) the reasons why I believe
    time. this report should receive the consideration
    of that committee! if and when it is set up.
    CRIMINAL CODE
    In the debate which took place between
    R_~VISION A1.'lD AMENDMENT OF EXISTING STATUTE December 15 when the Currie report was
    Hon. Stuart S. Garson (Minister of Justice) tabled and the Christmas adjournment on
    moved the first reading of Bill No. 93 (from· December 17! reference was also made to a
    number of other matters relating to national
    the Senate), respecting the criminal law.
    defence about which I may have something to
    Motion agreed to and bill read the first time. say on another occasion. But today I intend
    to confine what I have to say to the" Currie
    PRIVATE BILLS report itself and to matters relevant to it.
    FIRST READINGS-SENATE BILLS Before entering into this subject I should
    like if I may to make a personal reference~
    Bill No. 94, for the relief of Jane Louttit For the affairs of the Department of National
    Dormer .-Mr. Winkler. Defence and the three armed services of
    'Bill No, 95, for the relief of Roger Loiselle. Canada I am: respon.sible under the statute
    --'Mr. Winkler. under which I was appointed. I have accep-
    Bill No. 96, for the relief of William Oscar ted and have endeavoured. to discharge that
    Gilbert.-Mr. Winkler. responsibility to the best of my ability. I
    Bill ,No. 97, for the llelief of George Magner. have no intention of trying to dodge that
    Mr. Winkler. responsibility. There has not been and there
    will not be any effort made to find a scape-
    ,Bill No. 98, for the relief of Teodora
    goat. When we found that there had -been
    ,Szablity Szentirmai.-l\4r. Winkler. wrongdoing! we laid prosecutions. When it
    i Bill No. 99, for the relief of Arthur Piche.- appeared, as I said in the house on April 21,
    ,Mr. Winkler. that there had been "grave irregularities"! I
    68108-59j
    DOMINION OF CANADA

    HOUSE OF COMMONS
    DEBATES
    OlfFICIAL REPORT

    SEVENTH SESSION-TWENTY-FIRST PARLIAMENT

    1-2 ELIZABETH II
    BEING THE 95TH SESSION FOR THE PERIOD 1867·1953

    VOLUME II, 1952-53


    COMPRISING THE PERIOD FROM THE NINETEENTH DAY OF JANUARY, 1953,
    TO THE NINETEENTH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 1953, INCLUSIVE

    INDEX ISSUED IN A SEPARATE VOLUME

    EDMOND CLOUTIEE, C.M,G., O.A., D.S.P.


    QUEEN'S PRINTER AND CON'IROLLER Of'STATIONERY
    OTTAWA,1953
    !Z72 HOUSE OF COMMONS
    Crown Liability
    wi th our in terpreta tion of the text, he may CRIMINAL CODE
    offer an amendment with regard to it. REVISION AND AMENDMENT OF EXISTING
    Mr. Henderson: Will the blll contain a STATUTE
    definition section defining highway, or will Hon. Stuart S. Garson (Minister of Justice)
    that be defined by the Highway Traffic Act? moved the second reading 'of Bin No. 93,
    Mr. Garson: I would think, Mr. Chairman, respecting the criminal law.
    that highway would be defined by the
    provin-cial ad. Mr. Fulton: I presume that the minister
    will make a statement advising us of his
    The Chairman: May I suggest that if the intention with respect to the course of. the
    minister gives an indication to the hon. legislation.
    member of what will be in the bill, he will
    have to reply to the other members. We Mr. Garson: Mr. Speaker, we have been
    should not anticipate discussion on the bill going along so ·rapidly here that my file on
    at this stage. this Bill 93 is on its way to me from my
    office at the moment. -
    Ml'. Knowles: May I ask the minister Mr. Fulton: "We know that the minister is
    whether the legislation contemplated by this
    resolution has any bearing upon the position capable of 'speaking extemporaneously.
    of civil servants in their personal Gapacities Mi', G3.!son: Mr. Speaker, the bill, the
    in respect of debts, garnishee arrangements s-eco!1d reading of which I am now moving,
    and so on? I see the minister shaking his passed the Senate before the Christmas
    head. Can he indicate what the situation adj-ournment and will, I expect, be referred
    is in that connection while we are OTh this to . a committee of this house. As a matter
    resolution? At the same time, will he tell of fact, I propose to make a motion to that
    us what the position of members of parlia~ effect after the second reading has been
    ment is in these matters? Having regard given. Having regard to the fact that it will
    to ourselves, I 'want to say that I do not be considered-as it was in the Senate-in
    think we should be in any preferred posi- great detail in this committee, I feel that
    tion. I was wondering whether this resolu- there is no necessity for me to deal with it
    tion might be of the kind that would do away at too great length at the present time.
    with an,y _preferred position, if there is such,
    so far as members of 'parliament are con- Before touching on the main principles of
    the bill I desire to say a· word or two con-
    cerned.
    cerning its preparation. On April 7, 1952, I
    Mr. Garson: The point which the han. mem~ tabled in this house the report of the com-
    bel' raises is one which has no relevancy mission 'which had been instructed to prepare
    whatever to the present resolution. This for consideration by the government a draft
    resolution will not touch it in any way, and bill to amend and revise the Criminal Code.
    therefore I think that it would be only In that report, which I am sure all hon,
    'proper observance of the rules of the house members have read, there are set out at
    to postpone arl.y discussion of that point until length the various stages of the work which
    some more apt -occasion. was done and which culminated in the
    presentation of the draft bill that was tabled
    Resolution reported, read the second time along with the report.
    and concurred in. I should like to pause here to pay tribute
    Mr. Ga~son thereupon moved for leave to to those men who were responsible for the
    introJuce Bill No. 105, respecting the liability revision. The Criminal Code revision com·
    of the crown for torts and civil salvage. mission was originally composed of Han.
    He said: Mr. Speaker, before you put that
    "V. M. Martin, Chief Justice of $askatchewan;
    J. H. G. Fauteux, Q.C., then of the Quebec
    motion may I say that His Excellency bar and no\v Hon. Mr. Justice Fauteux of the
    the Goyernor Genei"al, having been made Supreme Court of Canada; Mr. F. P. Varcoe,
    acquainted with the. subject matter of this Q.C., deputy minister of justice. To assist
    resolution, recommends it to the considera~ this commission and to undertake in large
    tion of the hous-e; -and having also been measure much of the detail, there was
    acquainted with the purport of the measure appointed a committee composed of Mr.
    to be introduced has given consent, so far Robert Forsyth, Q.C., then with the Depart-
    as Her Majesty's prerogatives are affected, to ment of Justice, now senior county court
    judge at Toronto; Mr. Fernand Choquette,
    the consideration of the bill.
    Q.C., then of the bar of Quebec, now Mr.
    Motion agreed to and bill read the first Justice Choquette; Mr. H. J. Wilson, Q.C.,
    time. deputy attorney general of Alberta; and
    [Mr. Garson.]
    JANUARY 23, 1953 1273
    Criminal Code
    Messrs. Joseph Sedgwick, Q.C., and J. J. one it will replace and a large measure of the
    credit for it must be given to the commissioners.
    Robinette, Q,C., of the bar of Ontario. The Your subcommittee wishes further to record its
    personnel of the committee was subsequently appreciation of the great public service given by
    increased by the appointment of Mr. W. C. the commissioners in the performance of a labor~
    ious and difficult task. The condensation, rearrange-
    Dunlop, Q.C., of the Nova Scotia bar; Mr. ment and clarification of many of the sections of
    H. P. Carter, Q.C., director of public prosecu- the present code will effect a marked improvement
    tions of Newfoundland; and Mr. T. D. in the criminal law of Canada.
    MacDonald, Q.C., who prior to succeeding I have pointed out that the commission
    JudCfe
    o
    Forsyth in the Department of Justice was not charged with the task of making
    was deputy attorney general of Nova Scotia. changes in broad principles l but was asked
    The work of the commission and the com- to evolve as simple a code as possible and
    mittee was commenced in 1949 and continued in doing so to make such consolidation and
    until September, 1950, when there was a rearrangement as it thought necessary to the
    reorganization and the work from that time accomplishment of this end. Hon. members
    on -was carried on by a -committee which will observe that there has been -considerable
    was subsequently appointed a commission, consolidation and rearrangement. This phase
    and was instructed to prepare a draft bill of the work has contributed to the marked
    for the consideration of the governme"tlt. reduction between the number of clauses in
    I am sure han. members will agree that the bil1 and the number of sections con-
    as the Criminal Code which was first enacted tained in the present code. This feature of
    in 1892 had not had any major review or the work of the commission willI I am surel
    overhaul since that datel the time had arrived l prove of great advantage to those who are
    when this commission was appointed l when called upon to interpret and to administer
    this task or revision -should be undertaken. the criminal law.
    Indeed that is rather an understatementl if Another matter which I wish to call to
    anything. . the attention of the house is the extent to
    . The terms under which the commIssion which the blll will be exhaustive of the
    was asked to enter upon the preparation of criminal law. Under the terms of reference
    'a draft bill are as follows: (a) Revise ambi- the commission was asked to endeavour to
    guous and unclear provisions; (b) adopt uni- make the Criminal Code exhaustive of the
    form language throughout; (c) eliminate criminal law. The .commission, however.
    inconsistenciesl legal anomalies or defects; came to the ,conclusion that the code should
    Cd) rearrange provisions and parts; Ce) seek be exhaustive in so far only as criminal
    to simplify by omitting and combining pro- offences are -concerned l and that the criminal
    visions; (f) with the approval of the statute law of England l as presently in force in
    revision .cOmmission omit provisions which Canada, should be continued in respect of
    should be' transferred to other statutes; (g) other mattersl inter aHa, :procedure, matters
    endeavour ,to make the code exhaustive of of defence and rules of evidence not already
    the criminal law; and (h) effect such pro- codified. The result is that no change has
    cedural amendments as are deemed nec- been effected in so far as the common law
    ess-ciry for the speedy and fair enforcement may now have effect in Canada. other than
    of the criminal law. to preclude the institution of proceedings for
    Hon. members will note from the terms of ,common law offences. The -commission found
    reference that the purpose of the revision upon consultation with the provinces that
    was not to effect changes in broad principles resort has been had to common law offences
    but was to produce as simple a code as in a very limited number of cases, and there
    possible' ,by the elimination of unnecessary have been incorporated in the draft bill
    or obsolete provisionsl the correction of those common law offences which the exper-
    errorsl the re'moval of inconsistencies and by ience of the past sixty years has shown could
    such consolidation and rearrangement of pro- be continued as ;part of the criminal law
    visions as was deemed necessary to facilitate of this country.
    reference. The work involved was arduous I am sure hon. members will agree -iha·t it
    and required great care. I -am sure that is much more satisfactory to have those
    hon. members who have studied the bill will things which constitute crimes clearly set out
    agree that the -commission has admirably in a statute readily ·available to all than to
    fulfilled this very exacting task. have to refer to ancient texts to ascert-ain
    In this "connectionl I should like to refer to what c.onduct is ,criminal in this country.
    a statement contained in the report of the
    subcommittee of the standing committee on The commissioners in their report dealt at
    banking and" commerce of the Senate which some length with punishment. There is just
    made a study of the bill: one phase of this matterl howeverl to which
    I wish to direCtt the attention .of hon. members
    Your subq'omrhtttee is of the opinion that our
    new Criminal Code will be a better code than the at this time, and it is their recommendation l
    1274 HOUSE OF COMMONS
    CriminaL Code
    carried out in the draft bill which they pre- in order that the court should have before it
    sented, that minimum punishments and all essential evidence, authority should be
    higher maximums for subsequent offences given to hear additional witnesses as well
    both be abolished in order to leave a greater as witnesses- called on the trial. It appears,
    degree of discretion to ,the courts. however, that the proposal that appeals in
    This recommendation was not acceptable in summary conviction matters should be heard
    toto and in this bill minimum punishments on the evidence taken before the court of
    have been restored in respect of driving a first instance did not appeal to the hon.
    motor vehicle while intoxicated and where members in the other place, with the result
    ability to drive is impaired, and also in the that the bill that is now before this house
    case of certain minor offences in respect of provides that appeals in summary conviction
    the mails. matteI;"s shalL be'- by way of trial de novo, as
    May I for a moment now touch on the pro- they are under the existing law.
    visions dealing· with procedure? In the Before leaving this branch of 'the bill, I
    present code there are two parts dealing with should point out that the summary trials part
    the non-jury trials of" indictable '·offences. In and' the paI"lt relating- to summary conviction
    the bill, these two parts have been consoli- offences were submitted to provincial repre-
    dr:t'ted, and the provisions of part XVII, which sentatives at a joint meeting held' in Toronto
    deal with jury trials where they are not in September, 1951. These parts were dis-
    inconsistent, have 'beeh made applicable. The cussed'sectioh by section, and the commis-
    advantage of this is to'have uniformity in so sion in its report points out that in general
    far as possible in the_' trial of indictable the revision of these· parts was acceptable -to
    offences. ",":, the provincial repres"entatives.
    " I- think 'some reference should be 'made
    It win be observed that under the provisions
    to what has happen'ed toO-the bill since it was
    of. the consolidated parts, the jurisdiction' ,to
    tabled. in draft form, in this house on April
    be -exercised by magistrates will,be exercised 7, 1952. . . ..
    only by those who are specialiy appointe'd
    for ,that purpose. The bill was Introduced as letter H-8 of" the
    Senate_ on May_ 12, 1952, and on May 13 I
    In view of this and in the, expectation that attended in ,the other place, as ministers of
    jurisdiction to act under -this pa'r,t will be the crown may now do, to sp'eak on the
    bestowed. on qualified persons, and jurisdic- motion for second reading. The bill was
    tion to try an accused with his consent has referred to the banking and commerce com-
    been extended to indude certain offences mittee of the Senate which appointed a sub-
    which must now be tried by jury. I would committee to consider the measure clause by
    emphasize that this hi no way impairs tlie clause. Mter twelve meetings the subcom-
    right of an accused to trial by jury and that mittee reported to the main committee on
    the accused wi11 continue to have the pight June 20. The -main committee held three
    to select the method of trial which he desires. meetings _for the purpose of considering the
    The principal matters with which I wish to amendments and subsequently recommended
    deal in respect of changes in "procedure in :0 the Senate that, because of the amount
    summary conviction offences are the follow- of work remaining to. be done, the bill
    ing: Under the bill provision is made for should not be proceeded with further at that
    the inclusion of more ,than one offence in session.
    single information. This is not an innovation. During the summer of 1952 the bill was
    A similar provision will be found in statutes reviewed by the officers of my department
    of parliament and of the provincial legis- in the light of the recommendations made by
    latures, and the practice was widely adopted the banking and commerce subcommittee and
    in connection with wartime regulations. As a a number of_ recommendations made by that
    proper safeguard, it will be noted that power subcommittee were adopted. The views of
    is given the court to, order a separate trial the criminal 1a w section of the conference
    on anyone or more of the included charges of commissioners on uniformity of legislation
    if the court is of opinion that such a course in Canada were also sought and secured in
    is necessary in the interest of justice. respect of particular provisions in the bill.
    I might also mention that the bill was the
    Under the present provisions of the code, subject of a paper delivered by Mr. F. G.
    where an appeal is taken in a summary con- Scott, crown prosecutor for the city of Van-
    viction matter, the court must hold a new couver, to the section on the administration
    trial. The commissioners recommended that of criminal justice of the Canadian Bar
    the appeal should be determined on the Association at the meeting of that organiza~
    evidence taken in the court of first instance tion at Vancouver in September last. Mr.
    as in the -case of indictable offence,S, and that Scott, after ,observing that the bill hac;! been
    [Mr. Garson.]
    JANUARY 23. 1953 1275
    Criminal Code
    studied intensively by a committee Of lawyers, . Criminal Code revision commissioners and in
    including the provincial deputy attorney the bill iniroduced in the Senate, paragraph
    general a learned magistrate and nine or ten (e) of clause 46 provided:
    laWyer~ recognized as very skilled in criminal Everyon~.commtts treason who, in Canada, con-
    law made the following comment in COll- spires with an agent of a state other than Canada
    .nection with the bill: to c01umunicate information or to do an act that is
    likely to be prejudicial to the safety or interests
    One comment I find is common to every brief of Canada.
    that I have l'eceived: this is the wholehearted com-
    mendation to the commission for what is unani- This was undoubtedly an extension of the
    nlOusly termed a wonderful piece of work. law of treason beyond what is contained in
    In addition, during the .summer recess, the the law of treason at the present time under
    Department of Justice received comments the Criminal Code and the common law.
    on the bill from a munber of barristers in The punishment provided in the bill for this
    Canada and, after due consideration, certain offence was death or any term of any impris-
    proposals made by these geritlemen were onment up to life imprisonment. It appears
    ,inG~rporated in tp.e bill which is now before to have been the opinion of the bon. gentle-
    you. men in the other pl.ace that this is not an
    , The bill was ag~ln.introduced in the Senate offence that should properly be defined or
    iii November at the opening of the present punished as treason, and the paragraph in
    session of parliament and was referred again question has accordingly been transferred by
    'to- the banking Clnd commerce com~ittee. the Senate to clause 50 of the bill which' pro-
    The subcommittee' held fifteen meetings and vides a punishment of imprisonment for a
    'exainined -the iil.~asure claUse by cia use. In term not exceeding fourteen years; This is
    their "deliberations, the subcommittee and the also a matter upon which I shall have more
    main -c'ommtttee had the assisti:mce of officers to say when the bill is in committee.
    of -'my department who were fam-mar with In conclusion r might poipt out again that
    the bill. -:'In addition, the main committee the revision of the Criminal Code was not
    heard-' witnesses representing "interested undertaken for the purpose of effecting
    'groups in Callada. changes in broad principles. As hon. members
    r' think tha-t in closing my remarks I know, our system of criminal jurisprudence
    should mention two matters that were the embodies the high principles of the British
    subject of amendments in the other place system and provides as fair and just a system
    and that w111 undoubtedly merit discussion as it is possible to devise to- ensure that justice
    here when the bill is in committee. will be accorded to all. I am sure that hon.
    The first of these is the question of appeals members who study this bill will agree that
    from convictions for contempt of court. there has been no departure from these
    Neither under the law of England nor under principles.
    "the law of Canada is there express provision
    granting an appeal, as of right, by 'a person In closing I should like to sayan behalf
    convicted of contempt ot court in connection of myself and the government that we
    with criminal proceedings. The Senate appreciate fully the work which has been
    apparently considers ihat some provision done by the commissioners who produced the
    'should be made in the criminal law to per- original draft and by the various lawyers,
    mit appeals in such circumstances, and the commissioners on the uniformity of legis-
    accordingly an amendment has been made lation and others who have taken a keen
    ~n the other place to cIa use 8 of the bill interest and have made many useful sugges-
    providing for an appeal to the court of appeal tions, some of which have been incorporated
    of the: provinces. Under the amendment, in the bilI before us.
    where ~ contempt is committed in the face Of all that group there are none who are
    of the court, no appeal would lie in respect entitled to greater commendation and
    of the conviction, but an appeal would lie in gratitude than the members of the Senate
    respect of the sentence imposed. Wh-ere the committee on banking and commerce, in par~
    contempt is committed not in the fa·ce of the ticular Senators Hayden, Farris and Roebuck,
    c0ll:r.t, ,an appeal would lie both from .the members of the subcommittee. Their long
    cOJ1.vi,Gtion and from the sentence imposed. and arduous labours upon this bill have been
    .1 \10 _not propose to discuss this question invaluable and entitle them to the gratitude
    fUrther at this time but I shall have more of the people of Canada.
    to say' in this conlle~tion when ihe bill is in
    committee .. Mr. Fulton: r wonder if before concluding
    . The other matter to which I sliould like the minister would say a word with respect
    to direct the attention of -hon. members is to the proposal to send the bill to a special
    clause 46 of the bill, which defines the offence committee. The minister merely referred
    of tr"ason. In the draft bill prepared by the to that, but did not enlarge upon it.
    1276 HOUSE OF COMMONS
    Criminal Code
    Mr. Garson: After second reading a motion subject. I express the regret of this party,
    will be made to refer the bill to a committee. and I am sure the regret of the whole house,
    Mr. Fulton: It is the intention to move at the unfortunate and enforced absence ot
    that motion immediately following second the hon. member for Lake Centre (Mr. Die~
    reading? . fenbaker) on this occasion. In the remarks
    that I shall make I am frank to confess that
    Mr. Garson: That is right. I speak not as an expert but simply in an
    Mr. Fulton: There will be an opportunity effort to put into workmanlike language the
    at that time to discuss the matter? views which have been expressed to me by
    those who are undoubted experts in this
    Mr. Garson: That is right. field.
    Mr. E. D. Fulton (Kamloops): Mr. Speaker, The fundamental criticism which has been
    it is difficult at this stage to say very much advanced to me is that while the committee
    on a subject of this nature. This is the and commission were instructed and did make
    motion for second reading of a bill, not to a real effort not to rewrite the substantive
    amend so much as to revise and consolidate portions of the Criminal Code, but merely to
    the Criminal Code. In discussing the prin- codify them, they did in fact on a number of
    ciple of the bill one would be discussing the occasions yield to what has- been described
    very principles of criminal justice, to which as temptation to re\vrite the substantive as
    the minister has made reference in his closing wen as the procedural lawj and to use words
    remarks. The principles of criminal justice with respect to that SUbstantive law.
    as they prevail in Canada are not of them- The objection advanced to that course is
    selves the object of this bill now before us. that criminal jurisprudence has been built up
    As the minister said, the intention was not over the years, in fact for almost a century,
    to alter or vary those princip.les but rather around the wording of the Criminal Code as
    to codify the various sections of the code as it was first enacted, and it will be a matter
    they have grown up over a large number of of considerable difficulty for the courts to
    years, dealing with various criminal offences interpret the new provisions of the substantive
    and the procedures by which they would be law. It will be necessary ·for the courts to
    tried. reinterpret words and to that extent build up
    My remarks will not be extensive, but there new jurisprudence. Wherever words of an
    are some observations I should like to make. old section dealing with an offence have been
    Ai the ·outset I join in what the minister said changed it will necessarily involve the devel-
    by way of expressing gratitude which this opment of new jurisprudence regarding in-
    house and country owes to the commission terpretation and application.
    and committee appointed to undertake this It seemed to those who expressed this view
    revision and also to the committee of the that it was unnecessary that that course
    Senate which reviewed the bill the commis- should have been followed, that a greater
    sion drafted. It is no detraction from my determination should have been shown not
    sincere expression of appreciation to those to write new law but simply to stick to the
    bodies when I say that no minority report task of codifying the existing law_
    was submitted by the committee, although it Then there have been objections and
    is my understanding that certain members
    criticism with respect to another matter men-
    had some reservations which they did no'
    feel could be placed in a minority report. tioned by the minister in his remarks this
    They were nonetheless serious, although not afternoon. That is in connection with the
    reduced to writing in that form. enlarged jurisdiction of magistrates. It is no
    It is not to cavil at the really outstanding part of my intention, Mr. Speakerj to imply
    job done by these bodies to say that I feel in -any degree ~that magistrates are not con-
    that these reservations, which were shared. scientiouS', hard-working andf for the most
    by other lawyers'in the country, should be part, fully qualified men; nevertheless I think
    referred to at this stage in the hope that it is a fact that by the very nature of things
    when discussed in the committee and advan- magistrates are not as highly qualified as
    ced as objections or reservations in connection judges of either the county or supreme courts
    with certain provisions in the bill they may of our provinces. It is felt for that reason that
    perhaps form the ·basis of amendments in an it is a dangerous tendency, particularly in
    effort to improve the work done. criminal matters, to enlarge the jurisdiction. of
    I should say also that I am speaking on magistrates, and it has been suggested that
    behaJt of the official opposition in the absence to do so, to enlarge the jurisdiction of
    of at least one· and perhaps several who are magistrates, who sit of course always without
    more qllalified than I am to deal with this a jury, obliquely abolishes or whitt~es away
    [Mr, Fulton.]
    JANUARY 23, 1953 1277
    Criminal Code
    the right of an accused to trial by jury which advantage to follow that course. Accused
    is such a fundamental part of our criminal persons, perhaps people in trouble for the
    law. first time, not being aware of the seriousness
    In that connection I realize that the com- of their position and not always realizing the
    missioners have themselves pointed out that fact that they are going to have a blot on
    the accused is still free to elect whether or their records which will follow them for the
    not he Will be tried by jury.. What the com- rest of their lives, are prone where the police
    missioners have to say on that point is found seem friendly-they do want to keep it out
    , at page 13 of the mimeographed copy of their of the papers and so on-to accept these sug-
    report which was presented to parliament last gestions. I believe that is a dangerous
    year. They say: tendency. I realize that it is one that is
    Consideration was given to the extension of the welcome to prosecp:ting officers, but I believe
    absolute jurisdIction of magistrates and it was it is a dangerous tendency thus to enlarge the
    decided that certain minor extensions of this jur- jurisdiction of magistrates and, as r have
    isdiction would be justified. said, to whittle away the absolute right of an
    Then they go on to refer to the actual accused to trial by jury.
    sections of the new bill which have that r have heard criticism by lawyers well
    effect. They say: qualified and experienced in these matters
    The' absolute jurisdiction was further extended- that in this respect, as well as in some of
    This is absolute jurisdiction, not qualified the revised procedural sections, there has
    or elective. been a tendency to rewrite the law from the
    -to include attempts to commit the offences of point of view of the prosecuting officer so
    obtaining property by false pretences, receiving and as to make it easier to obtain convictions.
    retaining, where the value of the property does not There has been a tendency to eliminate some
    exceed $50. . of the difficulties experienced by these very
    Then they go on to say: prosecuting officers in the past in obtaining
    In view of the requirement that magistrates who convictions, and I state very definitely that
    are to exercise jurisdiction under the part must be is a fundamentally wrong approach to the
    expressly appointed for the purpose, it was decided task of revising the Criminal Code.
    that the number of offences which should now be
    required to be tried by judge and jury should be A closely related subject to that which r
    -reduced to include only treasonable offences, piracy have just been discussing has to do with the
    and piratical acts, murder, manslaughter, comblna~
    tions in restraint of trade, discrimination in trade, question of the "trial de novo. That is the
    accessory after the fact to murder or treason, question of the appeal from a conviction by
    attempt to cQmmit murder and conspiracy to a magistrate to a superior judge which, under
    murder. The rights of an accused are in no way the code as it stands, has to be a trial de novo,
    impaired as he is entitled to elect whether he will
    be tried by a judge and jury, by a judge alone. or that is to say a new trial with witnesses called
    by a magIstrate. and the full evidence presented again. The
    proposal of the commissioners in the draft
    Although they have placed In there that bill was that such an appeal should not be
    last sentence I have read, and the minister
    himself has' referred to it, I beg to take some a trial de novo, but merely an appeal on
    issue with that statement. My submission fs questions of law; that aU that should be
    that, the' jurisdiction of the magistrate having before the judge of the higher court would
    been enlarged and in some cases as contained be the record, such as it might be, of the
    in the extract from which I q~oted earlier, proceedings iri the magistrate's covrt, and
    ~bsolv.te jurisdiction having been extended, it that the judge should not have before him
    is a f~ct that that is a whittling down of the the witnesses and the evidence upon 'which
    right of ..the ·accused to trial by jury. Even the conviction was based.
    where an.. accused ha-!) an election, Mr. I am very glad indeed to find that the
    Speaker, I suggest that it is a dangerous Senate committee recommended, and in fact
    tendency because we know that there is a has written into the bill as reported to us
    temptation to the police, who 13,re conscien- from the other place, the principle that for-
    ti~usly endeavouring to do a good job-it is merly existed in the code that an appeal
    with that spirit that they approach their duty, from a conviction by a magistrate to a higher
    and r fully recognize it-to get a case disposed court shall be by way of a trial de novo. r
    of as quickly as possible and to suggest to an hope this house will preserve that provision
    acc~sed person that he probably will be better which the Senate has rewritten into the bill
    off If he has his case disposed of with as little before liS.
    fuss and bother as possible, and probably it I do not wish to transgress the rule against
    W~Uld be to his advantage to elect to be discussing particulars, but I think these are
    trIed by a magistrate. matters of principle. I want to mention the
    There are ways and" ways of suggesting to reservations that are felt by a large number-
    ~n accused person just how it will be to his of qualified lawyers with respect to the
    1278 .HOUSE OF COMMONS
    CriminaL Code
    elimination of the necessity for corroboration I take the view that notwithstanding the fact
    in sexual offences. That is referred to at that the communists may have muddied the
    page 16 of the report of the commission. They \vater, we should not refrain from expressing
    say: our ovm considered opinions on the merits
    One example is that under the present code on or demerits of these provisions because we
    a charge of rape Or' indecent assault, the evidence are in the unfortunate position that some-
    of the complainant need not be corroborated. How-
    ever, a rule of practice requires the trial judge to body else may have spoken on the matter.
    give a warning as to the danger of convicting on I am not going' to go into detail in this
    the complainant's evidence alone. This rule is house at thIs stage on all these questions,
    ccdified and extended to caseS of carnal knowl-
    edge with the result that under the draft bill corro- but I- think there are certain things which
    boration of the evidence of the complainant is no can be said on these matters, as well as the
    longer required In cases of carnal knpwledge. relation to what I have described already as
    I know that those who have had experience an unfortunate tendency to make it easier
    in criminal law and criminal trials have very to obtain convictions. As I said, one matter
    great misgivings as to the tendency to elimi~ is improperly enlarging the jurisdiction of
    nate the necessity for corroboration in con~ magistrate~ in certain respects. However, 1
    nection with offences of this kind. think the proper place for that discussion
    There are two other matters which I should would be in the committee which the minister
    like to mention in connection' with the bill proposes to set up. 'What we say here is of
    and the report of the royal commission. In general application' and it is not easy to be
    reading the -report I was disturbed to note !,pecific.
    that after the commissioners had, stated that . ' I do want to s.aY. that while I reject abso-
    they had eliminated minimum fines; .which I lutely the hypocritical utterances of the com-
    believe is a sound. principle, - they went on munist leader! Tim Buck, in this regard,
    to state at page 19-! in connection with the nevertheless I hope· that all other members
    punishment for summary conviction offences: will fe~l fI;ee, as I do! to express their views
    In keeping with our desire for simplification, the when the matter is reached.
    draft bfll provides one general penalty for all Just in case it should appear from my
    summary conviction offences, namely, a fine of
    $500 or six months' imprisonment, or both. remarks, which-have dealt with what I con-
    sider to be weaknesses in the bill, that I am
    I mention this, Mr. Speaker, because I
    too critical, I want to say that I hope I have
    think it is perhaps important and certainly
    not left that impression. I think the bill
    of general interest to those who may be con~ represents tremendous work and improve-
    sidering this matter who probably would
    ment by way of codifying and shortening the
    have been as disturbed as I was to see that, code. I want to say that I join fully with the
    on a first reading of these words at any
    minister in the sentiments he expressed
    rate, a standard fine of $500 for all summary
    regarding the deqt which the country owes
    conviction offences was being included. How~
    to ·the commission and the Senate committee
    ever, when you turn to the relief section and
    the new part dealing with summary convic- who have done such outstanding work in
    this connection.
    tions, you will find that the fine of $500 is a
    maximum with no set minimum at all! and Mr. Knowles: I should like to make a few
    that minimum sentences have been elimin- remarks on second reading of this bill. I
    ated. However the first impression gathered notice that it is getting pretty close to five
    from a reading of :the committee's report is o'clock, and on two or three occasions we
    that everyone -convicted on summary pro- have trespassed on the hour for private and
    cedure would- be fined $500. That is not public bills, so I wonder if the house would
    borne 'Out by the words 'Df the 'Section be willing to call it five -o'clock now and go
    involved, which I think is 694. on with other items. If so! I might make my
    The final subject which I would like to remarks in a more connected fashion at
    mention is in connection with this section eight o'clock.
    referred to by the minister, dealing with the Mr. Deputy Speaker: Would the house con~
    offences of treason and related offences sent to call it five o'clock?
    against the state. I have certain very definite
    views on this matter, 'Mr. Speaker, and I Some hon. Members: Agreed.
    think it is most unfortunate that the waters
    have been muddied to a certain extent by PRIVATE BILLS
    presentations-I do not want to dignify them BEAVER FIRE INSURANCE COMPANY
    by that word, but ~t was a fOl'm of presenta- The house in committee on Bill No. 43,
    tion~made to the Senate committee by the respecting Beaver Fire InsurHnce Company
    communist leader in this country, Tim Buck. -Mr. Rooney-Mr. Beaudoin in the .chair.
    [Mr. Fulton.]
    JANUARY 23, 1953 1287
    Criminal Code
    views to one of the railway companies about extend invitations to interested bodies and
    what they should do; that they should con- organizations that may wish to appear before
    sider this question as a matter of collective the committee to make representations. I
    bargaining and not expect parliament to deal want to say that, in our view, we cannot be
    with it as a matter of legislation. too careful in discharging our responsibility
    Some han. Members: Six o'clock.
    as the elected representatives in this parlia-
    ment with respect to this very important
    ,On motion of Mr. Dickey the debate \vas piece of legislation.
    .adjourned. It is true, of course, that in many sections
    · At six o'clock the house took recess. of this bill we have simply a consolidation,
    codification or carrying forward in slightly
    different language of the provisions or prin-
    cip:es that have been in the criminal law of
    AFTER RECESS Canada for a long time. As a matter of fact
    The house resumed at eight o'clock. the Minister of Justice this afternoon sug-
    gested that the .desire in revising the Criminal
    Code was not to effect changes in broad prin-
    CRIMINAL CODE
    ciples, and in many sections of the bill that
    REVISION AND AMENDMENT OF idea has been kept in mind. However, despite
    EXISTING STATUTE the fact that that desire was laid down by the
    · The house. resumed consideration of the minister as a guide, it does seem to us that
    , motion ,of Mr. Garson for the se.eand reading there are a number of instances where very
    -of Bill No. 93, respecting the criminal law. definite changes have been made in this legis-
    lation, both as to principle and with respect
    Mr. Sfanley Knowles (Winnipeg North to the severity of punishment that is pre-
    ; Cenire): Mr. Speaker, we readily approve of scdbed for certain offences. I sha11, in
    the suggestion which has been made by the developing my remarks, refer to some of the
    Minister of Justice (Mr. Garson), that after instances where it seems to us new law is
    this bill has been given second reading it being written in this code. I mention'It now
    , should be referred to a special committee, simply to support the plea I make that there
    so that that committee, on behalf of the house, be no attempt to rush this committee, but that
    might .make a very thorough study of all its it be given a chance to do a thorough job on
    prOVIslons. We are aware of the fact that a this very important piece of legislation.
    great deal of study has already gone into the With respect to the principle of the, bill, the
    preparation of this bill. We realize that there subject matter of the legislation itself, we
    was considerable work and study before the feel that there are certain shortcomings. I
    bill was ever _introduced. It is also a fact need not take time to speak of the advantages
    that the members of the Senate gave a great of revising the code, and all the good things
    deal of thorough study to the provisions of which are in it which are being carried for-
    this' bill, and that as a result of that study ward. Those can be taken for granted. It
    quite a number of changes were made. Those is our job) particularly on the opposition side
    changes are incorporated in the bill in the of the house but also we feel it is the job
    form in whlch it is now before this house. . of all members, to be concerned where we
    · Nevertheless, we feel tl~at it should not be feel there are errors or shortcomings in legis-
    . contended that because of all the prior studies lation of this kind. I shall point to a number.
    by the commission, by the officers of the 1:1 the first place, we are dissatisfied that
    ; -department and by the members of the Sen- the legislation contains no clear statement as
    ate, this should curtail to any degree whatso- to the purpose· of the punishment of criminals.
    eVer our exp.miriation of. the provisions of this I draw attention in particular to what, in my
    legislation._ A,ftel: all, the members of this view, was the very excellent brief on the
    House of Commons are the elected represent- revision of the Criminal Code which was
    atives of, the -_people of Canada. It is we presented to the minister on June 8, 1950,
    Who a~e most respon,sible for' legislation that by the Canadian Welfare Council. The point
    goes on tl).~ "statute' books, and I strongly I have just now suggested is m&.de very effec-
    urge that the committee which is set up to tively as the first point in that brief. To put
    stu~y .this bill b~ given plenty of time, all the it in the language of the Canadian Welfare
    aSsIstance it needs and all possible enco.urage- Council, I would quote irom page 2 of the
    nJent to do a really thorough job on this brief where they say:
    revision of the' Oriminal Cod-e. I '-hope, too) This committee recommends inclusion in the
    that that commUtee will be given the usual Criminal Code of a statement of the purpose of
    criminal
    POwers to send for persons, papers and the protection punishment emphasizing that the aim is
    of society through the refonn of the
    recordsj and that it will use that power to individual.
    1288 HOUSE OF COMMONS
    Crimina! Code
    The Canadian Welfare Council gives cer- hon. friends. I hope these interjections:
    tain instances where the purposes of similar will suggest to the minister that maybe
    legislation have been indicated in the legis- this point which they are supporting, and
    lation itself, and in my view the government which the Canadian Welfare Council urged
    has not paid sufficient attention to that part upon this government, should be given more
    of the brief submitted to it by the Canadian consideration than it appears to 'have been.
    Welfare Council. given thus far.
    Mr. Macdonnell (Greenwood): Would the A second shortcoming or complaint that
    hon. member permit a· question? it was my intention to develop a bit with
    respect to this legislation was given to the
    Mr. Knowles: -Yes. house this afternoon by the hon. member
    Mr. Macdonnell (Greenwood): Did I under- for Kamloops (Mr. Fulton). I fully agree
    stand the hon. member to say that he would with the position he took, so I shall not
    give illustrations where the aim of the legis- take time more than just to state it. He
    lation was contained in the statute? quoted certain authorities in support of his
    position-and my legal advice is the same-
    Mr. Knowles: Right on the next page of the that the legislation seems to have been
    brief I hold in my hand the Canadian 'Welfare drafted from the viewpoint of the prosectl~
    Council states this: tion, its aim apparently being to make it
    Such a. guide is provided in similar legislation. easier to secure convictions, That aim, Mr.
    Section 38 of the Juvenile Delinquents Act, 1929, Speaker, is obviously inconsistent with the
    states:
    modern philosophy of the treatment of crime,
    There is a paragraph from that act, and to which I have referred in quoting from
    perhaps I should put it on the record. the Canadian Welfare Council. We fee!
    This act shall be liberally construed to the end that here too there is a shortcoming, and r
    that its purpose may be carried out, to wit: That hope this aspect will be gone into thoroughly
    the care and custody and discipline o£ a juvenile by the special committee which deals with
    d-eItnquent shall approximate as nearly as may be
    that which should be given by its parents, and this legislation.
    that as far as practicable every juvenile delinquent At the expense of being repetitious, I
    shall be treated, not as a criminal, but as a mis- repeat my plea that the committee not be
    directed and misguided chfld, and one needing aid, rushed, that it not be told by whoever is
    encouragement, help and assistance.
    Its chairman that this bill has all been
    I am not suggesting that in the Criminal gone over by the commissioners, by the
    Code for adults the purpose would be exactly officers of the department and by Their
    the same as that; but I am suggesting that if Honours in the other place and therefore it
    in that legislation it is possible to state its should be put through in a hurry. By doing-
    purpose, it should be possible to do it in this that we would not be discharging our respon-
    legislation. sibilities as elected members of parliament.
    As has often been said by the hon. member A third aspect of this legislation which it
    who has just interrupted, because of his seems to us should be looked into carefully
    own great personal interest in the whole is the way in which a number of t>he punish-
    question of penal reform, we have made ments provided have been considerebly in-
    great progress in our thinking as to crime, creased ttl< severity. Entirely apart from the
    and its punishment, and the reform of question whether or not that course is con-
    criminals. I agree with the representations sistent wUh mod-ern phil'os-ophy so far as the
    made by the Canadian Welfare Council that treatment of crime is concerned, and just on
    this progress in our thinking with respect to the basis of older: ideas, we find it hard to.
    crime, its punishment and the reform of understand why there should· be so many
    criminals should be reflected in the legisla~ instances where the punishment has been
    tion when we are rewriting the Criminal increased, in some cases from several months·
    Code. to ·a number of years, in some cases from.
    two years to fou~teen years ,and in some
    Mr. Fulton: Will the han. member permit
    a suggestion as to what the title might be? cases from a few years to the possibility of
    life imprisonment. I need not worry the
    Mr. Knowles: Yes. house with details; I have a number of them
    jotted down;
    Mr. Fullon: I suggest that the title should
    be "An act for the prevention and punish~ Despite the fact that this aspect may have
    ment of crime." That is what it is con~ been ·looked at by those who have gone
    cerned with. over this legislation before us, we suggest
    that is a fairly serious change to be making
    Mr. Knowles:. I think the suggestion js in the law of this country, and that the
    one that deserves consideration, and I am committee should look at it carefully. There
    glad to have these interjections by my two is one cam~--it slips my mem('r:y tor t.be
    rMr. Knowles.l

    I
    !
    JANUARY 23. 1953 1289
    Criminal Code
    -moment but it does not matter-in which the bill it would be increased to fourteen year:;.
    punishment provided was increased the last At any rate, that was the example I had in
    time we went .over the code in 1951; and mind.
    iIow ,.only a year and a half or two years Mr. Speaker, thus far I have given four
    .late;, it is being increased again to quite a reasons why we feel that this bill should
    -,:;;ubstantial extent. We th.erefore feel that be looked at carefully, and we regard each
    ..tllat,.is another aspect of the" code which. the of those reasons as important. I have left
    " members pf this house and of the committee to the last, the fifth of our criticisms of this
    which will do the main work on this legisla- bin, an aspect which is perhaps more impor-
    tion 'should -look at carefully. tant than any of those I have mentioned
    Then, too, as a fourth comment about this thus far. It is our feeling that in this legis-
    ! bill-and .one which underlines the need for lation there are provisions which will have
    . giving it car~ful st1,ldy-I wish to mention the effect of imposing greater restrictions on
    i ,llIe. fact. that it seems to involve a good the rights of citizens) particularly in relation
    ~ ~deal "6f changin.g .of ~stablished law. In view to the rights of labour and established civil
    1 of the things I sar from time to time, and will liber-Ues, than we hav-e y-et had inihis country.
    ( probably continue" to say, about lawyers an.d As r launch into a few comments on this
    \ their reliance on ,precedents and so on, It question I want to say how much r appre-
    a
    t :may ~~~,~, ~~t out of character for me to ciated-as I think all han. members of the
    ~ ;,~ke_,the"Qt"l\~r side for a moment; but despite house did-the way in which the han. member
    I the '-shortcomings of the law, the way it has for Kamloops (Mr. 'Fulton) approached this
    'I' }?~e~,y;rrii€m:ang, the way it has been phrased, question this afternoon. I ar;n sure we all
    ! At ~~~ms _~9,;p1e ~hat to make the number of agree with him that H does not matter what
    [ chan'ges that are being made in this legisla- anyone else may have said about these
    j tion, withqut careful and thorough examina- questions) the rights _of labour, and civil
    'I ~i,?~' ,of -~t; '-'vpu!~ 'not be wi,se or responsible liberties; it does not matter that criticisms
    acbon -on' our -part. have been levelled against these sections in
    t r:,')i-maY",bi(;that' everyone of these changes this bill by people whose motives we may
    ! ¢i:)i")Je det~~~e_d, but let us not rush into not trust; surely if we think these restrictive
    : 1. ", Tl:\ere_ is 'an atmosphere of fear and sections are wrong) it is our right and our
    \ ~:~iety ,abi'?ad toda!; and sometimes there duty to say so) and it is our privilege to
    'IS undue pressure, It seems to me'l to try say so without any charge of association being'
    I, to deal with things by suddenly changing applied against the han. member for Kam-
    the '"law" arid making the punishment more loops or any of the others of us who may
    severe. All ;of 'this is exceedingly important. be concerned about legislation which seems
    I', Would ,suggest that it would be far better to impose restrictions on the rights of citizens
    "to -' take -considerable time to go over this which are contrary to the principles of
    r-legislation with respect to its codification and democracy.
    its legal aspects and produce a good bill,

    ! o. ne that i~,_really satisfactory, rather than


    just to have the satisfaction the minister
    1rn~ght "like" to experience of getting the
    I~egislat~on "through and getting it on the
    As I said a few moments ago-and we aU
    recognize it-there is in the atmosphere of
    this day and ag-e quite an element 'of fear.
    We know whence that fear comes, and there
    t st.atute "books. is no point in trying to deny that it is there.
    Most of us can remember the days in the
    F),j~· R.rroll: May I ask the hon. gentleman early part of this century when we thought
    t~ q~e~_tlpnf .What ~vas the particular crime freedom and democracy were on the march,
    lt9: ,yt"hiqh ,hE! ',n:i,ade reference, as to which a and it was just a matter of time until their
    ;crl;1!l,I).g~" 'JVa~,-l!!-flde :in the punishment some glory would spread and -cover the entire
    fY:fi!:~!i ~go }t,~ld another change is made in earth. We have seen quite a reversal of that

    !
    1I>~presellt legislation? trend in the la'st few decades, and we ' live
    today in the fear that we might lose some
    , '. Mr. Knowles: ~I believe that is in the sec-
    ho~s 'dea~~ with treason, but I am not of the freedoms which were won in the nine-
    teenth century, and which were cherished by

    1
    9~1te sure. If I can find my notes ort that
    'Point;lso my ans\ver may be correct, I should our forefathers at that time.
    be.glad ·to:do so, . . r thipk it is still true that many of us in
    :Il:',~~~:~(~_n. ,_~e"m,l?,er: -Try' the other pocket.
    this place regard as some of the greatest
    speeches of the past that w-e like to read
    ",,:(;M~. K:nQWl~s:- It ~s section 62 which deals the speeches that dwelt on that same theme
    1V{1!b, secjltion, I ,did not have quite the right of the freedoms that had been won and how
    fi
    9;'<:!I' ->:I~ .. _-~951, the penalty was increased important those freedoms are'to us. We get
    f"t;9.n1"{W9 ye"~rs to seven years; and by this the occasional uplift of that kind today. I was
    1290 HOUSE OF COMMONS
    CriminaL Code
    particularly interested in a speech by Mr, that there are certain things which are liable
    Churchill not many months ago' whet:t there to punishment if they are likely-with
    was a discussion in the British House of emphasis on the. word "likely"-to be preju-
    Commons with respect to free speech as it dicial to the saiety of Canada. We feel that
    applied to a certain person in that country, is a place where the word "likely" should be
    Mr. Churchill stood up in true loyalty to the taken out. and some other word put in that
    belief in freedom that is so characteristic of would convey the quality of intent to be
    that little island, and insisted that freedom prejudicial to the safety of Canada.
    was for everybody if we believed in .it at all, Mr. Garson: Will the hon. member permit a
    including the particular person who was question?
    being discussed at that time. And I insist,
    agreeing as I do with what Mr. Churchill said Mr. Knowles: Yes.
    on that occasion, that we must not lose con~ Mr. Garson: Will he not agree that its
    fidence in democracy's capacity to tolerate inclusion in the section dealing with treason
    free speech. in itself would require the proof of mens rea?
    It is not often, Mr. Speaker, that I feel it An hon. Member: Explain.
    is appropriate to use the word "sacredll in
    application to politic'al concepts. But when we Mr. Knowles: I am not perplexed by the
    are talking about freedoms we are talking minister's use of Latin; I am perplexed by'
    about something that is really sacred, and his suggestion that if it were in the section
    in -my view we must be careful not to hedge on treason it would make a difference. It has
    the old sacred freedoms with 'restrictions been taken out of the section on treason, has.
    born of fear and capable of costing us the it not, and put in section 50 rather than in
    very freedoms we are seeking to protect. section 46 where it was before?
    In the light of that affirmation of faith in Mr. Garson: I understood my han. friend
    democracy and in the principle- of freedom, I was complaining about it having been put
    want to suggest that in our view there are in the section on treason in the first place.
    some provisions in this legislation that need At least when it is in the section on ·treason.
    to be looked at very closely by the com- it is necessary to prove intentl and if my hon ..
    mittee. My view that they should be looked friend says that is what he wants l I would
    at closely is I think borne out by the fact point out that is what he had at the begin-
    that some of them were looked at very ning.
    closely by Their Honours in the other place; Mr. Knowles: Mr. Speaker, this is one of
    and in some instances they made changes the things we can go into in committee. Per-
    which· in my view definitely improved the haps we are misunderstanding each other,.
    legislation. In this instance I take my hat off or it could readily be that I am lacking in
    to Their Honours, at whom I sometimes make legal training, but my point was that it has
    cracks. been taken out of-
    Despite the improvements they have made, Mr. Riley: What an admission!
    there are still sections of the bill which we
    feel should be looked at very carefully. There Mr. Knowles: Everyone says it is obvious,.
    is a provision dealing with prohibited acts, and everyone knows it. But this subsection
    to which. the Minister of Justice (Mr. Garson) has been taken out of section 46 and put in
    referred this afternoon when he pointed out section 50. One of the points we should go-
    that a clause which formerly was in the into is the question as to what happened to
    section under treason, where it was punish- this very point in the Senate 90mmittee. r
    able by death, had been moved down into have no doubt that the argument made
    a section headed: "Prohibited acts" where by the Minister of Justice was made ovel'"
    the punishment would be less severe. I was there l and I have no doubt that the argu-
    glad that he was &ble to point out that that ment I am making was made over there,.
    change had been m'ade; but I would point out even if in more legalistic terms.
    that in that section, even in the new place Mr. Riley: You are circling now.
    where it has been put, there still appears the
    word "likely", where it seems to me you Mr. Knowles: No, I am hying to convince
    ought to put words to indicate the quality of my han. friend that we have a point here
    intent. We cannot discuss the details of that has to be gone into by our committe~
    sections of the bill on this occasion, but without our being told that this has been
    perhaps I may ·be permitted to go as far as dealt with before by the commission or by
    the Minister of Justice went and say that the Senate. I have looked at it pretty care-
    what we do not'like about that section under fully; I have some friends who are lawyers;
    prohibited acts is that the wording suggests I have discussed the matter with them, and
    [Mr. Knowles.1

    I
    I
    JANUARY 23. 1953 1291
    CriminaL Code
    at this moment I am persuaded that the qual- that kind and increase the penalties, I sug-
    ity of the ,intent should be included in that gest that you put into the hands of those
    'section. . who are hostile to labour-and we may as
    Similarly; ·Mr. Speaker, there is a section well admit that there are such still in the
    that -happens to be numbered 52-but we are country-a weapon that they can use to the
    not supposed to refer to sections-dealing detriment of organized labour in particular.
    · 'with -sabotage. It was section 49 of. the bill Mr. Macdonnell (Greenwood): Mr, Speaker,
    when it was first introduced into the other on a point of order) I probably shall not
    j: plhce. This is a section which it seems to us I
    have another opportunity to question the
    could be used as an anti-strike weapon. The hon. member for Winnipeg North Centre, but I
    i ,minister shakes his head. The minister may is he entitled to discuss all these sections
    I
    Lbe right, but there are a lot of people who in detail at this time? I
    I · do not agree with him. There are many
    -people who feel that this could be used as
    "~m .at:it~-strike weapon. We know the minis-
    Mr. Knowles: The point of order is well
    taken. The only trouble is -that it shOUld
    I

    f..ter will say here again that such actions as have been taken when the Minister of
    .. ter.,-fer~. nc. e.'With the movement .Of vehicles Justice was speaking this afternoon.

    !
    tn
    -and ,S9 on yvould have to be prejudicial to Mr. Speaker: If the point of order is well
    ;t~e safety and interest of Canada before it taken it will not be necessary for me to
    ·_collid be '8rought under the terms of this make a ruling.
    _llecti.on. But the point I wish to make is
    ,again paql1lel to a point that was made at Mr. Knowles: As I said myself before I
    ,the other -~nd of this building; that is, that . started referring to the sections, I shall
    :;~he wO?:,d "interests" still appears there. That just refer to the provisions. The Minister
    : .'~!'!c-tion, by the way, was improved in the other of Justice recognizes) and we all have recog-
    , place. -They put in the quality of intent but nized it in discussing this same legislation
    -_they leftJn -the word uinterests". The safety every year, that it is pretty difficult to talk
    :<?f Canad~ is something that we can all under- about the principle of this kind of legisla-
    : stand and ~here is no quarrel with that part tion without talking about the things it does.
    _,of ,the sectIon; but as one of Their Honours Mr. Browne (St. John's West): Especially
    • in -the 6~her' place pointed out in relation a code.
    ,to anothe):," section, when you talk about the
    _ int~rest~ o~, :~anflda you bring in things of an Mr. Knowles: As the hon. member for
    ,}:!conomic nat,ure. In my view there is real St. John's West says, especially when you
    ;-,daI?-ger,:' ()~ ,this being an anti-strike weapon. are dealing with the Criminal Code which
    _~We ,f!,!el'tl'!!l:t this section, formerly section 49 contains so many provisions. However, my
    )mt npw s.~c-Von 52, is one that must be time is just about up and the points I wanted
    _109k~d a,t'most carefully. I hope there will to deal with are just about exhausted, but
    ~jbe, ,compl~te freedom and abundant liberty there is one other I shOUld like to refer
    }~r the ~~-1;:lour organizations of this country to to. Another provision in this legislation
    'appear if they v.,iish to do so, and I know they deals with what is termed mischief. As a
    i do, before the committee to state their views matter of fact, we think that the section
    " with respect to this section. itself is mischievous. It deals with obstruct-
    ing the use of property. Here again \Ve
    :'a-'Sini.i~~~IY, ,I-'believe labour would like to feel there is something that could be used

    l
    i~
    ,)l:Img '~~fo~.e
    .'•..P.p..e...ar-to ..-~ay' .th.e
    ,about.committee and of
    the breach have some-
    contract as an anti-strike proviSion, which is contrary
    to the provisions of the Industrial Rela-
    ,:P.ro.vi.~,ions -in section 365. Here again I
    _!an~lclpate ,that the minister will probably tions and Disputes Investigation Act and to
    ~h~ke_ his ~ead from right to left but there court decis'ions which have upheld the right
    ! s a 'feelin~ at?- the part of labou~ that this
    to strike and the right to peaceful picketing.
    f.~ay_ be' an -,ailti~strike provision despite the That is section 372; and I shall not mention
    any more sections.
    h'e~t t~at, We '~a.ve other legislation which
    h:on~1n.lzes t~e strike; weapon under certain I hope I have demonstrate&- the main point
    ~thi - tto~s. ,1 suggest that there is some- I wanted to make, that this legislation is
    (m n~ n~w ,in ,this section 365, despite the extremely important because it covers so
    ,w imster s statement earlier today that there many subjects. Despite the fact that it may
    ;pr~~~in~ desire -to effect changes in broad be a good idea to bring the code up to date
    .,p e., , to revise and codify it, there are still thes~
    .
    :~-:l! ~o, far ,as, y'o4_ can relate this to o~her
    leoOVt'd/)lons i,n ,the ,code, there has been a
    aspects which make it necessary for the
    committe~ to do a thorough job on it, So
    ,.,,1;Uj erable-incr . th e penalty involved, far as we are concerned we are prepared to
    If 0 ' .', ' ease m listen in committee' and again in the house
    Y u make more stringent provisions of to all the legal arguments that can be
    1292 HOUSE OF COMMONS
    Criminal Code
    advanced with respect to the matters at doubly certain that we do not unnecessarily
    stake. But I want to say clearly that we abridge the rights and principles of the
    will urge the importance of the three or Canadian people. At the same time we should
    four points I spoke about in the earlier part realize that we are living in a day when there
    of my remarks. Furthermore, when it comes are many _people who are all too ready to
    to things that are basic, when it comes to abuse the privileges and liberties they enjoy.
    the concept of freedom, we will oppose with Unfortunately that is so, and I am afraid that
    all the vigour ,ve possess any sections of it becomes more so the further we get from
    the bill which in Ollr view curtail the rights the great struggle which our fathers made
    of labour or in any way impinge upon or to win th,ese freedoms for us. As a conse-
    diminish the established liberties of democ- quence we simply must have law with teeth
    racy. in it so we can protect the rights and liberties
    Mr. Solon E. Low (Peace River): Mr. Chair- of all the people;
    man, I do not think it will be necessary at In my judgment we have to look at both
    this stage to enter into any lengthy discus- sides of these cases. ~et me take, for example,
    sion Of this bill respecting the criminal law, the case that was raIsed by the hon. member
    because the minister has indicated already for Winnipeg 'North C.entre (Mr. Knowles).
    that it is to be referred to a small committee When we talk of the liberties, rights and
    of this house for careful study and report privileges of the labouring people, with which
    back to the house. I thoroughly agree} at the same time we have
    It is not my intention at this stage to ,enterto consider the rights, privileges and liber-
    into a discussion of the individual provisions ties of those people who are hirers of'labour.
    of the bill. If I did so I would clearly be out These things must be fair. They must be
    of order, as has been admitted already by just to both sides, and in our studies let us
    the hon. member for Winnipeg North Centre make sure that the law that is laid down
    (Mr. Knowles) and the hon. member for extends justice to all parties in the land. I
    Greenwood (Mr. Macdonnell). As a matter of am more concerned about those things than
    fact I would feel hesitant at this stage to r am about some of these other things that
    enter into a discussion of the specific pro- have been mentioned.
    visio::1s of the bill because I consider it to We think it was wise to omit most of these
    be foundation law, and I feel I will know mandatory minimum sentenGes that are pre-
    more about it when the committee has scribed in the present Criminal Code. But
    finished its studies. I will be in a better having said that, r think it may be estab-
    -position to di-scuss with something like lished-I am not going to say that it can be
    authority the provisions of the bill when it but it may be-that there have been
    is referred to the committee of the whole altogether too many unnecessary increases
    house. So I shall resist any temptation to in maximum penalties. I am not going to
    discuss the individual provisions. criticize at this stage because I have not
    yet been convinced that that is so, but that
    r find myself in thorough agreement with fact may be established as a consequence
    the principle of the bill as expressed this of our careful study.
    afternoon by the Minh:;ter of Justice (Mr.
    Garson). As a consequence of a study of this r am going to take the same position that
    monumental work I have wondered whether was taken by the hon. member for Kamloops
    the bill continues to adhere closely to the (Mr. Fulton) this afternoon. I thought it was
    principle that was laid down. While it was a good pointJ and I be~ieve it would be well
    the, definite purpose of the committee which for all of us to approach the study of the bill
    worked on it for so long to produce a simple to amend the Criminal' Code with this thought
    modification of the Criminal Code rather than in mind. No matter who has said what
    -to change any broad principles, I am wonder- about it, we should' b.e prepared to take a'
    Jng if in some cases th.ere has not peen what careful look at all opinions that have been
    could be calle.d extensions of the law that expressed with regard to it, and certainly
    _may have the result of affecting seriously no one should have the right to C;lll anybody
    fundamental principles and liberties of the else a communist Qr a communist sympathizer
    ·Canadian people. Many Canadians w"ho have simply because he may say something that the
    ,given this careful s,tudy believe that to be so. communists have already said.
    When we come to the committee stage we Having said thatJ I want to assure the
    ought to give the most careful consideration minister that we are prepared to support the
    . to the claims of these people and take plenty bill being sent' to a committeeJ and we are
    of time to. study their· claims, as against the prepared to accept our responsibilities in
    _study that has been made by the hon. memw the committee to give it a thorough and comw
    bers of the othelt place. We should make petent study.
    [Mr. Knowles.]
    JANUARY 23, 1953 1293
    Criminal Code
    ':-.Mr. -G. C. Nowlan (Annapolis-Kings): Mr. of politics, but that is not necessarily true
    Speaker, the minister has already stated that of those who come from the rest of Canada.
    it 'is his intention to refer this matter to a ~ There are many lawyers in the house who
    committee _and, as the hon. member for I think would like to make some contribution
    Peace River (Mr. Low) has just stated, I am to this committee. Perhaps their contribution
    sure there is no one here who will question the would not be great but at least they would
    . advisability of that action. However, tonight have an opportunity of expressing their views
    Lw~s i,;okin~ Oyer the list of standinK com- and possibly giving some of their experience.
    inlitees . -of .the house, and I was rather If the matter is referred to a small committee
    iropress~4 with. the fact that we have no of the house, then I am afraid the minister
    standing committee to which such legislation may not save as much time as he would like
    can Qe·:~ent.. t 1:tnow the Minister of Justice in dealing with this very bulky and most
    (Mr.· Garson) is a modest man who is carrying important legislation, because certainly when
    o'ut" his duties i,n accordance with the consti- it comes back to the house there will be
    t~ti(n(o_f ,the' country, but perhaps he does many who will want to deal with it clause
    not, appreciate the fact that as Attorney by clause and section by section and express
    g'e#¢ral pi Gilriada and as Minister of Jl,lstice their own views, which possibly would not
    of this country, by virtue of his position and be the case if the committee were larger. It
    thir 'ma,tters -with which he deals, he is has been whispered privately-and when I
    a'c\uallY ,the· second man in the government say Hprivately" I do so with no opprobrium
    of -'¢anada. t. . -by the minister in discussions with various
    ,.·\Wh~.~,. you ~ook over the standing commit- members of the house that the committee
    t.e~s of Jlle H;ouse of Commons you see that we
    might be of a size which I frankly think
    ~~v'~ 'a, ·~6.IP~,i~t.~e ~)ll a restaurant, we have a is too small if it is to deal expeditiously
    with the matter and accomplish the results
    ; «9.mmit~~e on ~lections and privileges which which he would like to see accompUshed J
    . ~<l:y ',sit;Wlc~)n ~wenty years, and we have a namely a fairly detailed and comprehensive
    1,~~innUttee qn" a l~brary. Yet we have no
    (committee 'on~justice to which fundamental discussion in the committee. Then the house
    could deal with it much more expeditiously
    :\ ~~t~er~ ~lifC~":is this may be referred. One than would otherwise :be the case.
    ~ S9tn~times. wonders if there should not be a
    :: fifr~her ·~~e~ro.nent of the rules of the house, So much for the general suggestion as
    i: 1?ecau~e ;,today there certainly should be a to the reference of the measure to a com~
    mittee. I simply want to reiterate what was
    ,.stiinc!ing"committee to which this and kindred
    ¥l~giSl<itiori":cotild be sent. There was a time mentioned by the han. member for Kamloops
    r,~ ',Vh:~~ ili~ ,))b~~VOli ~f minister of justice in this afternoon. There are many phases of·
    (,a~rus~erlUg:'R few general statute laws the bill which one could questioll--'I ·will ,not
    ,~~was stich that,' although he had a most respon-
    say quarrel with-if one were going to deal
    ',~.~ible ;.positiort, it Was kept within rather with them in detail. However, that is not
    {fnarrow.:confines. Today we see it in every the purpose of this debate and I do not
    ~Ph~se.of·..our.<lives, and I do think that when
    propose to do so. But very obviously from
    :~leglSlation such as this comes before the house a reading of the report of the commissioners
    ':we.: shOuld rhave a standing committee to and of the general bill there is, as was
    ;"whJch such matters can be referred. stated this afternoon, a further curtailment
    . IIi ;the abs~nce of that, Mr. Speaker, I do 01 the right of trial by jury If this bili Is
    ~,thlnk the, cOIl.1l1):ittee to which the bill is adopted in its present form.
    ;,~e~er~ed ~sl].ould be fairly large. We have A few moments ago the hon. member for
    :: ..ere. ,v~pous. members who are qualified to Winnipeg North Centre referred to the rights
    \,Slt. on 'su~;h ,a committee. We have the of labour and expressed the fear that they
    ;,hon. me:m~e:r; ,for Winnipeg North Centre (Mr. would be curtailed. Frankly I am' no more
    bKnowles), ,\Yh.ose modesty prevents him from
    ~'dmltting that· he Is one of the outstanding interested in the rights of labour than I
    .;~ awy~rs of this house though we all recognize am in the rights of farmers or fishermen .
    ;!he lega, Ci":lalities whri~h the hon. gentleman What I think we are concerned with are the
    (~o~ses~es.. We have in the house tonight rights of Canadian citizens J and I do suggest
    i!, gent~eman. who for many years was one that any curtailment of the right of trial by
    ~?f the butstanding jurists in eastern Canada jury in this day and age is a dangerous
    til~d who presided over mc;,my criminal trials infringement upon our rights which we should
    !ilth fairness and ability. I know because scrutinize most carefully. It is true that if
    ~ppe~red before him on many oc casions. the rules permitted, and if one were going
    ~; Mr~ Siic.k: I,n what capacity did you appear? to deal with the sections in detail, one would
    1;' Mr. NOWlan: Coming from Ne\vfoundland probably find that the absolute jurisdiction
    r y fr~end will immediately suspect a case
    t 68108-83
    conferred upon .magistrates is only increased
    1294 HOUSE OF COMMONS
    Criminal Code
    in one or two cases, perhaps in cases of be imposed upon them. There are many cases
    receiving stolen goods up to a value of $50 where a sentence of one day may be fatal·
    or something like that. , to a person. It is not the extent of the gen-
    One may say, why bother about a matter tence with which many of these accused are
    such as. that; but I wonder how many here concerned, it is the fact that they are con-
    have tned cases in a magistrate's cour.t. I vieted at all.
    wonder if the Minister of Justice, who has 'Without embarking on other fields outside
    been removed from active practice for some the. scope of this debate, if a man is convicted
    years, realizes the atmosphere which per-
    tains rtoday in provincial magistrates' courts and sentenced for one day, one month or
    where you perhaps have a docket of 30, 40 or six months, and is obliged to serve that
    50 cases in the morning. Some of them are sentence in jails such as are provided by
    simple drunks. Some of ,them are for municipalities in many parts of Canada today,
    offences under the game act. Some of them then I say that is a dire punishment indeed.
    are for offences under the motor vehicles It is one matter which I think probably
    act. Some of, them are minor infringements should be dealt with by a committee on
    of the Criminal Code. justice. The whole administration of justice,
    You spend an hour or two taking the pleas the enforcement of the law and enactment
    of guilty, and then you start back on those of law.s, and the whole question of punish-
    cases who wish to plead not guilty. Some ment and the question of our jails and the
    poor lawyer has to defend_ them before a use of them should be dealt with by a com-
    magistrate who is harried and rushed, and mitt-ee of this house.
    who probably has to appear in some other So without taking fUrther time now, Mr.
    court fifty miles away at half past two that Speaker, I do want to say that when this
    afternoon. Those are the conditions under matter is befor,e this house again, or in com-
    which magistrates operate and I say, sir, mittee, I personally want to make many
    that it is unfair to them to increase their criticisms of the special sections; and I am
    absolute 'jurisdiction one iota. going to continue to insist that there should
    If a prisoner wishes to elect to be tried be no abridgement of the right of trial by
    before a magistrate and the magistrate can jury. It should be extended rather than·
    find the time to try him, well and good; but abridged. These are fundamental rights which
    let 'us not impose -on these overworked are guaranteed by practices which have gone
    magistpates any heavier burden than they on through the centuries, and they should not
    have at the moment. I can tell you, speaking be interfered with by this special statute
    at least of the magistrates in my own prov- which, as we all know, is to some extent an
    ince, for whom I have the greatest rEspect, infringement or alteration of the old English
    who are men of real ability and who do the common law on criminal practice which has
    best job they can, tha~ it is impossible for grown up through the centuries.
    them to carry the load they have now with- Mr. J. L. MacDougall (VancouverRBurrardl:
    out imposing anything further on them. It was not my intention to enter this debate
    As I said, you can forget the mechanics of and, first of all, may I explain that I am not
    the situation and go beyond the atmosphere of a lawyer. But I dare say I am as good a
    the courtroom; and why should the right :to lawyer as my good and honourable friend
    jury trial be curtailed on the part of anyone- from Winnipeg North Centre (Mr. Knowles).
    whether it is for theft of $50 or of 25 cents.
    In these days and times when- pressure of Mr. Knowles: A Q.C. for you.
    all kinds is mounting, when you have sus- Mr. MacDougall: Down in the ·maritime
    picion and distrust of the power of govern- provinces they have a term they apply to
    ment-and I am not saying this at all a non-lawyer who tries to speak as a lawyer.
    politically-there is this one fundamental They call him a seafaring lawyer, I think.
    safeguard of the liberty of every Canadian Well, I am not even a seafaring or sea-going
    citizen. It is his or her .right to appear before lawyer-a sea lawyer; I am corrected. How-
    twelve good men and true, 'Or women as the ever, in my opinion there is something to
    case may be, and have the case tried before be said by han, gentlemen in this house at
    them. this time in connection with this tremendous
    I deprecate any enactment which will -in job of revising the Criminal Code. I think
    the slightest degree infringe upon that funda- there are something like 477 clauses.
    mental safeguard, It is true that somebody Mr. Fulton: -There are 700.
    will say that if persons are tried absolutely
    Mr. MacDougall: Seven hundred and forty-
    before a magistrate ,they are very fortunate four. Well, there are' a lot of clauses but I
    because they can only receive a maximum am not going to deal with them individually ~
    sentence of six months; that is all that can you may rest assured.
    [Mr. NOWlan.}
    JANUARY 23, 1953 1295
    Crimina~ Code
    ~There - are a couple of surprising aspects committeel the committee hearing is not
    'about this report l to me at least. Despi:e going to result in a repetition of the principle
    the fact that there has been an increase In of stare decisis. If it is, it is going to be too
    crime a.cross the Dominion of Canada~ we bad for the amendments to the Criminal Code.
    have some hon. members of this house saying r will admit that the members of that com-
    that. we should be more lax in our punish~ mittee should be clever jurists. The han .
    . ment of· crime. Although I have not the member for Annapolis-Kings (Mr. Nowlan)
    Iltlmber of it before me, I recall the clause on spoke about poor lawyers. I hope he was
    treason. The penalty there has been increased referring to them in a monetary sense rather
    considerably, and I want to deal with that than in a qualitative sense.
    for a moment. If in this country we are
    to continue a virile democracy, the harder Mr. Fulton: I do not think he mentioned
    parli~rp.entJ through the enactment of amend- poor lawyers.
    ments to the Criminal CodeJ cracks down on Mr. MacDougall: He said "poor lawyers";
    treason the better for the people of Canada. you read it. The point is that we want to do
    We ,.hear a lot about sabotage in various the best possible job on these 'amendments
    countries of the world today and there are to the Criminal Code. We must always keep
    a lot: of .people in this country-r hope not in mind the fact that some of the country's out~
    too' many, but I think r am on safe ground standing jurists gave these revisions a great
    to ~ay 'a few thousand-who are determined deal of thought over approximately a two~
    to ~1ter', the government of this country not yea:r period. The members of the other place
    J>Y ,the votes of the electors but by force. d·id likewise. r only ask that weI as members
    r have had and r am' sure a great number of this house and of that -committee, give
    of members have had communications from these amendments equally sound thought. We
    the .C<;!,nadian peace congress. Strangely shoUld keep constantly in our minds that what
    ~ enough, .no matter where those letters come we are trying to devise is something that is
    ( from~nd I have received them from pretty going to be of specific benefit to the Canadian
    j well. all' over western Canada and certainly people as a whole, not one class or on~ group
    ~" all over the province of British Columbia- within the community.
    ~ they. :list the sanie clauses and this is the Finally, I may say, with respect to the
    ~ number one that is complained of as whole set-up of the revision of th-e Criminal
    l anathema to democracy. If we take them Code, that unless we are determined· to
    f , too "s>eriollsly I think we are going to run
    tighten the sections -concerning treason and
    ) ourselves into a great deal of trouble be- sabotage, and all those related matters, in
    ~ <ra~!,~. in this modern, scientific era there is :my opinion as members of this House of
    ~ s~c~.~ thing as a thermal bomb. A few
    Commons we are falling down on our job.
    t,; peQple, un~emocratic in their views of gov- r hope that is one thing that will -come out of
    ~~ e~'l?IJlentl . could do a terrific amount of
    t qatn,age to the economy and welfare of
    tp.e Dominion of Canada through the use of
    the discussions in the committee. It is almost
    axiomatic, Mr. Speaker, that if we allow free-
    ; ~. few thermal bombs. dom to be undermined in any part of Canada
    t through laxity in our law, then our liberty is
    ',;1 do not t'hink my han. friend from Green- a farce.
    ~- wood (Mr. MacdonneW was laughing at me
    f
    ' when he laughed just now, because what I Mr. H. W. Herridge (Koo.tenay Wes.t): I wish
    say is quite factual. Those bombs do not to make some observations on this rather
    ,need .to -'be any larger than your fountain mammoth document of 294 pages, Mr. Speaker.
    ti ". pe~, and ten or twelve of them thrown along t can assure you that I shall be quite brief,
    : t!le railroad tracks going through the Fraser because 1 think the member for Winnipeg
    can-foUl' .for instance, would completely North Centre dealt quite effectively with this
    j:se:v:er ra,il ·t;!0m.munications between the .At- subject, particularly with our concern and the
    ".l8.l:ltiC. aud P~clfic oceans. T'. hese are serrous
    con-cern of many others over certain sections
    : &Spepts. of our amendments to the Criminal in this bilI. I must say that I enjoyed the
    Code. • . speech delivered by the member for Kam-
    :. In so far as the amended clause with loops (Mr. Fulton) this afternoon. I thought
    -respect ,to treason is concer~ed, I would say he made a most thoughtful contribution to
    \ ,t~at as originally drafted ft was not suffi- this d,ebate.
    t'Clently specific. With respect to that aspect, Since this bill has come to public notice as
    L~nd that aspect .onlYI 1 believe the gentlemen a result of a draft copy being made public
    [,Ill the other place were quite right in their early last summer, there has been consider-
    ~fImen(;hnent. In the final analysis we, as able interest in -certain sections of the bill.
    rrepreseq.tat~ves of the Canadian people l ought Since that time it has been given close scru-
    F,10 be yery careful that when this bill goes to tiny by a large number of trade union groups
    ! 68108-83,
    1296 . HOUSE OF COMMONS
    Criminal Code
    in this country, by gentlemen of the legal pro- Labour Congress of Canada, from indepen-
    fession, and I might say, Mr. Speaker, by the dent unions, and even from quite small groups
    C.C.F. group in this house and others who of· eIl).ployees organized on a local basis. In
    belong to it outside of this house. According addition, I have received communications
    to parliamentary practice we are only per- from other groups in the community, groups
    mitted to discuss the principle of the bill on interested in civil liberties, women's groups
    second reading. There are, however, sections and so on. I have noticed in my own con-
    of this bill of serious concern to the people in stituency that quite a number of the gentle-
    the groups I have mentioned, who consider men of the legal profession are most interested
    they are a violation of traditional civil liber- in this bill. In fact I was asked to send
    ties and traditional trade union rights. I several copies of this bill to members of
    think the speaker who just preceded me made the legal profession in my own constituency.
    some references which indicated .that there At this point I might say that I was inter-
    may be irresponsible people taking exception ested in what the hon. member for Winni-
    to some sections of this bill. peg North Centre had to say when he was
    To illustrate the concern of the labour making reference to the legal profession.
    movement, I am going to place on record a As a rancher, one of those who make their
    letter sent by the secretary of the Canadian living from the soil and the forests, I will
    Congress of Labour to the secretaries of freely admit that years ago I used 11;0 have
    affiliated and chartered local unions, l?bour .a so:t;newhat sceptical approach to the legal
    councils, federations of labour and repre- profession because, on occasion, I had found
    sentatives of the congress, concerning this that it was quite- expensive to have dealings
    bill. This letter is dated November 25, 1952, with that profession: I will, however, say
    this. Since being a member of the legislature
    and reads: of British Columbia and a member of this
    Greetings:
    house, I have come to the conclusion that
    The congress has received a number of inquiries the great majority of the people of Canada
    about Bill H-S. .
    do not realize what a great deal they owe
    Of course, it is now Bill O. to the legal profession, having regard to
    This was a bill to revise the Criminal Code, sub- their interest in civil liberties, the traditional
    mitted to the Senate at the last session of parUa- right-s of Canadians and that sort of thing. I
    ment. It was a bill of 744 sections, running to 294 have always noted that, regardless ·of party,
    pages of. type.
    The congress officers studied it, and referred it to they take a keen interest in this type of
    the congress legal adviser; and the congress would legislation.
    have made representations on certain sections if it
    had not become clear that there was no chance As I said before, I have had a number
    of the bill passing last session. Actually, it never of lawyers in my constituency ask me for
    . even got to the House of Commons. copies of the bill, express quite severe
    During the summer, the congress was in touch criticism of certain sections of it, and promise
    with the government on the matter. The govern- to write me at length when they had an
    ment said that the bill would be reintroduced at
    the present session, and would be referred to a opportunity to study the latest draft of the
    special parliamentary committee, before which latest bill which is Bill O. I have had
    everyone interested would have ample opportunity responsible businessmen in the constituency
    to appear and make representations. The bill is I represent write me at length and ask for
    in fact, so long, so elaborate, and so important,
    both to ordinary citizens and to the legal profes- copies of the bill. They have given it some
    sion, that this course is inescapable. The bill just consideration and have expressed their objec--
    cannot be rushed through; every lawyer in parlia- tion to certain sections included- in it.
    ment will insist on a most minute examination.
    The moment the new bill is printed. the congress In addition to that I have received in the
    also will subject it to a most minute examination, neighbourhood of one thousand communi-
    with the assistance of the congress legal adviser. cations. On one hundred of these communi-
    When it has done so, it_ will make prompt and full cations I notice the signatures of men who
    representations to the parliamentary committee, to
    parliament and to the: government, on any and have served this country in either the first
    every provision of the bill whIch appears to be in or the second world war. I therefore do
    any way dangerous either to the rights of unions not think it is quite correct for the hon.
    or to the civil liberties of ordinary citizens.
    member who spoke previously to me to sug-
    Yours fraternally,
    gest-if I heard him correctly-that people
    Donald Ma-cDonald,
    Secretary-Treasurer. who take objection to some sections of this
    bill are not entirely responsible or· are not
    Now, Mr. Speaker, that was a letter too greatly concerned about the welfare of
    addressed to the local unions of the congress, this country.
    and it shows concern over certain sections I am not going to deal with the various
    of this bill. I have received correspondence sections of the bill, Mr. Speaker; in fact, I
    from unions affiliated with the Trades and do not think I am capable of, shall I say,
    [1!r. Herridge.}

    I
    JANUARY 23, 1953 1297
    Criminal Code
    getting away with it as well as did the hon, As I said before, Mr. Speaker, this com-
    member for Winnipeg North Centre when mittee has an exceedingly important and
    he dealt with them. r heartily support the serious task to perform at this time
    criticisms be brought forward concerning in connection with this bill. I trust that
    certain sections, as we all do in this group. it will give every consideration to the repre-
    We."we~e .rather delighted to se~ ~hat he sentations that are made to it and that it
    , followed .the example of the Mmlster of will make certain thatl when the bill is
    J1.1stice (Mr. Garson) in so doing. returned to the house, it will recommend
    '.' iW~. in this group were glad when, last amendments, a'S necessary, to remove -any
    -session, in reply to a question by the hon.
    suggestion "uhat there is a violation of the
    member for 'Winnipeg North Centre, the tradLtional ciV1il liberties or traditional trade
    Minister of Justice said that this bill would
    unio-n rights.
    be referred to a committee. We believe Mr. J. M. Macdonnell (Greenwood): Mr,
    tha't ,hi' an excellent practice. It is impossible Speaker, I have a few observations to make
    tt'd,eal with a tremendous bill of this sort- on this measure; but before doing so I just
    bile -that is full of technicalities, legal phrases want to follow throughl as it were on two
    j

    arid .~ that sort of thing-in the House of things which have been said by others.
    Commons in debate or actually in the House In the first place I should like to join
    of Commons in committee of the whole. This with those who have suggested that they
    j

    cbmnrlttee" will" have a great and important view the task 'of the committee as a most
    task." , I tr"~stl Mr. Speaker,' that it will be a important and onerous one and who believe
    committee: of sufficient size and not just a its numbers might be increased. I know that
    small cohllnittee composed only of legal ordinarily one is inclined to think a small
    expertsl with a few members from aU parties committee is better than a large one. But
    ih""this house. I hope it will be a substantial having regard to the magnitude of this task,
    and representative committee of this House and having regard to the fact thatl for inevit-
    of COh)mons with members on it represent- able reasons, member,'> are obliged from time
    j

    irig "varhms points of viewl various profes- to time to be absent, I think it is worth while
    sions'" and trade.s, and so on. There is no to have a larger committee.
    ""que?"tion about itl the important work on The second thing I should like to say is
    this' ;bill so far as the House of Commons is by way of comment on what the hon. member
    j

    concerned, will be done by the committee to for Annapolis-Kings (Mr. Nowlan) said with
    Which it ,is referred at the conclusion of this regard to trial by jury. I "remember reading
    debate. ..That committee will have the a statement years ago by that great English
    op·portunity to hear representations from lawyer, F. E. Smith as he was originally
    trade ""unions-and I am sure a good number and who was subsequently Lord Birkenhead.
    of ",them will make representations-and He was a man who, I suppose had pleaded
    j '

    -othel,' groups. in scores-perhaps even in p.undreds-Qf jury


    i{- "In that" connection I should like to make trials. He spoke about the British jury and
    a'poirit. ,I have answered dozens and dozens said tha tl in all the cases he had tried, there
    of letters about this bill, and I have made were only three in which he thought the
    it" a "p:a'tttcular point to draw to the attention jury had come to a wrong conclusion. He
    of "tp.e people who wrote me that Canada also said that in two of those cases he had
    ~s "a, 'deni'Ocracy~ that the minister had advised since come to the conclusion that it was
    Us that the bill would be referred to a not the jury that was wrong, but himself.
    c?mmittee, and that all representative groups" To me that was a tremendous endorsement of
    WoUld "ha v~ an oPP!?rtunity to express their this practice. It is easy to make fun of the
    point -of VIew, their objections to certain jury. A good deal of wit has been exercised
    sections and so on. at the expense of the jury; but there we have
    the opinion of a gl,"eat and experienceq
    '<-I "say: again that we are extremely pleased
    authority.
    that 'this bill is going before a committee. We
    1 should like to make one or two comments
    ~ope the committee will take plenty of time. on the measure itself. In the first place I was
    TI:ter~ "i~"ho need to hurry this matter through. utterly astounded to find how many people
    b the Opinion of this grpup it is far better are affected by the criminal la\v in this
    to. take two years before we finally adopt country. I could hardly believe my eyes when
    thIS" measure than it is to make one mistake I read the debate in the other place. Accord-
    t~at transgresses any tr~ditional Canadian ing to the figures given, there were 918,000
    clvil"UbertYI any of the rights of trade unions, convictions in the year 1948. That does not
    ~.r"any. of the freedoms and democratic facili- include the people who were tried and let
    les we have enjoyed to date and trust that off. Of course the great majority of those
    We shall continue to enjoy. convictions were for trivial offences, One
    1298 . HOUSE OF COMMONS
    Criminal Code
    does not want to create the impression that it was not accepted in toto. For example,
    the people of the country generally are in an, early Pennsylvania case I read the
    criminals. A great many of the offences following from the judgment:
    would perhaps be due to a little bit of The common law punishment of ducking (which
    excessive enthusiasm the night before, and was the punishment for the offence of being a com-
    we should not take them too seriously. But mon scold in England) was not received nor
    on the other hand it is a tremendous figure, embodied by usage, so as to become a part of the
    common law of Pennsylvania. It was rejected-
    and it makes one realize how close this
    legislation comes to the lives of a great many I understand that "scold" as used there
    people. means Hwife".
    On looking over the provincia,l records I Mr. Browne (St. John's West): It is
    read with some regret that my own province retained here especially.
    of Ontario has the unenviable pre-eminence
    of leading the Ust. The ratio to 1,000 of popu- Mr. Macdonnell (Greenwood): The hon.
    lation in Ontario was 147·4. For reasons that member says it is retained here especially.
    will be better known to the people of that That is a comfort; I did not know that.
    province than they are to me, Saskatchewan These things, are important to have in mind
    was at the bottom of the list with 29·2 per when one thinks of the difficulties in the
    1,000. I can only hope that we in Ontario United States due to this multiplicity of
    have this pre-eminence perhaps because of jurisdictions that has occurred. Any number
    superior energy which has to be let loose of undesirable pardons have been issued
    in one way or another. th~re by state governors. As I understand it,
    I was born and brought up in Kingston. you can work up such a lobby that it is
    We had many advantages in that city. We often easy to have the ends of justice
    had a penitentiary, an asylum and a uni- defeated. That leads one to pay tribute
    versity. I remember once walking past to the wisdom and the generosity of the
    the penitentiary ,where a very novel view framers of our constitution) because it meant
    of crime was presented to me, which I a good deal of giving up here and there
    do not endorse for one moment. I just pass to make concessions necessary to have a
    it on as the view of a whimsical man. As common criminal law, which has meant a
    we were walking past he pointed out the great deal to the development of juridical
    penitentiary and said that in there were life in this country.
    people- who possessed such energy that we There are one or two other comments I
    could not compete with them, so we con- wish to make. I should like to endorse
    spired to lock them up. That is not a view what my colleague, the hon. member for
    of crime that I wish the committee to take Kamloops,. has said on the subject of treason.
    into serious consideration, but it just When one thinks of treason, it is not so
    occurred to me as I was going along. many years ago that we thought of it as
    The other chief point I would like to make something that existed in funny far-off
    is what an amazing advantage it has been countries, where they did not know how to
    to us who live in this country that in the live together and where strange things hap~
    wisdom of the framers of confederation, pened, which of course could never happen
    in spite of what must have been great diffi- here. Well, since then things have changed.
    culties, we ended up with one criminal law; I imagine most of us have read that book
    whereas in the United States, and I read "It Can't Happen Here". I suppose that
    from volume 6 of the "Encyclopaedia everyone who read it had the same feeling
    Britannica", they have- I had, how easily it could happen ·anywhere
    For purposes of the administration of criminal if people became careless about the pro-
    justice each of the forty-eight states, and the fed- tection of their freedom.
    eral government, is a sovereign state with its own
    law, its own exclusive jurisdiction, its own judges The protection of freedom is not an easy
    and other officers of justice, its own system of thing, because there is a great temptation,
    penalties. .
    when we find freedom attacked in one way
    And so on. I think we are all familiar that we find abhorrent, to crack down on it
    enough with life in the United States to in ways which perhaps strike against the
    know the results of this multiplicity of very principles we are trying to protect.
    jurisdictions and different laws. When I
    Therefore, as I say, this question of treason
    say "different laws'" there is this that is
    common to them all, that all or nearly all is terribly difficult. We have to be firm;
    of them embody a great deal of the common we must not be sentimental or urirealistic in
    law of England. I might refer to one thing recogni7ing the fact which I for one was slow
    here! that the common law was very general to recognize, namely that there are people
    throughout the states, but on the other hand in this country who go about among us, who
    (Mr. Macdonnell (Greenwood).J
    JANUARY 23, 1953 1299
    Crimina! Code
    seem like us, who are personally quite plea- I -shOUld like to make an humble apology
    sant, who take full advantage of our institu- to the hon. member for Greenwood (Mr.
    · tions, who have had the benefit of them, but Macdonnell) for interrupting him when he was
    .nevertheless are pr~pared to conspire to over- speaking on the serious offence of being a
    turn them; and yet in our indignation at them common scold. My memory was at fault. I
    · we may go too far, for it is so easy same- said it was being specia-lly retained. It is
    ,jimes ·to feel that we must go the limit in being specially rejected. I find this in the
    pracklpg (lown. commissioners' report:
    ~ Without elaborating the matter further, Certain common law offences are, in the opinion
    · Mr. Speaker, the only safe place I can find of your commiSSioners, obsolete and archaic and
    are not retained, for example, champerty and
    where I can come to rest is to say that we maintenance, barratry, refusing to serVe in office
    shalL-not try to punish men for what they and being a common scold.
    think; "W~ _~hall only punish. men for what
    they do.: As to the definition of the act, I am I think most of these offences are as Greek
    lfot going to· discuss it further. Someone to the ordinary layman.
    ~aid _h~re ~~rli~r, and I agree with it, that There are two speclal subjects about which
    what -we have to do is consider this act as 1 should ,like to speak, and they are both
    .Something w.hich is for the" benefit, not of this linked, together here in this report of the
    ~E;!'qtion or, that section, but of every citizen commission that dealt with this subject. They
    of Canada. are the questions of restitution of property
    (",~s I take.!uy seat 1 should like to r~iterate and compensation, and the jurisdiction of
    ~Qt:!lethiilg that,was said to this house earlier; magistrates. '.
    that in ,~pite of all the difficulties and soine- As everyone- knows, when property is dam-
    , Hm~s they a're terrible ones-facing us in aged maliciously or is stolen the state feels
    "~,9jne of, the things abhorrent to us which that a public offence has been committed.
    pe9ple 'w-PI ,do, I recall again Churchill in It is an offence against the state; that is why
    ~ifferent ·circumstances. He was mentioned there is a hue and cry and a-ction by the
    ~at:lier toIjight. 1 suppose if there is one police and the attor:ney general and so forth.
    ·man "in this ,vorld who must have tried the But the person who suffers most is the one
    p.atlence ;of' ~ihose having~to do with him it is whose property has been taken or damaged,
    thii. r~ Dean of Canterbury. Our late col- or who has received personal injuries. Quite
    ~ea,~e, whom,:we- all remember with regret often his rights are neglected and he may
    and;,~fiection" in this house, the former mem- suffer more in fact than the prisoner who is
    b~r for Calgary West, Art' Smith, spoke of punished. At tim~s the prison~r is punishw
    ~ ,one -day in this house in terms of great but the party who is injured is completely
    yehemence which I think reflected the views forgotten.
    9~ all o_f' us, but when Churchill was pressed
    t?~J·~ake sOll}e act1on-1 suppose it would
    A person may have property stolen. The
    h~ve meant' a change in the law in order to Criminal Code now provides that he might
    00 it-h'e -said: "We must remember that the be compensated to the extent of $1,000, which
    pr~ciples we believe in have to -be pre- would constitute a judgment debt against the
    ~~rved;- ,even though we suffer greatly in the
    convicted person. That provision is going to
    ~l.Oing :of. -it, we must stick absolutely to the be changed; the limit has been taken out and
    law.u " the compensation is now limited to the
    'L-We -have here this tremendous bill, tre- moneys found in the possession of the
    mendous -in size and tremendous in impor': prisoner when arrested. In other words the
    1ance." ,I .agree with ,all that has been said prisoner may be a millIonaire, but if he has
    l;I.~out tl;1e 'care and thought which should be no money on him wh-en arrested there will
    gWen to it. The thing is not to get it back be no restitution of property or compensation

    ln
    l)~rf' qWckly; .th~ thing is to g~t it back her~ for the injured person.
    ,t.~e .1?,est possible shape it can be given. I know of an instance where a place was
    ~ 1 '
    >. Mr. W. J, -Browne (St. John's West:)· I broken into and property stolen and damage
    done to the ext~nt of about $500. The
    s-h?u1d like to make a few remarks. I c'om-
    tnend the' ·Minister of Justice on his wisdom accused was unable to obtain a bondsman
    a
    in agr~irig ito have this 'bill sent to special to provide bail, and he offered the magistrate
    a certifi,ed cheque for $4,000. He was allowed
    ~~~~t~ee." ,We should ,not rely entirely on
    bee,,_e!fp~rienced lawyers in the other place,
    out. When' he went to th-e 5upr-eme court
    juca~s7:::there are so many lawyers and ex- they would not take this cheque as bail, so
    b ~ges m -this place who can give Us the the money was returned to his 1awyer and
    't enefit of their experience in such an impor- some of it went to his wife~ The person whose
    ant matter as a new revision of the Criminal property was damaged has not yet received
    C Ode. ,-
    any compens~tion. I do not see how .. anyone
    1300 HOUSE OF COMMONS
    Criminal Code
    can call that administration of justice. The do not think it is fair to give an untrained
    one person who is most concerned is the one layman the responsibility of imposing a sen-
    whose property is damaged and in that case tence of that severity. I know serious
    he has not yet received any compensation. mistakes have been made. It is a reflection
    The matter was pursued in the civil courts, upon those responsible for the administration
    but the accused person had left the country, of justice that such power over their fellow
    He was released by authority of the Depart- men shoUld be given to men who are not
    ment of Justice because he was ill, and he legally trained. I think my han. friend will
    escaped from the jurisdiction. Compensation agree with that.
    has not been given to the person whose I know the magistrates are overworked.
    property was damaged. The magistrate's court in St. John's is a
    I feel that consideration should be given disgrace. Anyone who has gone there and
    to this important matter. I know from experi- who has had any experience anywhere else
    ence that it has been a most valuable pro- kno,."s that they are tremendou1;l1y over-
    vision for a judge to be able to order that worked. It is a reflection upon those respon·
    compensation should be given. In my opinion, sible for the administration of justice down
    apart from the punishment of the guilty there. You have· a courtroom, and you have
    person, that should be done whenever pos· an office that is sometimes used as a coW't-
    sible. 'rhese people who have suffered injury room. The magistrates have even to hear
    should not have to bea'r the expense of a trials in their offices.
    civil action. Their losses may run more than Mr. Deputy Speaker: I believe the han.
    $1,000, and the present limit should be
    member is getting much farther away from
    removed and compelL'3ation, whatever it may the bill than perhaps any other previous
    amount to, ordered to be paid out of any speaker. The ,facilities available for magis-
    property belonging to the accused, not trates, about which he is now speaking,
    merely what he has in his possession at the should not be discussed on the second reading
    time of arrest. The arrested person may be of this bill. I know some latitude has been
    cute enough to pass whatever money he has given, but I am asking myself if I should
    to some friend before h.e is actually put in not intervene at this time and ask han.
    the cell block. By that means he could members to confine "themselves to discussing
    escape having to pay any compensation. I the principle of the bill and not go into
    hope therefore that this matter will receive individual cases, the application of the law
    consideration when the bill goes to the com- or the organization of the provincial courts.
    mittee.
    Mr. Browne (St. John's Westl: I wonder if I
    I should like to deal now with the question
    may, with deference, disagree with some of
    of the jurisdiction of magistrates. This bill the observations you have just made about
    proposes to enlarge their jurisdiction to some speaking to the principle of the bill. I would
    extent. It must be remembered that magis- point out that this is a code which contains
    trates are concerned chiefly with the adminis- many principles and which deals with many
    tration of provincial laws, and these are subjects.
    considerable in number. I think that con-
    stitutes the bulk of their work. Every year Mr. Deputy Speaker: I did not make a rul-
    new laws are passed which must be dealt . ing, I simply made an observation in the
    with summarily by magistrates. Over the last hope o~ getting the co-operation of han. mem-
    50 years the work performed by magistrates bers. I do not want to enter into a procedural
    has increased manyfold. debate. The han. member may continue.
    The tendency has been to give more work Mr. Browne (St. John's West): This in-
    to the magistrates and to take work away creased work has been given to the magis-
    from the judges. The Minister of Justice (Mr. trates without any consideration being given
    Garson) knows that in -Newfoundland we to increasing their salaries. If you increase
    have only the supreme court and the magis- the jurisdiction of a judge or magistrate I
    trates' courts; we have no
    county COUI1t Or think it is only fair that that point should
    be considered also.
    district court. I had the honour of being the
    last district court judge; no appointments Another point to which I wish to refer
    have been made since. The law provides for is the taking of evidence by commission where
    five district court judges, but not one has a witness cannot be brought before the c.ourt.
    been appointed. That provision applies only to trials in the
    The magistrates are being given tremen- higher courts, and I submit that it should
    dous powers, the same as judges of the apply to the magistrate's court as well.
    supreme court, to pass ·sentences up to four- I should like to repeat the two points that
    teen years. Only two or three of the magis- I wish to make. First is the importance of
    trates in Newfoundland are lawyers, and I providing restitution of property as part of
    (Mr. Browne (St. John's Wes~l.l
    JANUARY 23. 1953 1301
    Crimina! Code
    .the penalty inflicted upon a person convicted we have received and in several cases acted
    of an .offence. Second, there should not be upon representations from individual lawyers,
    too .great responsibilities placed upon the from the bar of British Columbia and the bar
    magistrates, either by gIving them too much of Nova Scotia as professional groups, from
    work·or too much power. the commissioners on the uniformity of legis-
    ·-~Mr. 'i. W. Noseworthy (York South): Mr. lation, criminal section, from the attorneys
    general of the various' provinces and from the
    . SlJ"eaker, "I wohder if before he closes the members of the other place, particularly from
    debate the minister will put on the record,
    for the benefit of a number of groups which the subcommittee of the Senate committee
    I know are desirous of coming before the on banking and commerce which turned over
    committee, the details of the procedure that the great bulk of work which was done by
    -ShoUld be followed. Will the minister indi~ that committee, the spade work, the hard
    ~ate also whether, as far as his department
    work of drafting, to three senators, namely,
    is: cou<Eerned, the bill as now amended and Senator Hayden, Senator Farris and Senator
    present.~d. to us is like the law 9f the Med~s
    Roebuck, who are known from one end of
    ahd PersIans, not to be changed? Is thIS the country to the other as eminent, skil-
    bill going before the committee with the ful and experienced defence criminal law-
    minister and his supporters being there to yers, it seems to me that it is not altogether
    see tb~t no change takes place? Will the in accordance with the facts to suggest that
    'co~lttee be given some latitude to hear and we have refused to accept worthy sugges-
    ,w~igh 'representations and, without the use tions, or that there has been a bias in favour
    ,of t4e party whips, be free to try to reach of the prosecution in the drafting and revision
    ~a~ ~onclusions regarding some of the points of this bill.
    hftli''',bIll which are in dispute? If indeed there ever was at any stage of the
    , lJon."Siuari S. Garson (Minisier of Justice): proceedings, it has certainly been counter-
    Mr. Speaker- balanced by what was done by these three
    senators in the subcommittee. These men
    ~r'~~r~ )ep-uiy Speaker: If the minister speaks are aU outstanding as excellent criminal law-
    ijo'W,- he '\vl,ll close the debate. yers, and if they have any bias at all,it would
    ~;~'_,~r~...g~rson: !vIr. Speaker, in reply to the be extraordinary if it were not in faVOUr of
    guestion ',which the han. member for York the defence when they have been acting for
    South has asked, I should like to point out that the defence in sa many cases over the years.
    WhilEr'.r am slire there were no implications; The government has maintained an open mind
    aspersions or insinuations in his question in respect of all these matters and it will
    ~nd -·that· 'he was jU&t asking for informa- continue to maintain an open mind with rela-
    tion, I really do not thinkJ with great defer~ tion to the many valuable suggestions it has
    ence, that on the basis of the performance received from these several sources. We
    o~ the government in this matter to date he have always welcomed and we have given
    l~ :r~,~lJr entitled to entertain any doubts at most careful consideration to these pro-
    all upon the points he has raised. The fact posals. We have adopted a large number of
    9t ..the '.Ill:atter is. that in my memory there them. If those members who are familiar at
    hlas. b~~n po bill in th~s house, or in any other all with the bill as it was introduced in the
    legISlative body in which I have been to other place last year will compare it with the
    W~i:h. a greater amount of genuinely de~o­ bill which was introduced in the other place
    cr~t,Ic' c,onsideration has been given, than to this year they will see that there have been
    this.· . .. . many material changes in the draft which,
    when it came from the commission, was recog-
    h~;~;:T~~;.~rst '~~ft was made by a commission of
    . 19h.1j' qualIfied and, experienced experts in
    nized from one end of the country to another
    as excellent to begin with.
    the field of criminal law who were repre-
    S~H:ttati:re of aU parts of Canada. In spite of Therefore, while I agree with the view-
    the"er~}ln.~Ilce. a~d the outstanding and recog- point of everyone of the speakers who have
    ~~e~ ~.agpit;y of all the members of the com- preceded me as to the wisdom of this house
    nllSsIon, which, may I say in rebuttal to those making its own decisions with regard to the
    ~P<? .. ~ay~ .suggested that nothing but the provisions of the bill, you may rest assured,
    f~OS~~Uti?h vie\vpoint has been reflected in sir, that if these decisions commend them-
    [s ,~~I~J mcluded such eJ:ninent defence law- ~,elves to the open mind which we shall main~
    yers. ~s .Mr.' J'oseph Sedgwick, Mr. J. J. tain, just as much in relation to the proposals
    ~obmette'ahd Mr. Arthur Slaght, and in spite of the House of Commons as we have main-
    o ~he undoubted excellence of the draft bill tained in relation to the suggestions of the
    ~ cli they .produced, this government has other place, we shall give effect to them.
    wever at any. stage taken the position that it All of these Canadian citizens to whom I
    as a law of the Medes and Persians. When have referred have taken a very great and
    68108-84
    1302 HOUSE. OF COMMONS
    Criminal Code
    keenly intelligent interest in this matter. been given to what the minister proposes to
    The work w4ich they have performed on a do until we know precisely what that is. I
    voluntary basis has been of a most creditable wonder if there is any hurry about the bring-
    character. Their contributions and the man· ing in of the motion setting up the committee..
    ner in which they have been received by the Is it not possible-I think it is procedurally
    other place to begin with, by the govern· correct-for the minister to move that the
    ment, and, as I am sure they wBI be, by this bill be referred to a committee to be designa~
    house, have constituted a heart-warming ted later?
    example of democracy in action in a matter
    in which everyone from the ordinary citizen Mr. Garson: Yes, that is right.
    to parliament itself has played his part in a Mr. Knowles: I thought the minister was
    co-operative effort to get as good a law as we now going to indicate the number of members
    possibly can in this consolidation of the of the committee and its composition. It is
    Criminal Code. only the number of members of the committee
    r do not share all the views of the hon. and its composition that I think should be
    member for Winnipeg North Centre (Mr. left over. I am not opposed to a motion that
    Knowles), Indeed, I think onevery one of the it be referred .to a committee to be designated
    specific points he raised tonight I find myself, later.
    quite reluctantly of course, in disagreement Mr. Garson: May I suggest; Mr. Speaker,
    with him, but there is no harm in that. Our -that I naturally conferred with the Clerk in.
    disagreement will produce all the better this matter and reached agreement that this
    debate in the committee if he will venture to 1-8 the form of motion which it is now appro-
    become a member of it. While I have great priate to move. Perhaps if I read the motion
    respect for the hon. member for Annapolis~ my hon. friend may consider whether he
    Kings (Mr. Nowlan), there is one respect in wishes to object to it or withdraw his objec-
    which I must quite modestly venture to dis- tions. The motion is:
    agree with him. I must say in all frankness That a special committee be appointed to con-
    that if one had not had the experience of this slder BIIl No. 93, an act respecting the crIminal
    measure in the other place before one, one law, and all matters· pertaining thereto, with power
    would be inclined not to disagree but to agree to send for persons, papers and records, to examine
    witnesses, to prInt its evidence and proceedIngs,
    with his viewpoint as to the value of a large and to report from time to time its observations
    committee. But it was very clear there that and opinions thereon; that the said committee con-
    when a 'committee is dealing wUh the actual sIst of seventeen (17) members to be designated at
    drafting section by section of a difficult a later date;-
    statute, which is a tedious, grinding job, in Mr. FuHon: Is there not something about
    the end, as happened there, the great bulk a provision regarding one of the standing
    of the work falls upon the shoulders of three orders?
    very hard-working men who put in long Mr. Garson: Yes.
    hours of labour on the bill. -and that standing order No. 65 be suspended in
    For that reason-and I may say I have dis- relation thereto.
    cussed this matter with the leaders of the If I am not out of order perhaps I might
    other parties-I think that perhaps the best indicate the second motion which would fol~
    membership for the committee that we could low there.
    set up would be a membership of 17. Once
    the house gives second reading to the bUI I Mr. Deputy Speaker: Has the han. ministet'
    should like, if I may, to have unanimous con- unanimous consent to proceed in this fashion?
    sent to move that the bill be referred- to a He has not had leave to revert to motions.
    Has the han. gentleman leave to revert to
    committee and to provide for the setting up
    motions at this time?
    of -that committee this evening if possible.
    Some hon. Members: Agreed.
    Motion agreed to and bill read the second
    time. . Mr. Deputy Speaker: I am speaking now
    about the first motion, the one that was read
    APPOINTMENT OF SPECIAL COMMIT'rEE- by the minister a moment ago.
    REFERENCE OF LEGISLATION TO COMMITTEE Mr. Fulton: The minister indicated that in
    Mr. Deputy Speaker: Does the minister order that we should know what was contem·
    wish to have leave to revert to motions? plated he would indicate, without moving it,
    what the motion was, so that we may have
    Mr~ Knowles: Mr. Speaker, before you con- the whole picture before us.
    tend that leave has been given, in the light Mr. Deputy Speaker: Hon. gentlemen
    of an experience we had yesterday I do not realize that this sort of procedure can only
    think it should be assumed that leave has take place with unanimous consent?
    [Mr. Garson.1
    JANUARY 23. 1953 1303
    Crimina! Code
    Some hon. Members: Agreed. number is as high as the minister is prepared
    Mr. Garson; The second motion would be: to go I presume we have no alternative but
    That Bill No. 93, an act respecting the criminal
    to accept it. It is certainly better than the
    law -be referred to the special committee appointed rumour we heard some time ago as to what
    to ~onsider the said bill, the number might be.
    Mr. Knowles: If we pass these two motions I just want to say, in line with what other
    we Will adopt everything except the names members have said tonight, that it seems to
    of the persons to compose the committee, me that the importance of this question is
    and that will be left to a later date. such that, out of a house of 262 members,
    Mr. Deputy Speaker: Hon. members have with the plethora of lawyers we have here,
    heard the two motions. Are they agreed? 17 is hardly enough. One of my. reasons for
    having demurred just now was the hope that
    Some hon. Members: Agreed. the minister might consider a larger number
    -Mr. Fulton: I want to make a brief obser- than 17; but it is better than the smaller
    vation on the motion, although I am agree- committee, and if that is as high as he will
    able to the procedure. go we have no alternative but to accept it.
    . I just want to take this opportunity to Mr. Deputy Speaker: Is it agreed that this
    support fully what was said earlier by the bill is Teferred to the special committee
    hon. member for Annapolis-Kings (Mr. appointed to con~ider the said bill?
    Nowlan), While this is the only way in which
    this bill coUld ,be referred to a committee, I Some hon. Members: Agreed.
    think it indicates more clearly than anything Motions agreed to.
    else· the desirability of having a standing
    committee on justice under the rules of this SAINT JOHN BRIDGE AND RAILWAY
    house. I;:XTENSION COMPANY
    r want to point out to the house and the
    PROVISION FOR ACQUISITION BY CANADIAN
    minister that the judicial committee, as it
    .is caUed in the United States congress, is PACIFIC RAILWAY
    one of the most important committees of Hon. Lionel Chevrier (Minister of Trans~
    that body.. We have had a number of port) moved. the second reading of Bill No. 38,
    experiences with bills requiring more in the respecting the Saint John Bridge and Rail~
    way of legal consideration than partisan way Extension Company.
    or political consideration, matters on which
    there is no difference between the parties. Mr. Green: I suggest that we call it ten
    They require very careful consideration for o'clock.
    their legal implications, and I believe that Mr. Chevrier: I have no ·objection provided
    type of bill should be referred to a standing it is made mutatis mutandis.
    committee on justice. I believe that is indi~
    cated by what has happened here today, in Mr. Green: I did· not heaT that.
    fact by the readiness of the house to give Mr. Chevrier: It is a Latin maxim.
    its agreement to this procedure. And it would
    seem. more appropriate if it were not neces~ Mr. Deputy Speaker: Does the hon. mem-
    sary to ask for that type of consent, and if ber for Vancouver~Quadr.a (Mr. Green) m()ve
    it might be recognized practice of this house . the adjournment of the debate?
    that bills of this kind would be referred to Mr. Green: No, Your Honour, I did not
    a standing committee which should be set . move adjournment.
    1,lP . for the purpose.
    Mr. Fournier (Hulll: It has to be that way.
    I hope the minister will give his considera ~
    tion to it, not only because of what has Mr. Green: I 'suggest the minister move
    happen€d here tonight but because I believe adjournment.
    that questions coming before this house deal- Mr. Chevrier: I have no -objection at all.
    ing with the administration of justice in this
    C{)untry are matters of gr$at importance and On motion of Mr. Chevrier the debate was
    warrant the setting up of a standing com- adjourned.
    mittee on justice so they may be automati~
    I

    cally referred there. BUSINESS OF THE HOUSE


    ~r. Knowles: Just one· word on these Mr. Fournier (Hulll: Mr. Speaker, Monday
    motions. One· of them is debatable, even if is private members' day. We will proceed
    the other is not. I am referring to the motion according to standing order 15.
    to set up a committee of 17 membeDS, whose At ten o'clock the house adjourned, with-
    nam~s are to be designated later. If that out question 'put, pursuant to standing order.
    • 8108-84!
    1636 HOUSE OF COMMONS
    Committee on Criminal Law
    the desires of the people of Manitoba if some and its banking and commerce committee
    way were found to carry out the suggestion especially by a subcommittee consisting of
    to which I have referred. I hope those who Senator Hayden, Senator Farris and Senator
    are behind this measure will give some coil- Roebuck. Having regard to all of this work
    sidera tion to that proposal. that has been done there is no reason, 'in
    MO,tion agreed to. our opinion, why a careful and thorough -con~ I
    sideration cannot be given to -this Bill 93 by I
    CRIMINAL CODE
    the House of Commons committee and by~,
    the house itself before the end of the present
    CONCURRENCE IN FIRST REPORT OF SPECIAL session. Certainly it is the intention 'Of the'
    COMMITTEE government to proceed vigorously with the
    Mr. D. F. Brown (Essex West) presented consideration of the bill to that end. ,I .

    the first report of the special committee on Motion agreed to,


    Bill No. 93, respecting the criminal law, and
    moved that the report, be concurred in. QUESTIONS
    Mr. H. W. Herridge (Kootenay West): PERMITS FOR USE OF STEEL',
    Before the motion is put, Mr. Speaker, I Mrs. Fairclough:
    should like to ask the Minister of ,Justice 1. How many applications have been received for
    a question. In view of' a certain item in pennits for use of steel since December 1. 1950? "
    this morning's Gazette concerning the possible 2. How many permits for use of steel have b~en
    progress in consideration of this bill, would iSSUed since December 1. 1950, (a) to whom.- wel,'e
    they issued: (b) what was the date of issue: (e)
    the Minister of Justice care to comment at for what quantity was each permit issued?·' '/,
    this time?
    Mr. Dickey: Mr. Speaker on several occas-
    Hon. Stuart S. Garson (Minister of Justice): ions I have discussed the 1question with ,the
    Mr. Speaker, the position is that some doubt han, member and she advised me yesterday
    has been raised as to the intention of the that she wished to have it dropped for
    government with regard to the completion rewording. .; .~
    of the work on this bill during the present
    session of parliament. A great 'deal of work Mr. Speaker: Dropped.
    has been done on this bill, first of all by
    the Criminal Code revision 'commission; then FISHERIES, N .S.-VALUES
    by the law officers of the Department of Mr. Balcom:
    'Justice; ,by the commissioners on uniformity What were the fisheries landings and landed
    of legislation, criminal section; by the depart- . value for the years 1951 and 1952 for .Hallfa?"
    ments of the attorneys general of the various Lunenburg, Queens, Shelburn,e and Yarmouth
    provinces; by the Nova Scotia bar; by the counties, Nova Scotia?
    British Columbia bar and by the other place Mr. MacNaught:

    1951 1952
    Landings Landed value Landings Landed value'
    Cwt. $ Cwt. $'
    Halifax County ................ . 934,198 4,718,506 923,970 4,716,559"
    Lunenburg County .............. . 633,905 2,403,906 674,203 2,688,728 ,
    Queens County .................. . 113,534 599,948 109,146 550,745.' :
    Shelburne County ............... . 487,662 3,750,169 553,838 3,741,243'
    Yarmouth County ., ... , .... , .... , 235,566 2,346,676 249,573 2,723,190

    CANADIAN NATIONAL ~AILWAYS-ROLLlNG STOCK 7. How manY,refrigerator cars were added (luring
    the five year period ending December 31, 1952, atld
    Mr. Catherwood: how many in 19521
    1. How many new passenger coaches have been
    added to the Canadian National Railways system, Mr. Benidickson:
    during the _past five years? The Canadian National Railways advise as
    2. How many in 19521 follows:
    3. How many have been scrapped during the past
    five year period. and how many in 1952? I. 61.
    4, How many oil burning locomotives have been 2. Nil.
    added during the five year period from 1948 to
    1952 inclusive, and how many in 19521 3. During the last five years, 94; during
    5. How many steam locomotives were added dur- 1952, 24.
    ing the past five yea_rs, and how many in 19521
    6. How many have been scrapped during the past 4. 1948 to 1952 inclusive-new di.esels, 269;
    five years? 1952, new diesels, 66. '
    fMr. Knowles.1
    FEBRUARY 5, 1953 1637
    Questions
    1948 to' 1952 inclusive-new oil burning, HALIFAX COUNTY, N.S.-FISHERIES VALUES
    '6; 1952, nil.
    , .",5. During- the past five years-Coal burn~ Mr. Balcom:
    ·lng steam locomotives, nil; 1952, nil. What were the fisheries landings and landed
    value by sllecies. for the years 1951 and 1952. Hali~
    6.' Steam locomotives scrapped, 108.
    fax county. Nova Scotia?
    7. New refrigerator cars-During the past
    five years, 1,100; during 1952, 500. Mr. MacNaugh!.

    1951 1952
    Landings Landed value Landings Landed value
    Cwt. $ Cwt. $
    Cod .......................... .. 412,043 1,465,592 375,305 1,453,936
    'Haddock ...................... . 155,903 730,715 177,906 836,527
    Pqllock ........................ . 29,251 32,402 40,881 68,549
    "Hake .......................... . 15,867 25,623 17,824 30,130 '
    ',C;usk .......................... . 1,240 1,482 1,376 2,217
    Roseflsh ...................... .. 31,424 93,813 28,406 81,314
    Ca\flsh ....................... .. 6,438 13,677 .,645 14,773
    Halibut ........................ . 42,720 899,712 21,ll3 509,546
    PI~ice ......................... . llO,010 357,541 121,923 4ll,670
    Yellowtail ..................... . 13,128 40,353 ll,220 39,609
    Witch ......................... . 9,246 28,401 13,553 47,450
    Flounders ..................... . 9,425 30,335
    Turbot ........................ .. 20 40
    Skate ......................... . 1,000 1,000 879 907
    Herring ....................... . 21,439 34,326 40,639 67,524
    'M~ckerel ...................... . 24,040 99,836 ll,821 72,956
    . :~e~i:ves ...................... . 3,633 6,405 2,232 3,306
    ,Shad ......................... .. 10 37 45 142
    ::Jalmon ........................ . 188 7,735 254 12,117
    $melts ......................... . 109 2,514 244 5,925
    Swordfish ..................... . 4,229 172,464 5,140 131,877
    ';funa •••••.•, •••••••••••••••••••• 1,442 9,897 1,772 11,962
    ·Eels ........................... . 162 3,296 225 4,963
    Lobsters ...................... .. 14,992 518,642 20,330 716,580
    -Clams ....•...............•..... 18,723 50,030 13,760 59,685
    Scaliops ....................... . 1,308 52,127 1,902 94,088
    Squid ............. : ........... . 338 1,459 181 855
    Cod livers ...................... . 4,824 12,094 8,757 18,656
    Halibut livers ................. .. 965 23,830 419 13,205
    S\vordfish livers .............•... 49 1,448 137 4,080
    Tuna livers ..................••. 52' 1,650 61 1,900
    Seals ....... , ..........••....... 70 70

    Totals .......................... . 934,198 4,718,506 923,970 4,716,559

    QUESTIONS PASSED AS ORDERS FOR 5. Since January 1, 1948. how many five-gallon
    " RETURNS cases of paint have been shipped out of Churchill
    from the defence establishment on requisition. and
    .,NATIONAL DEFENCE, CHURC.HILL--LIGHT BULBS what was their desti.natlon?
    AND PAlriT NATIONAL DEFENCE-SNOWMOBILES
    Mr. Knowles:.
    . 1. -lJow many electric light ~ulbs have been pur- Mr. While (Middlesex Easl):
    chased by the Department of- National Defence. 1. How many snowmobiles or similar vehicles
    since January I, 1948. for the defence establishment have been purchased for the Department of
    at Churchlll, Manitoba? National Defence. since "Operation MUSkox", May
    ; -2. How many of these have been requls1tloned. 19461
    i,~ci. what is the total number now on hand? 2. From what firm. or firms, were these vehicles
    3. How many five-gallon cases of paint haVe been purchased?
    dellvered to the defence establishment at Churchill, 3. If purchased from more than one firm. what
    b
    '!J"Y the Department of National Defence. since were the number of vehicles purchased from each?
    , ;;tnuary 1. 1948? 4. What has been the total cost of these vehicles?
    . -4. How many have been requisitloned. and how 5. What has been the disposition of these vehicles
    'lllany are now on hand? by military establishments in Canada?
    DOMINION OF CANADA

    HOUSE OF COMMONS·
    DEBATES
    OFFICIAL REPORT

    SEVENTH SESSION-TWENTY.FIRST PARLIAMENT I


    j

    1-2 ELIZABETH II
    BEING THE 95TH SESSION FOR THE PERIOD 1867·1953

    VOLUME V. 1952·53
    COMPRISING THE PERIOD FROM T~ TWENTY-SEVENTH DAY OF APRIL, 1953,
    TO THE FOURTEENTH DAY OF MAY, 1953, INCLUSIVE

    INDEX ISSUED IN A SEPARATE VOLUME

    EDMOND CLOUTIER, C.'P.I.G., Q,A., n.s.p.


    QUEEN'S PRINTER AND CONTROLLER OF STATIONERY
    O'ITAWA,1953
    4641

    " r"

    HOUSE OF COMMONS

    Friday, May 1, 1953 Clause 9. Renumber as clause 10.


    Clause 10. Renumber as clause 11.
    i;,The house met_ at eleven o'clock. Clause 11. Delete clause 11 of the Bill as it appears
    in lines 25 to ~8 on page 10.
    CRIMINAL CODE Mr. 'Drew: Mr. Speaker, may I lntenrupt?
    ~,- 'SECoND REPORT 'OF SPECIAL COMMITTEE Some hon. MemJ?ers: Order.
    '-'" -- ',:' ,

    I.
    Mr. D. F. Brown (Essex West): Mr. Mr. Drew: Oh, I am quite agreeable that
    Speaker, -I ·have, the honour to present the this be 'read. But I would point out that we
    ~ sec'ond -'report in French and in English of are only on the 'second page-
    I'~~,:~pecial -com~itt~e on the crimi~al law. An hon. Member: You asked for it.
    rhe-'Clerk -J\sslstant:
    ; The speCial committee appointed to, consider Bill
    Mr. Drew: We are orily on the second page

    !
    ,No. 93 (letter 0 of the Senate), intituled: "An act of this extended report which han. members
    . respecting the criminal law", and all matters per- have only now received, since the reading of
    _talnln g. thereto,. begs leave to present the following this document was begun. It was not in
    III Jts.,s,econd, repqrt- our hands at the time it was presented to
    I' Some hon. Members: Dispense. the house.
    In view of this, I hope hon. members will
    ), Mr. Drewl No; I wish it read. Perhaps
    rea.lize the extent of the problem that is
    [i\.mighl help if.illst before it ·is read I ask
    t t~~ .~uestion. ,: Is it a unanimous report?
    involved, and that they will decide whether
    they wailt the reading of it or not.
    ~1-I~.. :';;*eaker: The report is presented; I
    It1iWC"it, should be read.
    ,Iti ,,', ,- j' ,

    ,Mr. :.A91J01I: The report is the report of


    Mr. Abbott: You -asked for it.
    -Mr. Drew: I sugge'st that the reading, then,
    be proceeded with, so that han. members may
    tjle committee.
    realize the extent of the job that must now
    ~;.Th7 ~:~i~~_~ '~ssistant: 'be done, and ,I hope plans will be made
    '- Pursuant·to the order of reference of twenty.. appropriately for fl sufficient periOd of time
    _third January 1953 whereby Bill No. 93 (Letter 0 for that job.
    o~!~b.~, S~pate), 4ttitul~d: "An act respecting .the
    , ~timlna1. -law", 'was referred t6 it your committee Mr. Abbott: Thank you, kind sir.
    : hils, "dareiully considered' the said' bill and has
    ,agre~4 t9. J;'eport same with t4e following amend~ Mr~ Speaker: I understand from the re-
    , Ilwnts" natnely: . marks of, the Leader of the Opposition that
    -:~lause 2, par~graph (l{). Delete paragraph (10)
    and substitute the following: he is not insisting upon further reading of
    "(::ourt of-:cilminal jurisdiction:" the. report.
    J(lO) ':'fpprt of criminal jurisdiction" means
    (~) a cour,t of general'or quarter _seSSions of the Mr. Drew: Hon. members are.
    peace,:wheft'preslded over by a superior court judge Mr. Speaker: Order, but if hon. members
    °i'~:co'tl_Q.}y.-or district court judge, or in the cities
    in the house wish to have it read, he would
    t·h,.AfQll_t!~fll.and Quebec, by a :rq.unicipal judge of
    e city; 'as the case may be, or a judge of the not object. Is it the wish of the house that
    . ".essions of the peace, . we dispense with the reading of the report
    - ~~ la~d ~a~!stra~,e or -_jll:dg~ acting 'l:ln.del' part at' this time?
    cJ~~~;!,n ~l,le provlqce of New Brunswick, the county Some hon. Members: Dispense.
    ·1n:IClaUse 8. 'De~ete the figure" (1)" where it appears Some hon. Member-st No.
    line 35 on page 9.
    'bDelete sUbclauses (2), (3) and (4) and substitute Mr. Speaker:_ Agreed .
    j
    .,i following: '
    ',. ppeaI.
    '. . ,', '
    11I'!;:!l)"'Where. a"court, jUdge, justice or magisfrate PRIVATE BILL
    co,·o:.u!lri.1y ,:.convicts_ a Person for a, oontempt of
    th~"I;HW i~p?sEis punishment in re~pect thereof, FIRST READlNG-SENATE BIL;L
    or~' peFs~h may, with leave of the court of appea1
    ,~al j_Udge ,thereof, appeal 10 ,the court of appeal Mr. Irv'in Studer (for Mr. Bater) moved the
    ?~ ~ ff,~m 'thfil conviction, or. , first reading 'of Bill No. 364, to incorporate
    :P4(b ~~f\.in!;t the' punishment imposed. Canaclian Co-operative Credit Society·Limited.
    t t 4 vIII applies. ' ..
    f le~~ For the purposes of an appeal under· sub- Motion agreed to and· bill· read the ··first
    r1 7nutQ°tnls mutandis!'
    (1) the provisions of part XVIII apply.
    time.
    I
    4707

    .'
    HOUSE OF COMMONS

    Monday. May 4. 1953 I'!.EGULATIONS ACT


    REPEAL OF SECRECY PROVISION RESPECTING
    The ·li.'~use -met at eleven o'clock. ORDERS IN COUNCIL
    Mr. Stanley Knowles (Winnipeg North
    . ", ''',' , PRIMINAL CODE Centre) .moved for leave to' -introduce Bill
    -' Thitd-and final report of special committee No. 365, to amend the Regula.tions Act.
    pn tl1e. };,rim~nal law.-Mr. Brown <Essex He said: Mr. Speaker, the purpose of this
    W~O, , bill is to repeal the section of the Regulations
    Act, enacted in -1"950, which gives the govern-
    LUNAM CONSTRUCTION COMPANY ment the power to pass a regulation keeping
    secret any order in council, whether under
    TABLING OF RETURNS TO Qt,1ESTIONS the Emergency 'Powers Act or any other
    Hon. Alphonse Four·nier {Mw,ister of Public statute, which the government wishes to
    Works>: Mr. Speaker, I wish to table re'fer- withhold from publication.
    ence No. 174, mover Mr. Diefenbaker: How This bill would not affect any order now
    -rl1ciHy -'building or repair contracts have been in effect, but' it would prohibit the passing
    'gra,nteii t(f the Lunarn Construction Company, of any further secret orders in council under
    Saskatchewan, since January 1, 1948; the 'Emergency· Powers Ad or under any
    . "dAlib ;~eference No. 154, m6ver Mr. Diefen- other statute now -in Dperation.
    baker: Correspondence between any depart~ Motion agreed to and b!l1 read the first
    ment of the government and the, Lunam time.
    Construction Company of Regina, having to do
    wltli"failUre'to complete its subcontrads; QUESTIONS
    Also reference No. 215, mOYer Mr. Coldwell: DEFENCE PRODUCTION-CONTRAC'I'S FOR COFFEE
    ~()PY: ptIPt;ogress reports signed by dominion
    Mr. Goode:
    publi~:works architects, Saskatchewan, in con M

    hection." with .contracts awarded to the l. What wer!! the names of coffee importers
    tendering on government contracts·to the amount
    LUham' COfistrUctiDn Company of Regina. of $140,831 on the list published by tbe Depart~
    :r!;~~i~'-'-i~ only a partial report, relating to ment of Defence Production, March 16 to 31, 19531
    2. Was the T. H. Estabrooks Com"p'any Limited
    the Indian· hospital at Fort. Qu'Appelle, My the lowest tenderer?
    <9fficIals h.~v:e workeg ever since ·the return 3. What British Columbia ·firms tendered on these
    :W"a.sSpassed in ·the house to prepare these orders?
    pi'o~tess" reports, .and- to have copies photo- Mr. Dickey: I have discussed this question
    ·/!l'~pl"'l1 'and tabled. I had the pleasure of with the hon. member who has agreed that
    !Showing t_he orIginals to ·the hon. member for this be dropped.
    ~~,~etbvih:"Biggar, and I asked him if he
    'Wishgcf-to" :4.ave my offi-cials continue work- . Mr. Goode: I shoul9._llke, to nave the assur-
    ance of the parliamentary -asl:?istant that this
    ing on these progress reports for all the other
    large tender was awarded to the lowest
    c,ont:t;_~cts) because I do n'ot know if there
    'woUld 't,e" i;;y possibility of tabling them
    tenderer. If I ean get that assurance I am
    quite content to allow the question' to be
    before the end of the session. '
    ,~;".,., ';:";') .!);" " dropped.
    (i~-J~r•. rCp~p.~ell; The :rt:Iinister :has stated
    Mr. Dickey: I can give the hon. member
    -'Y.FP:t:!~.\ c::pr,rect.. I .saw~_ ,the ,otl;ter reports
    th~tassurance most definitely.
    ,~~d;J ~p:i!)kittl\is one were tabled it would
    \~~Y~c~n_)nd~ca~ion of the ty.pe of report ),t Mr. Speaker: Question'dropped.
    \'3~,~\.;\,!'-....., ; '. , . . . . . . F.u;>H CONSUMPTION
    'l--L~r~ -:;:t:lerqing: May I ask the minister if
    he is willing that these r_eports be referred :Mr. Balcom:
    What was the per capita consumption of fish, per
    to the public accounts committee for inquiry. province .In Canada for (a) 1951; (b) 1952?
    ".M:~. ';F~u~Qi.r (aull): I ha~e ab;olutely no Mr. MacNaughl: Information is not avail-
    objectlon, able as trade statistics essential in such
    HOUSE OF COMMONS
    Seventh Session-Twenty-first Parliament
    1952-53

    SPECIAL COMMITTEE·
    ON
    BILL No. 93 (LETTER a of the SENATE)
    "AnAc! respecting The Criminal Law",
    and all mailers pertaining thereto

    Chairman: Mr. DON. F. BROWN

    MINUTES OF PROCEEDINGS AND EVIDENCE


    No.2

    TUESDAY, FEBRUARY 24, 1953


    WEDNESDAY, FEBRUARY 25,1953
    TUESDAY, MARCH 3, 1953

    WITNESSES:
    Mr. Saul Hayes, National Director, Canadian Jewish Congress;
    Professor Bora Laskin, University of Toronto;
    Mr. M. M. Myerson, Advocate, Member Legal Committee, Canadian Jewish
    Congress;
    Mr. R. C. Merriam, Barrister, Counsel for Premium Advertising Association
    of America, Inc.

    EDMOND CLOUTIER, C.M.G., a.A.• D.S.P.


    QUEEN'S PRlliTER AND CONTROLLER OF STATIONERY
    OTTAWA, 1953
    71271-1
    MONDAY, February 23, 1953.

    Ordered,-That the name of Mr. Churchjll be substituted for that of Mr.


    Diefenbaker; and
    That the name of Mr. Gauthier (Lac Saint Jean), be substituted for that
    of Mr. Pinard on the said committee.

    Attest.
    LEON J. RAYMOND,
    Clerk of the House.

    49 I
    71271-1, .1
    .\
    MINUTES OF PROCEEDINGS
    House of Commons, Roo~ 268,
    TUESDAY, February 24, 1953.
    The subcommittee appointed to consider Bill No. 93 (Letter 0 of the
    Senate), "An Act respecting the Criminal Law" and ~11 matters pertaining
    thereto, met at 10.30 o'clock a.m. The Chairman, Mr. Don. F. Brown, presided.
    Members present: Messrs. Brown (Essex West)," Cameron, Cannon, Carroll,
    Churchill, Garson, Laing, MacInnis, Macnaughton, Montgomery, .Noseworthy,
    Robichaud and Shaw.
    In attendance: Mr. A. A. Moffatt, Q.C., Mr. A. J. MacLeod, Senior Advisory
    Counsels, Department of Justice.
    Mr. Laing presented a report of the steering subcommittee, dated February
    19, as follows:
    The subcommittee met under the chairmanship of Mr. D. F. Brovin,
    M~P'J and were present: Messrs. Robichaud, Noseworthy, Shaw, Laing
    and Cannon.
    The subcom:rnittee had before it for consideration a number of com-
    munications some of which contained requests to appear before the
    committee to make representatio"ns concerning Bill 93.
    The committee was of unanimous opinion and it so recommends that
    in conformity with the resolution adopted by the committee, the follow-
    ing be invited to appear on the date set in each case: The Association
    for Civil Liberties, at 10.30 a.m., Tnesday, February '24; Canadian
    Jewish Congress, at 10.30 a.m., Tuesday, March 3; Canadian Welfare
    Council, at 10.30 a.m., Tuesday, March 3; United Electrical, Radio and
    Machine Workers of America, at 3.30 p.m., Wednesday, March 4; League
    for Democratic Rights, at 3.30 p.m., Wednesday, March 4.
    The subcommittee recommends that the representative of the
    Premium Advertising Association of America, Inc., be heard either on
    March 3 or 4, if time allo'Ys, or at an early subsequent date.
    On motion of Mr ..Laing, the said report was unanimously adopted.
    The committee resumed from Febmary 18 the clause by clause study of
    Bill 93.
    Clauses 226 to 249, 251, 253 to 290, 292, 293 and 294 were passed.
    Clauses 222 to 225, 250, 252, 291 and 295 were allowed to stand.

    Wednesday, FEBRUARY 25, 1953.


    The committee met at 3.30 o'clock p.m. The Chairman, Mr. Don. F.
    Brown, presided.
    Members present: Messrs. Brown (Essex West), Cameron, Cannon, Carroll,
    Churchill, Garson, Henderson,_ Laing, MacInnis, "MacNaught, Macnaughton~
    Montgomery, Noseworthy and Robichaud. '
    r
    In attendance: Mr. A. A. Moffatt, Q.C., and Mr. A. J. MacLeod, Senior
    Advisory Counsels, Department of Justice.

    51
    52 SPECIAL COMMITTEE

    Mr. Cannon presented the report of the Steering Supcommittee, dated


    February 24, as follows:
    The subcommittee met at 3.30 o'clock this day, under the chairman-
    ship of Mr. D. F. Brown and the following members were present:
    Messrs. Garson, Robichaud, Laing, Shaw, MacInnis and Cannon.
    Your subcommittee had before it a number of communications and
    briefs some of which contained requests for personal appearance before
    the committee.
    Your subcommittee is unanimously of the opinion, and so recom-
    mends, that the privil~ge of oral representations be extended to -the
    Congress of Canadian Women on March 4, next.
    In the case of the following groups, namely: Montreal Civil Liberties
    Union, Montreal; Canadian Union of Woodworkers, Quebec; and Cana':"
    dian Friends Service Committee, Toronto; the subcommittee,· having
    considered the written submissions of these groups, feels that the views
    expressed therein merely emphasize the objections to certain clauses of
    Bill 93 which were voiced by national organizations and were elaborately I

    dealt with when the said national organizations attended before the
    committee. Therefore, personal appearances in support of the submis-
    sions do not seem necessary and your sub-committee recommends that
    the aforementioned groups be notified accordingly.
    On motion of Mr. Cannon, the said report was unanimously adopted.
    The Chairman informed the committee that advice had been received from
    the Canadian Welfare Council to the effect that they would be unable to appear
    as arranged on Tuesday, March 3. It was agreed that a subsequent date would
    be set for the purpose.
    The Committee resumed from Tuesday, February 24, clause by clause
    study of Bill 93, An Act respecting the Criminal Law.
    Clauses 296, 298 to 303, 305 to 329, 331 to 338, 340, 341, 342, 344 to 364,
    368, 370, 374 to 385, and 387 to 390 were passed.
    On clause 304
    On motion of Mr. Robichaud, seconded by Mr. Ca!lnon,
    . ResolveiL,-That the said clause be amended by deleting from paragraph
    4 thereof, in line 2, page 101 of the Bill, the following words: "and did
    believe".
    Clauses 297, 330, 339, 343, 365 to 367, 369; 371, 372, 373 and 386 were
    allowed to stand: .
    At 5.15 p.m. the committee adjourned to meet again at 10.30 a.m. Tuesday,
    March 3, 1953.

    TUESDAY, March 3, 1953.


    The committee met at 10.30 a.m. The chairman, Mr. Don. F. Brown,
    iresided.
    Members present: Messrs. Brown (Essex West), Browne (St. John's West),
    Cameron, Cannon, Carroll, Churchill, Laing, MacInnis, MacNaught, Macnaugh-
    ton, Montgomery, Noseworthy, Robichaud and Shaw.
    CRIMINAL LAW (BILL 93) 53

    In attendance: Mr. A. A. Moffatt, Q.C., and Mr. A. J. MacLeod, Senior


    Advisory Counsels, Department of Justice;. Mr. Saul Hayes of Montreal,
    National Director of the Canadian Jewish Congress, with Professor Bora Laskin
    of Toronto, Professor. of Law, School of Law, University of Toronto; Mr. M. M.
    Myerson, Montreal, Advocate and Barrister, Member of the Legal Committee;
    and Mr. Ronald C. Merriam, of the legal firm of Gowling, MacTavish, Watt,
    Osborne and Henderson, representing Premium Advertising Association of
    America.
    The chairman introduced a delegation 'of the Canadian Jewish Congress
    composed of Mr. Saul Hayes, Montreal, National Director; Professor Bora
    Laskin, Professor of Law, School of Law, University of Toronto; and JY.fr. M. M.
    Myerson, Montreal, Advocated and Barrister, member of the Legal Committee
    of the Congress.
    Mr. Saul Hayes read the brief on behalf of the Canadian Jewish Congress
    and was questioned at length thereon. Professor Bora Laskin and Mr. Myerson
    were also asked specific questions arising out of the study of the brief.
    At the conclusion of their presentation, the members of the congress were
    thanked by the chairman on behalf of the committee for their valuable
    contribution.
    The committee also heard Mr. 'Ronald C. Merriam of the legal firm of
    Gowling, MacTavish, Watt, Osborne and Henderson, who appeared on behalf
    of the Premium Advertising Association of America. Mr. Merriam read a
    short brief and was questioned thereon and the witness, after being thanked
    by the chairman, was retired.
    At 12.30 p.m. the committee adjourned to meet again at 3.30 p.m., March 4,
    1953.
    ANTOINE CHASSE,
    Clerk of the Committee.
    DOMINION OF CANADA

    HOUSE OF COMMONS
    DEBATES
    OFFICIAL REPORT

    FIRST SESSION-TWENTY -SECOND PARLIAMENT

    2-3 ELIZABETH II
    BEING THE 96TH SESSION FOR THE. PERIOD 1867·1954

    VOLUJ.\iIE I, 1963-64
    COMPRISING THE PERIOD FROM THE TWELFTH DAY OF NOVEMBER, 1953,
    TO THE SIXTEENTH DAY OF DECEMBER, 1953, INCLUSIVE

    INDEX ISSUED IN A SEPARATE VOLUME

    ED .....IOND CLOUTIER, C,M.G., a.A., D.S,P.


    QUEEN'S PRIN:IER ANn CONi'ROLL"EIt OF STATIONERY
    OtTAWA,1954
    31

    HOUSE OF COMMONS

    MondaYI November 161 1953 Mr. Diefenbaker: Perhaps the house woUldr
    ;:.The house met oat 2.30 p.m. permit a quesHon. How many prosecutions
    , have there been under -the resale price m.ain-
    1", "
    .)': 'RESTRICTIVE TRADE PRACTICES tenance legislation?
    l'l, .
    {{.,' _ ,TABLING OF REPORTS OF COMMISSION Mr. Garson: As I have indicated in my
    statement, this Quebec case is the first case
    ~: -H~n. Stuart S. Garson (Minister of Justice): that has arisen since the new legi:slation was
    flvIr. Speaker, I should like to table -two reports
    tof the restdctive trade pra'Cti~es commission i~troduced. It is thought. having regm'd ·to
    (f,bich were published after the iast parlia- the fact rthat the offence was only technical,
    b ent .was adjourned. One of these arose in that it would not be a very good case upon

    f ntario J the -other in Quebec. which to base the first .prosecutionS! under
    k':~h_e 'ontario report relates to alleged price the new legislation.
    vdiscrlmination "under section 498A of the Mr. Diefenbaker: So -there have not been
    t!5r1nunai Code between two retail hardware any prosecutions?
    ~ealers in North Bay, Ontario; and f:t is the
    l!I!st report to deal entirely with this ty,pe of Mr. Garson: No.
    Foffence.
    tj-Th~' quebec r~port relates -to .allege~ resale INDUSTRIAL STATUS OF WOMEN
    lpdce -maintenance in c-onnectlOn wIth the ~EASURE TO REQUIRE EQUAL PAY FOR EQUAL
    firi~~~~tlng of soap products in the Montreal WORK
    pi-strlct of the· province 'Of Quebec. and is Mrs. Ellen L. Fairclough (Hamilton West)
    rihe ·:first
    ~."".-,.; .. ,. one that we have received dealing moved the first reading of Bill No.2, to pro-
    ~.i~~ /;!esale price mainten-ance since the
    vid-e equal pay for equal work for women.
    ~assmg, in 1951) of the new legi-slation.
    KrYte .hav¢ taken the opinion of experienced Some han. Members: Ex!plain.
    Jnd:,£apable outside counselln both of-these Mrs. Fairclough: Mr. Speaker, I think the
    ~'Ses. . title of the bill is fully explanatory. It is in-
    t~in",the Ontario case, the opinion of Mr. tended to prohibit discrimination against
    r?rnlim'M,athewsl Q.C., of Torontol is to the women in the matter of wages earned.
    ~.t!_~J ~~at it is a borderlin~ case of a technical Motion agreed to and bill read the first
    l8!qJll~ic;m .and it is not a suitable case upon time.
    ~I,hi<c.h_ -10 found the fiTst prosecution under
    r,tion .498A of the Criminal Code unless, of CANADA GRAIN ACT

    ~
    :.~.~.rs~; -the' 'CondUct disclosed in the report AMENDMENT TO PROVIDE FOR FAIR ALLOCATION
    s persisted in. . OF BOX CARS
    ,). "

    ~t;lJlte,Quebec ·case, the opinion of Mr. John Mr:, H. R. Argue {Assiniboial moved for
    .
    t~., e~~ Q,C' J of Montreal, is to the effect that leave to introduce Bill No.3, to amend the
    ,i~~e the offence was technical and! isolated Canada Grain Act (distribution of box cars).
    t.~en\l h~d .be.en committed without the knowl· Some hon. Members: EXlplain.
    k~~e_ and -approval of the management -ofthe

    ~
    ___ ~pany concerned, and. apparently against Mr. Argue: The purpose of this \Jill Is to
    Y remove present discrimination in the distribu~
    I~rosecu~onl
    •.• ".'
    ;:P9.liC.'. . J;t.he case was not a suitable one for
    ·and -a .prosecuUon would not tion of box cars by providing in a new section
    " ely help the enforcement of the Combines of the car order book a rule for the fair al-
    : ye~ti~ation Act. location of box cars among elevator com~
    fi·:-:·The ;:director of investigationl having ~anies, By allocating their seeded acreage
    f~:c~ed ,the sam,e views, has advised me to among the elevator companies at a marketing
    '<and ~rne e~ect. I conour with -these views> pointl producers themselves will deterriline
    ~,n';eit:V~ therefore decided- not to p~os~cute the distribution of box cars at that point.
    ffhat -t et' case unJess further checks Indl:cate Motion agreed to and bill read the first
    8:":,;··' he offences are being persisted in. time.
    t:;{~;-:-
    32 HOUSE OF COMMONS
    Proposed Legislation
    INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS Mr. St. Laurent: The explanatory notes read
    AMENDMENT OF CHAPTER 152, REVISE)) STATUTES
    as follows: The purpose of this bill is to
    OF 1952-vOLUNTARY REVOCABLE CHECK-OFF redefine the present duties and functions of
    OF UNION DUES the Minister of Resources and Development
    (Mr. Lesage) so as to give greater emphasis
    Mr. Stanley Knowles (Winnipeg Norih to his responsibility for the administration
    Centre) moved for leave to introduce Bill No. and development of the north and for. Eskimo
    4, to amend the Industrial Relations and affairs. To reflect the change in emphasis,
    Disputes Investigation Act (voluntary revoc~ the name of the department is altered to
    able check-off). include specific mention of northern affairs.
    Some hon. Members: Explain. The chang~s are in recognit~on of the growing
    importance of the north as -a part of Canada
    Mr. Knowles: The purpose of this bill is to and of the desirability -of providing greater
    write into the Industrial Relations and Dis~
    putes Investigation Act a provision which is -attention to all aspects of its affairs.
    already in several of the provincial labour Motion agreed to and bill read the first
    codes, namely the voluntary revocable check~ tim~.
    off of trade union dues.· This bill is identical
    with the one that was before the house last CRIMINAL CODE
    session. At that time its subject matter was REVISION AND AMENDMENT OF EXISTING STATUTE
    endorsed by the industrial relations com-
    mittee and by the House pf Commons. Hon. Stuart S. Garson (Minister of Justice>
    moved "for leave to introduce Biil No.7,
    Motion· agreed to and bill read the first respecting the criminal law.
    time.
    Motion agreed to and bill read the first
    ELECTION MATERIAL time.

    USE IN BY-ELECTIONS AND NORTHWEST TERRITORIAL LANDS ACT


    TERRITORIES ELECTIONS
    ADMINISTRATION OF PL"ACER AND QUARTZ
    Hon. J. W. PickersgUI (Secretary of State) MINING OPERATIONS .
    moved for leave to introduce Bill No.5, Hon. Jean Lesage (Minisfer of Resources
    respecting use of election material for by- and Development) moved for leave to intro~
    elections alid Northwest Territories eleotions. duce BiU No.8, to -amend the Territorial
    Some hon. Members: Explain. Lands Act and to repeal the Yukon Quartz
    Mining Act and the Yukon Placer Mining
    Mr. Pickersgill: The explanatory note says Act.
    that the purpose of this bill is. to avoid the
    unnecessary expense of printing new election Mr. Adamson: Will the minister explain the"
    bill?
    material by authorizing material already
    printed as required by the Canada Elections Mr. Lesage: A shni'lar bill \vas on the order
    Act of 1938 to be used in any by-elections paper last sessi'On but it did not go through
    the house. The purpose of the bill is to
    and Northwest_Terr~tories elections from now amend the Territorial Lands Act in order
    until the next general election. Legislation ,that the 'administration, control and disposi-'
    is required because of the coming into effect tion of quartz and placer mining rights in,
    of the Revised Statutes of Canada, 1952, on the Yukon shall be brought under the provI-
    September 15 of this year. sions of the act with 'resulting unIformity
    bet\veen the Northwest TerrUo.ries and Yukon
    Motion agreed to and bill read the first Territory. "
    time.
    Mr. Adamson: It is exactly the s"ame pill?
    . NORTHERN AFFAIRS AND NATIONAL Mr. Lesage: Exadly the same biU.
    RESOURCES Motion agreed to and bill read the first
    PROVISION FOR CONSTITUTION OF DEPARTMENT., time.
    DEFINITION OF DUTIES AND FUNCTIONS
    OF MINISTE~, ETC.
    CANADIAN NATIONAL HAlLWAYS
    APPOINTMENT OF GEORGE A. TOUCHE AND
    Righi Hon. L. S. St. Laurent (Prime
    COMPANY AS AUDITORS
    Minister) moved for leave to introduce Bill
    No. 61 resp~cting the Department of Northern Hon. Lionel Chevrier (Minister of Trans~
    Affairs and National Resources. port) moved for leave to introduce Bill No.9,
    respecting the appointment of auditors for
    Mr. Knowles: Explain. national railways.
    [Mr. Argue.]
    DECEMBER 15, 1953 939
    Canada Grain Act
    positions and not in market demand. Priority their choice, and allows them the privilege
    must also be given to grain required for' of delivering their grain to that elevator it
    domestic outlets. is a vast improvement, and will work in
    With the absolute need for priority ship- conjunction with the car order book.
    ments, the distribution of cars in accordance On motion of Mr. Johnson <Kindersley) the
    with the -applications in the car 'Order book debate was adjourned.
    cannot be properly carried out. To check
    every application to ensure that the grain to Mr. Speaker: As it is six o'clock, the house"
    be shipped has a preference is impossible, will resume at eight o'clock consideration of
    and would -unnecessarily delay shipments. the business which was interrupted at five
    The continuance of the car order book under o'clock.
    these conditions leads to continual complaints Mr. Fleming: I presume that means we are
    and dissatisfaction among the different inter- to continue with Bill No. 29, to amend the
    ests; also the tendency among agents to fail Customs Act?
    to comply strictly with the statutory and Mr. Howe (Port Arthur): Yes-
    regulatory provisions 1'e car 'order book
    procedure. Mr. Harris: I take it that someone is
    I suggest to my hon. friend who is present- inquiring what we are going to do?
    ing this bill that anything he can do under Mr. Fleming: I asked if we were going to
    his bill can be done under the car order book. reSl,Jme consideration of Bill No. 29 in com-
    There is no limit to the nu"mber of applica~ mittee at eight o'clock.
    tions for cars that can be put in. Every Mr. ,Harris: No; we are going to start with
    member of the pool who wishes to deliver the Criminal Code at eight o'clock.
    to a certain elevator can enter his name on
    the car order buok and, except for extra- At six o'clock the house took recess.
    ordinary marketing condi-tions which I think
    it is in the interests of everyone to recognize,
    the car order book can do everything that my
    hon. friend intends to do u'nder his bill, and AFTER RECESS
    can do it wjthout tying up the whole trans- The house resumed at eight o'clock.
    purtation system, as would be -the inevitable
    outcome of this bill. CUSTOMS ACT
    Mr. W. M. Johnson (Kind.rsley): Mr. AMENDMENT PERMITTING MINISTER TO APPRAISE
    Speaker, as a practical farmer I welcome the GOODS ON WEIGHTED AVERAGE
    opportunity to take part in' this debate. I
    appreciate the subject matter of the bill The house resumed consideration in com-
    introduced by the hon. member for Assini~ mittee of Bill No. 29, to amend the Customs
    boia (Mr. Argue). I am thankful that the Act-Mr. McCann-Mr. Robinson (Simcoe
    Minister of Trade and Commei'ce (Mr. Howe) East) in the chair.
    has pr'esented the -history of -the car order The Chairman: Order. When the committee
    book and has made' the statement that it is rose at five o'clock we were considering
    entirely satisfactory in meeting the require- Bill No. 29. Shall I report "progress and ask
    ments of western farmers. leave to sit again?
    But I recall reading p~blished statements
    by the president of the Saskatchewan wheat Some hon. Members: Agreed.
    pool to the effect that the car 'order book as Progress re:ported.
    used at the present time is cumbersome and
    unwieldy. I think the car order book was CRIMINAL CODE
    originally implemented to give farmers the
    REVISION AND AMENDMENT OF EXISTING STATUTE
    opportunity of marketing their grain in com-
    petition with the line elevator companies. Hon. Sluar! S. Garson <Minister of Justice)
    That was prior to the era of the Canadian moved the second rea"ding of Bill No.7,
    wheat board. At the present time the car respecting the criminal law.
    order book is, to my knowledge, being used He said: In opening the debate on. the
    by Canadian farmers as a mechanisll) to second reading of Bill No.7, Mr. Speaker, I
    allocate box cars to the elevator of their should like first to express my appreciation
    choice, or is being used to perform the for the co-operation which has been extended
    function envisaged by this bill. by the hon. J;,eader of the Opposition (Mr.
    Since the car order book is failing to carry Drew), and his lieutenant in this connection,
    out the function for which it is presently the hon. member for Kamloops (Mr. Fulton);
    being used, and Bill No. 3 gives farmers an to the ,eader of the C.C.F. party and his
    opportunity to designate the elevator of assistant in this connection, the hon. member
    83276-60.
    940 HOUSE OF COMMONS
    Criminat·Code
    for Vancouvel'-Kingsway' (Mr. MacInnis); to one by one in numerical order, setting aside
    the han., leader of the Social Credit party those which any member of the house Would'
    and the hon. member for- Red Deer (Mr. 1i1{e to reserve for further debate or in
    Shaw), for ·their co-operation in joinirtg in respect of which- he feels he woUld _like
    our recommendation to the members of a information which may not be immediately
    method of debating this bill. I feel that this available. .
    method will save a great deal of time and In that connection, the government wouid
    effort, and produce a far better result than wish to set aside certain clauses of the bill as, I
    if we were to debate it in the usual way well, for the reason that -although, in accor.
    in which bills are debated. dance with the understanding which we
    In dealing with a biU to consolidate a code have reached with the members of the
    of laws we ,must realize that such a bill other parties, we have brought in Bill No.7"
    on secoIid reading' presents a velY different in -virtually the same form it was reportecl
    problem from the discussion of the prin- upon by the special committee of the last
    ciple of an ordinary bill. Our code is intended parliam-ent, since that time we have received.
    to cover the whole ambit of the criminal from sources which we regard as reliable sug~
    law in this country. It occupies a. field here gestions which we think are worthy of the
    which, in the United Kingaom, is covered by attention 'Of han. members.
    more than 150 criminal statutes. In doing Thep. there are one or two points of sub-
    so the one code has ,to deal with such diverse stance, in respect of which the government
    crimes as treason, murder, criminalUbel, sedi- itself i1? anxious to lay before the members.
    tion) rape and so forth. Each of these crimes a! parliament its suggestions which we. think
    and the sections dealing with it has its own are preferable to the recommendations -Qf ·the
    principle which is dealt with in the sections special committee.. '. .
    of the code relating. to it. That being the case" I think my first task,
    If, as has been correctly said, we debate is to place" on, the. record certain representa~'
    the principle of a bin· on second reading, tions which· I made, a_nd on the strength Of_.
    then it is quite obvious that to discuss all which· those members of the other. parties
    these Widely varying principles of the various have been good enough to join· with me In
    clauses of a c,riminal code bill simultaneously recommending this procedure to the hOlis-e. '
    would m·ake for great· confusiori. Let us try I represented first that tne bill now in the,
    to imagine, if it is not too preposterous to hands of hon. members is in all respects th~:
    do so, what a parallel situation would be in same bill as )lassed by the Senate in Decem,..,
    the United Kingdom. A large number of bel', 1952, as amended and rep·orted' by' the
    separate bills ainending separate acts would special Commons committee, 'except for slx~
    s~multaneously _be brought down, each involv- small matters ·i.llv61ving only eleven 'sec~ici.hs,
    ing its own principle) and then an endeaVOUr nam~ly 336, 375; 467, 469, 473; 687 and claus.~s·
    would be made to debate all of the principles 747 to. 751. None of these matters and nop.~_
    of all those amendm€uits simultaneously on of. these changes that ar~ ·set out in" these,
    the same second r~?-~ling. sections to which I have referr~d is, pa.r_~~
    'This is the- p'rohlem which confronts this ticularly important. I shall) of course;. b:e.
    house in dealin-g w.ith the second reading of pleased to explain each "Of them - wh~n w~
    the Criminal Code consolidation) Bill No.7. reach those sections in committee. .
    I am very h·appy that, through the co-opera- I should, like next to refer to on~ of the-
    tion of the hon. members whom 1- have named, main terms in the final report of- th~ speeral
    we have reached an understanding upon the House of Commons committee at the last
    strength of which we recommend 'to- the parliament. It reads as follows, on page 606 '-
    members of the house t,hat on the second of Votes and Proceedings for May 4, 1953:
    reading of this 'bill we should debate only the The clause by clause study of Bill 93 was in
    one principle which applies to all sections of itself a tremendous task, because as eacb clause
    the bilI,_ namely that a criminal statute which of the bilI, in respect of which- objecwms thereto
    has been on 'the law books of this country for ,or representations thereon had been made, was
    reached, these objections and representations were
    a period of 60 years needs now to be con- in all -cases placed before the conunittee fl?!
    solidated and revised. consIderation. - "
    At various times during the course of its
    Our thought is that when we get into com;- work, the following matters pertainIng ~o the'
    mittee of the whole we shall follow the criminal law were dIrected to the attentton of
    example which proved so profitable in the your committee; namely:
    committee on banking and commerce in the (a) The defence of insanIty.
    (b) Capital punishment.
    other place and in the special select com- (c) Corporal punishment.
    mittee of the House of Commons to consider Cd) Lotteries. . -
    Although these matters are well withm the
    the criminal law at the last session, and go scope of the terms of reference, your committeh.
    through the sections of the Criminal Code bill Is of opinion that these questions are of sUC
    [Mr. Garson.]
    DECEMBER 15, 1953 941
    Criminal Code
    paramount importance that they could and should house is the appointment of a joint com~
    not be dealt with merely as incidentals to the mittee of both houses of parliament to inquire
    consolidation or ·revlsion of the present Criminal into and to report upon the question of
    Code embodied in EiII 93. whether the criminal law of Canada relating
    That is to say, Bill No.7 that we have in to (a) capital punishment; (b) corporal punish~
    this, parliament was Bill No. 93 -in the last ment or (c) lotteries should be amended in
    parliament. The r~port goes on: any respect ?nd, if SO~ in what manner and
    The committee, upon the material before it, was to what extent.
    not prepared· to recommend a change in the pres~ f"d t" h e
    ent law respecting the defence of insanity, lotteries After care ul Consl era lOn, owever, W
    and the impOSition of punishment by whipping and reached the opinion that the defence of
    by sentence of death, but unanimously has come insanity to a charge involving criminal
    to the, conclusion, and so recommends, th?t the responsibility, as laid down by the law and
    governor general in council give consideration to
    the appointment of a royal commisSion, or to the
    arrnlied
    1:'1:'
    by ,the courts, is a qu,estio,n involving
    submission to ·parliament of a proposal to set up expert legal and psychiatric knowledge in
    a joint parliamentary committee of the Senate and respect of which it seemed to us that it \vould
    the House Of Commoris, which said royal com~ be at least difficult in the first 'instance for a
    mission
    consider or joint and
    fUrther parliamentary
    report uponcommittee shan
    the SUbstance committee of laymen' to' reach,. a dependable
    ,
    and principles of these provisions of the law a'fore~ opinion ,,,hich would in'spire confidence.
    said, and shall recommend whether any of those
    provisions should ·be amended and, if so, shaI1
    To us therefore it seemed. preferable that
    recommend the nature of the amendments to be the question of the defence of insanity on a
    ma.de. . charge involving criminal responsibili~y
    Now, sir, at the time the House of Com- should be studied ,by a royal commission
    mons committee made ihis report from made up of recognized experts in -the fields
    which' I have quoted the royal commission of law and psychiatry. Then if it wet:e
    which 'had 'bee'n appointed by ,the govern- consIdered. helpful or appropriate the report
    ment of the United Kingdom as far back as of such a royal commission could be made
    1949 to consider the question of· capital available to the parliamentary committee in
    ·punishment had not at that· time .made its connection with its consideration of the sub-
    report. It did not become available to us ject of capital pu·nishment~
    . her.e in Ottawa in printed .form until p.bout Therefore after the passage of the motion
    October 1, 1953. :aut when we got this now before the house I am ,prepared, if I
    report it seemed to us in the .D:epartment may have unanimpus approval, to move that
    of Justice, . upon careful analysis, that the 'a joint committee as aforesaid. be appointed-
    - ideas, thought-s,.statistics and other material that is to siy,-to take the first step necessary
    which it had gathered not only 'in the to set in motion the procedure which will
    United Kingdom but also .in a number result in a joint committee; because, of. course,
    of;countries in Europe, as well as in several the other place .ha~ to make its .contribution
    .of the states in the lJnited States of America, in due course to any such commIttee.
    and the conclusions :which it had reached -in For the record I think'I should say, in
    relation to capital punishment could, we -carrying out the understanding which has
    thought, be collated with comparable ideas, been reached with the other parties,' that
    thoughts, statistics and other material avaiI~ the government has under consid~ration the
    able in Canada in relation to capital ];)unish~ early appointment 'of a royal commission to
    ment. inquire into and report upon the .question
    It seemed to us that all of this material of whether the criminal laW of Canada
    -could then be supplemented QY representa~ relating to the defence of 'insanity should
    tions from those who were interested in the be amended and, if so, in what manner, and
    subject of capital punishment, either for or to what ext¢nt.
    against, and that it should .be possible that Pending .the reports of the proposed royal
    this material of the United Kingdo'm report commission and the .proposed joint Pdrlia~
    and the. material gathered in Canada, supple- mentary committee I recommend to you, Mr.
    mented by these oral representations,' could Speaker, and to my fellow members in t~e
    be made available to a joint committee House of Commons that we would be wise
    of parliament. We thought that a' joint in following the recommendations of the
    committee of parliament could consider all House of Commons committee which was
    of -these materials, as well as such further·
    facts and things as it might consid~r relevant, appointed .at the last session of parliament,
    and upon the basis of the whple reach con- to examine the criminal. c'ode bill in the
    elusions which would be as wise and as manner they suggested when they said, as is
    likely to inspire confidence as those which set out in the report:
    could be reached by any royal -commission. The committee, upon the material before it. was
    not prep8red to recommend a change in the pres-
    We therefore are of the view that the·. ent law respecting the defence of insanity, lot..
    proper course for us to recommen4 to this teries and the imposition of punishment by
    942 HOUSE OF COMMONS
    Criminal Code
    whipping and by sentence of death, but unani- much right to amend the law as the govern-
    mously has come to the conclusion, and so
    recommends. that the governor general in council ment. He said, "Oh, yes, but what as.surance
    giVe consideration to the appointment of a royal would we have that these bills moved by
    commission,- private members ·would not be manoeuvred
    As I understand that recommendation, it down t? the bottom of the order paper and
    means that we shall leave the clauses relat- thus fall to become law?" I said: "Well I
    ing to these four subject matters, namely the will secure from the Prime Minister"-as ~e
    la~ respecting :he defence of insanity, lot- had previously done in connection with
    tel'les, and the lmposition of punishment by another bill which I think it is still respect-
    whipping and by sentence of death in the able to mention, namely the Emergency
    form .in ·which they now stand in Blil No.7; Powers Act-"an undertaking that the gov-
    that is in the form in which they have stood ernment will expedite the prompt consider- I
    for many years; and that parliament shoUld ation by this house of any such legislation
    pass these clauses in their present form upon introduced. by the opposition based upon
    the government's undertaking that w~ shall either of such reports as I have referred to."
    appoint a parliamentary committee the first Mr. Knowles: What about private members
    step 9f which I propose to take to~ight, if I on the ~ove1,'nment side?
    play have the unanimous consent of the
    Mr. Fulton; They can be taken care of.
    house~ a.nd tha~ we would appoint the royal
    commISSIOn which I have already given an Mr. Garson: They have not raised this
    undertaking to do. It is hoped' that by these point, but I would not ha~e the slightest
    iI).struments we may have placed before us hesitation in extending the same assurance
    that more complete information which, I am to them.
    sure, the members of the special committee Mr. Fulton: Did you discuss that with your
    of last year as well as most other han. mem- whip?
    beers in this chamber now feel we must have
    ·before we assume the grave responsibility of Mr. Garson: In this connection the govern-
    changing the present law in respect of these ment believe that in this present bill there
    four subjects. are a number of principles which are moral
    The Prime Minister (Mr. st. LaUrent) has in character. We think it would be in the
    .authorized me to say that the government public interest if the government inform its
    undert~kes to give the most serious and con-
    members that they should vote according to
    s~ientious consideration to the reports of
    their conscience upon those clauses, and I
    these bodies as and when they are received. would hope that the leaders of the opposition
    parties might perhaps be able to urge their
    I give that -undertaking because the other members to do the same. Because I think we
    day, in discussion ,yith the han. member for all hope that the new Criminal Code which
    ~amloops (Mr.. Fulton) he said: "Well, it is will become law upon the passage of Bill
    , all very well for you to give an undertaking No. 7 in its final form will -be the achieve-
    to appoint this commission and the parlia- m~nt and responsibility of parliament itself
    mentary committee;_ but suppose they make rather than merely that of the government.
    a report .and you just pigeonhole it· then
    where do we stand? Will ·you give 'us an Now, sir, with these preliminaries out of
    undertaking to implement these reports?" It the way, we have to consider on second
    .s~emed to me that no prudent government
    reading, I suggest~ the principle of this bill,
    with due regard to its responsibility could namely whether after 60 years we should
    giv~ an unde.rtaklng to ·carry out a report
    consolidate our Criminal Code; whether the
    whIch then dId not exist. So I suggested to provisions of Bill No. 7 have been arrived
    him that the government, being a serious at by competent lawyers .and legislators
    responsible ·government, would ·either accept after adequate research, study and dis-
    these ~'eports when they ·became available 01' cussion; whether there has been ample
    would present to parliament str·ong reasons opportunity for representations concerning
    for not doing sOlar for doing so only in part. this legislation to be made in a thoroughly
    democratic manner by interested organiza-
    And ifI sir, for such strong reasons the tions and individuals, and whether in cOD--
    governl11:ent shOUld not introduce legislation sequence of all of these steps the provisions
    based on these reports, I pointed out to my of Bill No. _7 now before us are adequate for
    hon. friend 1 and I believe he recognized the their high purpose ..
    force of the point, that it would be possible To answer .these questions I should like
    for any of the opposition parties or members
    on the basis of the information disclosed b; to review-and I shall do it as brieflY as
    I can-the development of the criminal law
    th~se reports, themselves to bring legislation in Canada and the steps through which this
    into the house, :to amend existing law. This present legislation has passed prior to its
    would not be a money -bill. They have as appearance on the order paper tonight.
    lMr. Garson.]
    DECEMBER 15, 1953 943
    CriminaL Code
    Like other very large countries with had inherited as colonies of Great Britain as
    widely and unevenly dispersed population, these provincial criminal laws stood at the
    such as the United States of America, time the provinces entered the Canadian
    Australia and the U.S.S.R., Canada has found confederation.
    it advantageous to have a federal system of It is this code, introduced by Sir John
    government under which governmental pow- Thompson, in 1892, and as amended from
    ers of responsibility have been clivided time to time since, that Bill No.7, now before
    between the government of Canada on the the house, is designed after 60 years to con~
    one hand and the government of its ten solidate and in sQme respects to revise.
    provinces on the other. Under this division
    In the 1892 code there were 950 sections.
    the enactment of the criminal law is the Since that time there has been scarcely a
    responsibility of the national government and
    session of parliament at which amendments
    the parliament of Canada; but-and I do not have not been made to that code. As it stood
    think this point can be emphasized too
    strongly-once Canadian criminal law has in the Revised Statutes of Canada of 1927 it
    had grown to 1,152 sections. Of course one
    been enacted its enforcement, 'with some of the important reasons for this large num-
    minor ex-ceptions, is the responsibility of the
    ber of clauses has been a main principle of
    provincial authorities which are c'onstitution~ our code, that Canadians should not be pun~
    ally charged with the administration of jus- ished ior conduct unless parliament had
    tice. It is therefore very important that we
    enact here laws which the provincial authori- expressly declared that conduct to be
    unlawful.
    ti.es will wish to enforce without reluctance.
    In the past Canada's large~scale efforts at In this present Bill No.7 we have retained
    crhninal law-making, such as tWs Bill No.7 this principle, and indeed we have applied it
    now before us, have been wise, few and far more closely and more fully to our criminal
    between. In 1869 the parliament of Canada law. If, therefore, our code is to be compre:.
    . passed .five principal acts relating to the hensive of all of these things which parlia-
    criminal law based on or adapted largely ment declares to be -crimes, it must neces~
    from the provisions of the similar ·consoli- sarily contain many sections. But I think,
    dated acts passed in the United Kingdom in Mr. Speaker, it is noteworthy and it reflects
    1861. a good deal of credit upon the draftsmen and
    others who have taken part in the prepara~
    In 1878 a body of commissioners was lion of Bill No.7 ·that as now before you it
    established in England to prepare for that has 400 fewer sections than the code which
    country a draft -code of criminal law, and Sir is chapter 36 of the Revised Statutes of
    James Stephen, who was the outstanding Canada of 1927; and it has 200 fewer sec-
    expert in that field- in the United Kingdom, tions than even the original code introduced
    and had prepared the year before his well- by Sir John Thompson in 1892.
    known UDigest of Criminal La wJJ, was a
    member of that royal commission. In due By the year 1948, as one would expect, the
    course, after considerable time, the United Criminal Code required a thorough .()ver~
    Kingdom commissioners reported', but to this haul. As a result of many amendments that
    day the parliament of the United Kingdom have been made during the course of some
    has l.lot seen fit to enact a code of criminal 56 years there was a Jack of uniformity of
    law and procedure. Instead, as I indic,\ted language and many' provisions were ambigu-
    earlier in my remarks, it has on its statute ous and unclear. It contained inconsistencies
    books upwards of 150 separate criminal and anomalies. It was sometimes difficult to
    statutes. find the law in connection with the particular
    It was not until 1892 that Sir John Thomp- matter beca,use separate provisions relat-
    son, the then minister ,of justice, introduced ing to that matter had been placed in differ-
    in the parliament of Canada a criminal code, ent parts of the code at different times during
    which he was able to persuade the parlia- these years. What was even a graver offence
    ment of that day to pass in the same year, was that as a result of these extensive amend~
    unlike the one we are now considering, Mr. ments made over a long period of time
    Speaker, which has been under preparation there was a substantial' amount of over-
    and consideration for nearly five years. This lapping and repetition. This state of the
    1892 Canadian crlminal code adapted the pro- criminal law constituted a very serious incon~
    visions, so far as they were am:llicable to venience to practising lawyers and to the
    Canada, of the English draft code which the administration of justice.
    English themselves had not enacted. The Provisions relating to matters of procedure
    1892 Canadian ··criminal code also attempted which were quite appropriate in 1892 were
    to ass"imilate and make uniform the criminal not at all suitable in the light of the sub-
    laws of the Canadian provinces which they stantial increase in the work of the crimin.al
    944 HOUSE OF COMMON~
    C1imlnal Code
    courts resulting, .among other' reasons, from (a) To revise ambiguous and unclear 'pro-
    the very substantial increase in the popula· visions.
    tion of Canada between 1892 and 1948. (b) To adopt uniform language throughout.
    Accordingly the examination and study of
    (c) To eliminate inconsistencies legal
    the Criminal Code was authorized by order anomalies or difficulties. .'
    in council P.C. 527 on February 3, 1949)
    during my term of' office; but the original (d) To rearra.nge provisions and parts.
    recommendation for the adoption of this (e) To seek to simplify by omitti~g and
    course had been made by. my distinguished combining provisions. ,
    pre9,ecessor, Right Hon. J. L. Ilsley) as the (f) With the approval of the statute revi-
    then !p.inister of justice early in 1948, almost, sion commission) to omit provisions which
    I would p!=li~t out,' six years ·ago. . should be transferred to other statutes. ~
    The task of preparing the new consolidated (g) To endeavour to make the code exhaus-
    code was assigned to a commission consisting tive of the criminal law, and ' .
    of Han. W. M. Martin, chief justice of Sas- (h) To effect such procedural amendments
    katchewan, chairman; .Mr. Justice Fauteux as are deemed necessary for the speedy and
    and- Mr. F. P. Varcoe) Q.C., deputy minister fair enforcement of the .criminal law. .
    of justlc'e.
    Th~ commissioners applied themselves ,to
    In relation to the charge that is sometimes this task with the assistance of Mr. J. 'C.
    made that too' many prosecutors have been Martin, for many years a provincl,al reagistrate
    engaged in the drafting of this code) I would at Weyburn and a well-known student 'of
    · like to point, 'out that the counsel for this the criminal law iit Canada, who. acted as
    ,_commission was a very able criminal defence counsel to the commission. In the - at::tqal
    lawYer of long experience, Mr:. Arthur Slaght, . dra~ting of the bill the commission received
    Q.C., of Toronto. assistance from Mr. A. J. MacLeod,. whojs
    The commission was' to have the assist- the senior advisory counsel to the Department
    ance of a committee comprising Mr. Robert of Justice itself .. I have named all of these
    Forsyth) Q.c., now Judge Forsyth, Toronto; gentlemen to show that we have dra\'lii c'n
    Mr. Fernand Choquette, Q.C.) now Mr. Justice legal talent of very varied experieltce from
    Choquette, Quebec; H. J. Wilson, Q.C., deputy all parts' of Canada to assist us' in.- tlils-
    attorney .ge~eral of Alberta, and again two matter. .
    · outstanding defence lawyers, Mr. J. J. Rob- The commission submitted its final r~:portj­
    inette,' Q.C., Toronto, and Mr. Joseph Sedg- together with a draft crllninal cooe con-
    wick, Q.C., Toronto. The personnel of the solidation bill) to the government on' Janu-
    committee was subsequently increased and ary 22, 1952. . ,
    .. ~L
    'Mr. W; C. Dunlop, Q.C., Halifax, Mr. H. P. The government spent a few months giving
    Carter, Q.C., St. 'John's, Newfoundland) and consideration to the draft and then it was
    , Mr. T. p. MacDonald., Q.C., Ottawa, became inn'oduced into the other place as Senate
    members of the committee. Btll No. H·8 on May 2) 1952. It was r~·
    Then, as some members of the commission ferred to the Senate banking and com~erce
    and the committee found that their jUdicial committee, which appointed a subcommittee
    duties or their law practices made it impos- under the chairmanship of Senator Hayd,en
    sible for them to devote the very large to examine the bill clause by clause and to
    amount of time that was necessary to get report upon it. Amongst the other semito!,s
    their commission work completed, the com- from the other place who served prominently
    mittee was reorganized by an order in coun- on that committee were Senators Farris,
    · cil on September 26) 1950. Again on May 10) Roebuck and Haig. I would ask the house to
    1951, by order in council a second commission note that these are not prosecuting lawyers.
    consisting of Hon. W. M. Martin, chief justice They are all widely known, experienced and -
    of Saskatchewan, chairman; Han. Mr. Justice successful criminal defence lawyers. -
    Fernand Choquette, Quebec, His Honour
    Judge Robert Forsyth, Toronto, Mr. H. J. The bill was considered by that subcom-
    Wilson) Q.C., Edmonton, Mr. Joseph Sedgwick, mittee until the end of the session early in
    Q.C., Toronto, and Mr. A. A. Moffat) Q.C., 1952 and although that subcommitte'e met
    Ottawa) was set up and they proceeded with four or five times each week, time did not
    the work and largely finished it. permit the subcommittee to make a final
    The terms of reference are, I think, impor- report to the main committee before parlia-
    tant because they indicate the objectives ment adjourned.
    which the commission had in front of them The bill was revised again by the Depart-
    in their work of consolidating the code. They ment of Justice in the summer of 1952 in
    were thes'e: the light of the discussions in the other place
    [Mr. Garson.l
    DECEMBER IS, 1953 945
    Crimin-a.L Code
    and in its committee, and in the light of rep- Mr. Garson: Along with the members of
    resentations which we received from indi- . the royal commission and the others who
    viduals and organizations. It was again 1ntro- have -taken part in the preparation of this
    duced in November, 1952, as Bill 0 in bilI, I think they are entitled to a substantial
    the other place where .it was again referred to share of the credit for the piece of legislation
    . the banking and commerce committee. we now have before us. I must· say, Mr.
    The banking and commerc_e committee set Speaker, that the members of this committee
    -up the same subcommittee which after coo- certainly held and presented strong views~
    sidering the bill clause by clause, reported it with great force and zeal; and sometimes
    on December 16, 1952 with no less than 116 their controversies became a bit heated. But
    amendments. Some of these were slight and they were always objective and, best of all,
    technical. Some, on the other hand, indi- they were non-political. This committee p.eld
    cated differences of opinion on mattei's of 37 meetings. A subcommittee held 12 sit·
    substance and demonstrated that the other tings to settle such matters as questions of
    place ",vas not accepting automatically the procedure al1d to deal with the task of sum.-
    recommendations of those men, including marizing the great v()lume of representations
    members of the royal commission, who had made to the committee.
    previously worked on the legislation, how- The committee heard oral representations
    ever eminent and able they might be. by delegations appearing 'On behalf of the
    The high sense of legislative responsibility following national organizations. I make
    with which the other place and its committee this point, Mr. Speaker, because there has
    examined the bill is indicated by its recotn- been throughout the country 'a tendency upon
    mendations of changes of substances in clauses the part of editors and others to say that we
    concerning amongst others the following mat- in parliament have rather supinely accepted
    . tel's: Appeals from convictions for contempt a draft bill prepared by a royal commission
    of court, treason, duelling, explosives, COl'- end that we have n·ot, in relation to that bill.
    roboration in sexual offences, failure of per- properly discharged om: legislative functions.
    sons to provide necessities of life for per- Such charges are completely without founda-
    sons dependent upon them, presumptions tion. I do not think there has ever been
    arising out of evidence of recent possession, brought before this house, during the time
    custody· and disposal of things seized· under that I have been here, a bill which has
    a search warrant, backing warrants, election .received more careful, .detailed and systematic
    of mode of trial . by an accused, procedure on consideration than has this one~ nor in respect
    forfeiture of a recognizance and appeals in of which there has been greater opportunity
    summary conviction cases. These were the for democratic representation.
    chief matters in respect of which amend-
    ments in substance were made. Here are just some of the national
    After be·ing passed by the Senate on organizations which were heard by the 'House
    December 17, 1952, the bill was sent to this of Commons .committee: Tp.e Canadian Con-
    house SUbstantially improved. The bilI was gress pf Labour; the Trades and Labour Con~
    Introduced in the House of Commons in gress; the Canadian. J.ewish Congress;. the
    Premium Advertising Association of America
    January, 1953, as Bill No. 93 and after second Incorporated; the League for Democratic
    reading was referred to the special commit- Rights; the United Electrical, Radio and
    tee of 17 members, mostly lawyers, for
    examma' t 'Ion and repor.
    t Th. a t commItt·ee was Machine Workers of America; .the Congress
    under the chairmanship of the hon. memiber of Canadian Women; the AssociaUon of Civil
    Liberties; the Canadian 'Velfare Council; the
    . for Essex West (Mr. Brown). Canadian Mental Health Association; the
    If it is not unbecoming of me as a lawyer Inter.nationa1 Union of Mine, Mill and Smelter
    mys.elf to say so, that committee did such a \Vorkers (Canadian section); the Canadian
    conscientious and ·outstanding job 'Of con- Restaurant Association. Is there any indica~
    sidering and ·revising the bill that I think I tion here that we have barred any segment
    should certainly identify its mempership on of public opinion, however radical it might
    Hansard. They were, as of M<ay 1, 1953, the be, from a hearing?
    following: Messrs. Browne (St. John's Then in addition to hearing those organiza~
    'Vest), Cameron, Cardin, Churchill, Crestohl, tions who sent delegations to appear before
    the committee, we gave detailed considera·
    Gauthier <Lake Sf· John), Garson, Henderson, tion to briefs and resolutions addressed
    Huffman, MacInnis, MacNaught, Macnaugh- to the committee by over 80 ·organizations, of
    ton, Montgomery, Noseworthy, Robichaud, whom the Canadian and Catholic Confedera-
    Shaw and, of course, the chairman, the hon. tion of Labour, the National Council of
    me1")lber for ~ssex West. 'Vamen, the Manitoba Bar Association, the
    Mr. Macdonnell: All lawyers. civil liberties committee of the Canadian Bar
    946 HOUSE OF COMMONS
    Crimina! Code
    Association, the bar of the province of relating to procedure. matters of defence
    Quebec the International Association of including justification and excuse, and rUle~
    Machinists and the committee on criminal of evidence. _I
    procedure of the Canadian Bar Association
    are only a typical few. There is not a clause
    The result, therefore, under this bill is that 1
    the common law that is now in force in 1
    -of the bill now before hon. members that Canada in respect of criminal law and pro~ ·1
    was not examined in detail by the committee. cedure remains in force except that the bill ,{
    Among matters in respect of whi-ch the precludes the institution of criminal proceed_
    special committee recommended amend- ings for common law offences.
    ments, which have been accepted and are Does that mean that common la\'; offences
    now incorporated in this bill, were the fol- have been abolished by this bill? Yes;' the'y
    lowing: appeals in contempt of court cases, have been abolished as common law. offences,
    treason sabotage, witness giving contra- but most of them have been replaced by
    dictory' evidence, corroboration in sexual offences codified in this bill. What has ha.p~
    offences, trespassing by night, homicide, pened is that the royal -commission con'sulted
    administering drugs, failing to stop at the with the provincial law enforcement officers
    scene of an accident, criminal breach of con- and found that resort had been had to'
    tract, mischief, offences that must be tried common law offences, over the past 60 years,
    by jury, arrest, election of mode of trial, in only a very limited number of c~ses.
    compensation for' loss of property resulting These cases have now been incorporated in
    from the commission of offences, whipping, this bill, in codified torm. as Criminal Qode
    tar'iff of fees in summary conviction matter.::;, offences. In this way we have reached the.
    and transitional provisions. position which ''Ie think is desirable. narri~ly
    The report of th~ special committee, that no Canadian ,can be charged in Canada
    recommending amendments in respect of with an offence unless the conduct which
    these matters that I have just mentioned and constitutes that offence has been proscrib'~d
    other consequential amendments, was tabled by the Criminal Code.
    in this house in May, 1953. However, as the The second point which I think is worthY'
    members of the' _present house who were of notice is that the royal commission recom-
    members of the preceding house will recall, mended the abolition of minimum punish-
    the remaining· time before the prorogation of ments; that is, it gave the court complete
    parliament was not' sufficient to enable the discretion to go as low in the punishment as
    bill to be proceeded with and it died on the it wished to go. It also recommended the
    order paper. With the exceptions which I abolition of increased maximum punishmen~s
    mentioned at the beginning of my remarks, for second and subsequent offences. Under
    this Bill No.7 with 753 clauses which is now the 'present law minimum punishments_ are-
    before the house- provided for the offences of driving whUe
    Mr. Fulton: No; 744 clauses. intoxicated, driving while ability is imp~lr~d,
    Mr. Garson: No. If you go on a little bit theft of certain matter from the mail, theft
    further you will find the others. This bill is of a motor car and robbery of the mail.__ T.h€:
    goverriment did not feel that it could, at this'
    the same bill as that which was passed by time, accept the recommendation of the royal
    the other place in December, 1952, with the
    amendments thereto recommended by the commission in respect of the abolition. of
    special committee of the last parliament in minimum punishments for all of t~e~e
    May, 1953. offences' and in the result minimum pu~sh­
    ments a~e retained for the offences of driving
    I should now like to point out a few while intoxicated and while ability is
    matters in respect of which changes aTe impaired, and in respect _of thefts from t~e
    effected by this bill in the present law of mail. The view of the government in thIS
    Canada. In the first plaee, common law regard has been accepted by the other place
    offences are abolished. Hon. members will and by the special committee of the House
    recall that in their terms of reference the of Commons at the last session of parliame~t ..
    commissioners were directed to endeavour
    to make the cod'e exha'Llstive of the criminal With regard to the question of punishment'
    generally, the royal commissioners noted that
    law. The commissioners concluded that the the sentences provided in the present code
    code should be exhaustive in so far as the follow no apparent pattern or principle, ~nd
    definition of crlminal offences is concerned, in the view of the commission these pUnlsh-
    but that the criminal common law of Eng- ments were frequently not consonant with the
    land, as presently in force in Canada, should gravity of the offences to which they relate~.
    be continued in' respect of other matters in The commissioners were of opinion that there
    so far as that law had not already been codi- should be a few general divisions of. pu nish - ,
    fied in this country. Those were ~atters ment by imprisonment, and that each offence
    [Mr. Garson.]
    DECEMBER 15, 1953 947
    Criminal Code
    should then be assigned to one of these committee might do. Indeed, I recall rthat
    divisions. Accordingly, apart from those it was suggested that the bill had been
    cases where the sentence of death may be thoroughly reviewed in various other 1l1aces,
    imposed, maximum sentences of imprison- including the royal commission and the -other
    ment for all offences under this bill fall into house of this parliament and that in fact it
    one of five classes, namely; life, fourteen might be expected to go through this chamber
    years, ten years, five years or two years. without really very much discussion.
    For all summary conviction offences under Perhaps I may be entitled to say for the
    the bill one maximum punishment is pro- members of the official opposition that we
    vided, namely~ a fine of $500 or six months take some -credit for this, that had it not
    imprisonment or both. been for the attitude expressed by this par-ty.
    I have referred to these matters particu- joined on that occasion by the other parties
    larly for the purpose of indlcating to the house in opposition, I think· quite possibly the bill
    some of the typical sections of' the bill as would have proceeded rthrough this chamber
    drafted by the Department of Justice upon with only a cursory examination. That
    the :basis of the royal commission's reports, appeared to be the desire of the minister at
    which the Senate and the House of Commons that time. But we were successful in having
    committee thought worthy of special atten- it referred to a 1larliamentary committee,
    tion and amendment. This list of such not in fact to a joint parliamentary com~
    examples is not exhaustive of course, but mittee but to a committee of this house which,
    it is typical. as the minister has said, consisted of 17 mem-
    My main purpose, however, has been to bers who gave it the detailed examination to
    satisfy members of this house first, th.at our which he has referred.
    Criminal Code requires consoliqation; second, I mention these facts not merely to remind
    th~t this present legislation, Bill No. 71 was the minister and the house of what happened,
    prepared after long study and research by a but to draw attention to the fact that there
    royal commission of eminent lawyers, includ- is probably no more important legislation
    ing some of the leading criminal defence confronting the house, no legislation of
    lawyers in Canada; third, that it received greater interest and concern to the people of
    the most thorough and detailed consideration, Canada, than the bill to revise the Criminal
    clause by clause; by the other place, by its Code.
    committees, and in particular by the special What happened last year when the bill" waS
    House of Commons committee; fourth, that referred to a special committee of the house?
    anyone or any organization who wished to In that committee the bill received over 70
    make representations concerning this legisla- amendments and, ,as the minister pointed out,
    tion was given ample opportunity to do so it is the bill as amended by the special com-
    in person or in writing, and that a substantial mittee of this house which is now before us.
    number of amendments indeed were made In that committee alone it received over 70
    in the legislation in its evolution from the amendments. That, as the minister has said,
    original draft received from the royal com- was after the bill had been considered by a
    mission to the form in which it now appears royal commission, by a special committee
    before hon. members, as a result of such and by a committee of the other place on two
    representations; fifth, that the consideration separate occasions. It had received four
    which this legislation has received to date separate considerations before -it ever came
    has been long, patient, careful and thoroughly before a committee of this house.
    democratic, and that scores, if not hundreds, In the committe~ of the other place on
    of Canadians have taken an honourable part the first occasion it received, as "I read the
    in that consideration. debates of that place, over 63 amendments,
    Mr. E. D. Fulton (Kamloops): Mr. Speaker, and on the second occasion 117 amendments,
    if I can remember..it correctly I think I making a total of 180 amendments written
    should lik-e to begin somewhere near where into the legislation by the banking and com-
    the minister left off. That was a Ihtle While merce committee of the other place before
    ago, at the stage when he 'was paying tribute it ever came before the House of Commons.
    to the committee of the house which re- Then, as I say, it received a further 70 amend-
    viewed the legislation now before us, now ments by the special committee of this house,
    known as Bill No.7 and, known last year as and those 250 odd amendments are now in-
    Bill No. 93. corporated in Bill No.7 \vhich is before the
    I was very glad indeed ,to hear the minister house at this session.
    pay that tribute to the committee, because Therefore it seems to me that is a measure,
    as I recall it, in the early stages of the last if any such measure were required, of -"the
    session 'Of the last parliament we were not importance of the legislation now before us
    apt to hear quite so much tribute paid in and of the requirement of careful considera-
    advance to the work that _a ,parliamentary tion and scrutiny \vhich it is incumbent upon
    /

    948 HOUSE OF COMMONS


    Criminal Code
    this.house to give the 'legislation. That·being him wholeheartedly that it is due for revi_
    the case, it seems to me that one should refer sion and codification. lt will not be neces~
    for a moment to the history of the criminal sary, therefore, for us to long delay, the
    law as outlined by the minister. debate at this stage, because we'are in agree_
    I am quite certain that the house and the ment with the principle of the legislaticin:
    country as a whole will be grateful to the I have referred already to the careful con-
    minister for the very careful and exhaustive s,ideration which this measure has, received.
    review he has given us of that subject. I in the various committees of parl!~ment and'
    think he told us that the first time a criminal that the fact indicates the importance of t1115
    code was enacted iil Canada was at a time measure,to the people of Canada. I should like
    when Sir John Thompson was· minister 01 to lay before you, sir, some statistics indicat.::.
    justice, and that at that tirrie- the first codifica- ing the importance of this legislation -to. the
    tion of the criminal law -was embodied in a people of Ca~ada. According to figures o.rigi-
    statute of some 960 sections. It has not been nally produced in the debate in the Senate on
    revised l as he said) for some 60 years until this subject, in the year 1948 the total nUm-
    the present time when it· is -now to "be 611).- ber of convictions under crhninal or :quqsi~:
    bodied, if the bill goes through with the criminal processes in Canadian courts
    present number of clauses~ in a bill of 753 amounted ,to 918,277, as revealed in' the -.j
    sections. Canada Year Book of that yea~. ,_ By,;'
    reference to the bureau of statistics I am I
    I could not help but be struck by the pos- informed that the latest figures for 195"2;'
    sibility of comparison. When it was first four years later, ,show the total' number' ot '
    enacted in Sir John Thompspn's time it was convictions iil Canadian courts to be: l,355';3~g:,
    a statute of 960 sections, and not a bad or an increase of over 400,000 in ~he _friur
    code,' Mr. Speaker, ~ think you will adm~t. years. , ~ _ ',,-.
    It stood up to the test of time, with con- lt must be admitted immediately that these
    'siderable mOdification and amendment. But figures are' influenced by the admission' to
    if it was enacted in 960 sections in one year confederation of Newfoundlana. '-I woUld -_
    and has stood the test of time, and if the certainly be, the last -to sugges~ that tlie _riew~
    reduction to 753 sections under the aegis of est province and oldest colony of the Bl;~ti~h
    the present Minister of Justice has taken five Empire is entirely responsiple for the incre~~~­
    years, then God save America if we ~ver In the figures. I woul4 decry any· such s1,lg~
    n;y to reduce it to 100 sections. I wonder if gestion. It is significant whe~ you stopjo.
    it means that Canadians are becoming some- think that out of a population of about-)t,
    what more criminal in tendency? I do not million you should have 1)355,399 con.victions
    quite understand why it should take Us five in courts. in one year'. If I am :q.o~ mista~en'
    years to reduce' to 753 sections what we were that is approximately 10 per cent. -: '<-

    able to codify in 960 sections in one year back Of course, Mr. Speaker, figures, cp,n, be
    in the 1890)s. I do not think we are very quite misleading. I do not want t6 sugge~~­
    much more criminally inc1ined now than we that all those are convictions unde~, ~~_
    were then. ' Criminal Code because obviously, as t!le
    Perhaps our theories about punishm~nt minister and most members ot th~ house _will
    and penal reform are responsible; I do not appreciate, a substantial proportion. of th?!;e
    know. But it does seem to me, and I su~­ convictions will be for traffic offen.ces W~9h
    (fest this to the minister and to hon. mem- are not under the code at all.. The n)~m
    bers in this house, that our approach 'to the feature, it seems' to ~e, is that the procedure,
    question of the Criminal Code could be sum- by and large, under which all these offences
    marized and perhaps simplified if, we em- are tried and which resulted in these cqnvic~
    bodied it in R section which I have already tions is generally laid down and prescr.ibe.~
    suggested as a title) and that is, an act for by the Criminal Code of Canada. This is
    the prevention and punishment of crime. true even although the offences may ,h~ve
    That is what we are concerned with in this been under provincial statutes.
    mass of legislation before us.
    All these statistics, combined with t~e
    I suggest, and I hope the minister will number of amendments made already to this
    agree with me, that extraneous subjects particular legislation, indicate the tremehn-:-
    such as penal reform and things of that dous importance of this legislation to t. e
    kind should not be part of the Criminal Code people of Canada. It is hardly necessary _~o
    of Canada. I agree with the minister to try to emphasize the fact that the CrJminal
    that extent, that the only principle before Code of the country is that body of l~,:, b~
    us here is the question of whether or not which the rights and liberties of the cltIzeJ?s
    the Criminal Code ~s now due for revision are determined. The embodiment in ~h~t
    and codification. I say without reservation criminal law of the prlnclple of British JU'
    that we in the official opposition agree with tice that a man is innocent until he is proven
    [Mr. Fulton.]
    DECEMBER 15, 1953 949
    Crimina~ Code
    guilty, from which I am glad to say that with in the bill-will not require much discussion,
    certain minor exceptions there is no detrac- nevertheless if or when any clause arises
    t~on in the legislation now before us, is one upon which a member desires to have some
    of the most important things to the people of discussionJ there will be no attempt to cur~
    Canada because upon it depends the funda- tail debate. If it appears that the debate
    mental tradition of -the freedom of the upon that clause or the principle embodied
    subject. in it will be som-ewhat lengthy, the suggestion
    I mention these things, Mr. Speaker, not will be made that consideration of the clause
    hecause I want to prolong this debate, in question be postponed to a later time and
    although one could if he wished become quite that, particularly with respect to these four
    emotional concerning these principles. I do special subjects of capital punishment, cor-
    not think it is possible to stress too greatly poral punishment, insanity and gambling
    the importance of the task upon which this laws, as the clauses are reached they will
    house is about to embark, and that is the automatically be stood over for further
    clause by clause consideration of this bill to consideration.
    codify the Criminal Code of Canada. So' it might be hoped that We would pass
    . There remain only a few things I wish to in committee, without extended debate, the
    11,1e:b.tion. Since the minister has laid special great bulk of the clauses of the bill; and then
    emphasis upon the work of the special com~ a11 those clauses in respect of which it is
    mittee of this house, I feel I, too, should pay indicated by -any member that, there is a
    tribute tq that committe_e. It was composed desire for extended debate will be returned
    of 17 members of the house, and it gave to and discussed clause by clause.
    exhaustive and careful, consideration to the , I take it from the minister's attitude at the
    legislation before us. Without seeking in any moment that he agrees that I· have correctly
    way tp single out -one member of that com~ interpreted .our previous discussion. On this
    m,ittee above any O;f the others for special basis I think it is proper to anticipate that
    mention, after consultation with all the mem- the bill could be passed into law at this ses-
    'bers of the committee drawn from all parts sion of pm;Uament without any great difti~
    of the house I think it IS fair to say that there culty. .B~t I think it only proper to make
    was no member who made a greater contri- to the house on this occasion the reservation
    bution than the former. member for Glou- which I sta~ed previo¥sly_ to the minister. 1
    cester, Mr.. Albany Robichaud. Mr. Robi- know there are a number of memb~rs-and
    chaud is no longer the member for Gloucester, . I am not indicating that I share their views,
    although the sittfug member bears the same because as a ·matter of fact I du not-who
    name. I am certait:l that he will do his best. have a reservation with re~pect to .the ques-
    a_s the former member did, to represent .that tion of capital p\mishment. . . ,
    constituency. . Mr. Albany Robichaud, a What they are being asked to do" what the
    lawyer learned' in the cr~inal law, gave of house is being asked to do and what -the
    his best to the. work of. that committee and committee will be: asked to do, is to enact
    made a tremendous contribution. Ariother into law"and continue in force capital punish-
    member I .shouid lil-:e, to mention, whose ment-and I am just singling this out as. 'One
    advice we in this party particularly like to particular subject in respect of which they
    have, is the hon. member.for Victoria~Carleton may have grave disagreement. Therefore it
    (Mr. Montgomery), who is the sitting mem- is only to be expected that wheri those clauses
    ber for that constituency and was a member dealing with capital punishment are reached
    of the committee during the last session. there will be most protracted and strenuous
    Mr. Speaker, having said that, the 'Only deb;:tie on the part of those members.
    other thing to be gone into at this point is I \vish to make -that perfectly Clear. I wish
    the question of the procedure to be followed to make it clear that I have in no sense
    iIi dealing with this legislation. I must say indicated to the minister that we would cur-
    at the outset that, according to my under- tail debate on controversial clauses merely
    ,standing, the minister has scrupulously fol- because of the assurance that special com-
    lowed the general understanding we arrived mittees will be appoint~d to deal with those
    at un the basis of private discussions. The controversial subjects. I wish to make it
    procedure as suggested is that, after second perfectly clear that I think the minister, if
    reading, we should proceed clause by clause I may say so, has suggested a very methodical
    and common-sense method of procedure. I
    with the consideration of the bill in commit-
    ·agree with that method of procedure; but,
    tee of the whole. While It is hoped that speaking, as I have the honour to do on this
    'those clauses which were considered in detail occasion, on behalf of the official opposition,
    by the special committee last year-and this, I do not want to be taken as indicating ,that
    of course, comprises the majority "Of clauses we are seeking to restrict the right of any
    950 HOUSE OF COMMONS
    Crimin,,! Code
    member to debate any of those controversial Mr. Knowles: Don't be so modest.
    subjects even though they may be referred Mr. AdamsOn: Oh~ Davie!
    to a special committee.
    I think the only other point necessary to Mr. ZapIUnYl C~n we quote you on that?
    mention is that we appreciate the minister's Mr. Fulton: Well, I have always felt that
    assurance that when these subjects have been my remarks have registered so well in the
    referred as indicated. three of them to special first instance that it has been unnecessary
    committees and one to a royal commissionJ to repeat them.
    the government will introduce legislation While wishing to facilitate and assist in
    based upon the recommendations of those the process of the codification and revision
    bodies. ButJ as is quite possibleJ the govern~ 'of the criminal law of Canada, by and large
    ment may find itself in disagreement with those of us in the official opposition feel that
    those recommendations. Therefore we would the most important essential is to preserve
    not expect it to consider itself bound by any in no way unimpaired the principles of
    undertaking it might now attempt to give by British criminal justice which have been the
    way of introducing legislation based upon hallmark of this and other members of the
    recommendations with which it disagreed. commonwealth nations since their inception.
    Therefore "the government, in accordance Mr. Sfanley Knowles {Winnipeg Norfh
    with the undertaking given tonight by the Cen'ireh Mr.' Speaker, we appreciate the fact
    minister, will facilitate' the consideration of that this legislation comes ,before' us at the .
    private members' legislation. or legislation present -time after a great deal of study
    introduced or placed upon the order paper by by a' great many people. I do not need to
    private members, based upon the recom~ take time to rehearse the history of that
    mendations of thnse committeesJ even though study, which has been so well and so fully
    the government itself does not propose to placed before us by the Minister of Justice
    introduce legislation on that basis. (Mr. Garson), including of course the very'
    I think it fair and proper to say that this thorough study and examination of Bill No.·
    is as complete: an assurance as one might 93 which was made by a committee of the
    expect from any government that this sub- House of Commons fn the last' session of the·
    ject will be dealt with impartially and in a last parliament.
    spirit which will enable the House of Com~ However, I think it should be said, in'line
    mons to consider the matter as a deliberative with the remarks of the hon. member' for
    and not as a political body. We appreciate Kamloops (Mr. Fulton) toward the end of his
    the length to which the minister has gone in . speech, that if Bill No. 7 which is now
    giving us assurances in that regard. before us is to be passed by this parliament; .
    In conclusion I should like to make a few the responsibility for it rests finally ~p~n
    general observations. Notwithstanding the the members of this present parliament.·
    previous very careful and full consideration Therefore we must take that responsibility'
    given to this matter by the various com- seriously; we PlUSt not at any 'point' slide
    m! ttees, commissions and bodies the minister over sections of the bill when we are in:
    has mentioned, we do not abrogate in any committee, because someone says these'-' se~~ ~
    respect our right or obligation to' give the tions have been studied thoroughly by com...
    fullest scrutiny to the details of this legis- missions and committees over the paSt fiv~-
    lation. Let me repeat what I said on the . or six years. I am sure the Minister of
    previous occasion when this bill· was intro~ Justice, even though he may be anxious that
    duced for second reading, in the last parlia~ this bill get through at this session instead of
    ment-and may I say that I am not going to dying on the order paper as it has on two
    indulge in the temptation which is quite occasions, will agree with me that the respon~
    frequently indulged in by members who take sibility for the act as it is finally passed rests
    the liberty of reading what they themselves upon the members of the parliament in which
    have said on previous occasions. I shall say it is passed.
    simply that I adhere to the principles I A good deal has been said tonight as to
    enunciated at that time, as they are set forth the procedure that has been agreed upon
    at pages 1276 and following of Hansard for
    January 23, 1953. between the Minister of Justice on the one
    hand and representatives of the various
    An hon. Member: It is worth repeating. opposition parties on the other. It is fair to
    Mr. Fulion: \Vell, if the han. member thinks say that the procedure as outlined by him
    it is worth putting on Hansard again I will is the procedure that we in our group under~
    leave to him the opportunity of doing so. But stood from the report made to us by our
    I have never thought my own remarks were colleague, the han. member for Vancouver~
    worth repeating. Kingsway (Mr.. MacInnis).
    [Mr. Fulton ,]
    DECEMBER 15, 1953 951
    CriminaL Code
    However, in connection with the procedure capital punishment, corporal punishment and
    there are one or two comments that I should lotteries go through on the ground that that
    Jike to make. There can be no quarrel with was simply carrying forward the law as it
    the minister's statement that it is difficult on now stands, with the understanding that it
    the second reading of a bill, with 753 sections may be changed later on as a result of the
    and a great many !principles, to try and report of a committee of parliament and of a
    discuss the principle of that bill. There is a royal commission.
    "good deal to be said not only from the gov~ When the Minister of Justice was proposing
    ernment's point of view but from rthe point that these sections ,be dealt with in that way
    of view of hon. members generally· for the I certainly had a question in my o\vn mind,
    proposal that we have our general discussion and one of my colleagues came and spoke
    divided into a number of general discussions, to me about it, as to whether that was not
    and that those discussions take place in the asking us to do too much. The point made
    committee of .the whole on the bill. That by the hon. member for Kamloops is well
    being so, it puts a little different complexion taken, that even though when we get to
    on the motion for the second reading of this these sections it might be argued that it is
    bill than is '!lsually the case, Usually when just a case of carrying forward the law as
    a bill has had second reading it means rtha t it now is, in point of fact this parliament
    the house has approved of the principle of will be re-enacting these provisions, and I
    that bill. Usually that principle is one suggest no attempt should be made to curtail
    principle, and stands out rather clearly. discussion on ,the part of hon. members who
    In this instance we want it clearly under- are interested in those clauses when we come
    stood that so far as we are concerned, when to them.
    second reading of this -bill has been agreed In addition, since it is the government's
    to by this house, all that we shall have desire to deal in committee of the whole with
    agreed to is that the code should be revised all of the clauses of the bill except the clauses
    and that the house should go into committee relating to these four ~subjects, it does occur
    of the whole to consider not only the various to me that maybe there is room for discussing
    sections as they come along ,but- the various some of these subjects right now when we are
    parts of the code with the different principles on second reading of the bill. If the minister
    that underlie these various parts. In other does not favour that procedure, then I sug-
    words, Mr. Speaker, I wish to make it clear gest that at least there is room for discussing
    that there may be certain sections of the bill them-very clearly there is room for so
    which, when we' come .-to them in committee, doing-<>n the minister's motion that a special
    we shall find ourselves in this group unable committee be set up. The minister said
    to l3.ccept. We do not want it said at that
    time that we agreed to those sections when tonight that when we finish second reading
    we agreed to let the bill be read a second of the bill, he would, if he had the consent
    of the house to do so without the required
    time.
    notice, move the motion that such a commit~
    r think the smile on the minister's face tee be set up. He said he would make
    indicates that he agrees with these reserva- his motion bearing in mind that other steps
    tions, and I am sure he Understands our would have to be taken. That of course is
    position in that connection. As a matter of a debatable motion and certainly any com~
    fact I imagine the minister is in something
    of that position himself, because he has ments with respect to the subjects included
    indicated tonight that when we get into corp.- in the minister's ,motion would be relevant in
    mittee of the whole there will be some more that debate.
    amendments from the government to' be Mr. Garson: If I may be permitted, Mr.
    made to the bill. In other words he himself, Speaker, upon a point of pseudo-privilege-
    in approving second reading of tbe bill, does
    not wish to be tied' to the suggestion that he Mr. Knowles: That is quite an admission
    has at this point agreed to everything in the on the minister's part.
    bill as it now sands. Furthermore, Mr. Mr. Garson: -to make this suggestion. All
    Speaker, it should be clear that there are that we have sought by the arrangements I
    these four subjects which the minister attempted to outline tonight is to achieve an
    referred to, which are going to be discussed orderly' method of debate that will give all
    at some point in this procedure. han. members the best possible facilities and
    The han. member for Kamloops - (Mr. opportunity for a proper discussion of the-
    Fulton) took a slightly different approach to bill, and to debate it, and to vote on it
    this ,problem from that which the ,Minister intelligently. In my humble view that win
    of Justice took. The Minister of Justice was be achieved by the course that I have already
    assuming that the house would let these advocated for consideration of the bill in
    sections in the bill that deal with insanity, the manner in which I have indicated.
    $52 HOUSE OF COMMONS
    CriminaL Code
    If when we reach these clauses dealing I do not propose to do so myself. That is
    with capital punishment and the other three not b~c~use of tlJ.e opinion just expressed by
    subjects in the committee of the whole hon. th; .mlmste:, but because I have several other.
    members would wish to debate them or make thmgs I wlsh to say and I prefer to leave'
    speeches in relation to them, I am sure that ~hese matters to- some of my colleagues. It:
    no informal understanding that had been IS not perhaps unusual that the hon. member
    reached between the parties CQuid have the for K,amloops. (Mr. Fulton) and I hav~ taken..
    effect of curtailing the right of-a member.to this time to dISCUSS these proceduralarrange~ _
    speak on that section if he wished to do so. ments, for we wish .to know where we' stand _
    But having regard to the fact that any dis- both in the hou;s:e and in committee in regard
    cussion which does take place. must take to this important bill.
    place in the light of the government's under- We agree that after 60' years it is ti~e fo~'
    taking to have these very things examined the criminal law of this country to be re-
    by a parliamentary committee and a royal vised, codified and· consolidated. But when .
    commission, to the end that we shall all that process is being· carried out surely cel'-
    be in a better position more intelligently to tain things' should be considered. I listened
    discuss and legislate, I should have thought with considerable interest to the remarks of
    that most han. members would think their the hon. member. for Kamloops when he 'said
    ::ontributions to' such a debate might be he felt there· should·benothing in the criminal
    deferred until such time as they had the law dealing .with such subjects as penal te";;"', '
    Jenefit of the knowledge which these investi- form. I remember, as a matter of fact, "that
    gatibns would bring out. And that" especially he made an interjection . which. carried that .
    is this so where the government has under- implication at a certain point in a speech t·,_
    taken either to implement the reports of made on the subject last January.
    those bodies if they conscientiously thought Despite the positiol) he tqkes, and no o.oubt
    it was appropriate to do so, or that if the he takes it because he is a laWyer, it seems"
    government could . not do so the government to me there is room· in the Criininal Code-:r.
    would expedite consideration of any legis- perhaps it should have a better name--;...:..for.
    lation which opposition' members might wish some indication that society has' moved 'orC
    to' introduce. . and .made progress in its thinking- \vith' rei"
    . gard to the 'philosophy of dealing 'witk cr-line .
    . If we debate thesl? s'ubjects such as capitaland its prevention. Yet, Mr. Speaker: de:spite"
    punishment when -·the bill' is hi committee the fact that BillNd. 7 includes many amend--'
    of the whole we are debating them iIi the ments and changes from BiU No. 93 and from-'
    light of these facts, al)d the man who debates' Bill H of the year before, and th~ drafts· that
    them in the light of' these facts is really \\7e' have had down the line, I see in it ·8.:s· it is
    taking the position: "I am going to insist .
    upon the right- to make' a speech upon'. this now before U$ nothirig to' suggest an appreci.., ,
    ation of the 'advances that have been made iIi, I

    subject even despite the fact th'~.t the chances the thinking on this important question. -...
    are ten to one·that when' I get the 'report of
    the' royal commission and the· parliamentary It s.eeIl).s to me there 'was merit in the 2.~Ug..,.
    committee "I will be able to' make a better': ge<:;tlon" in the 'brief submitted 'by the .Caria":";
    and more intelligent speech than 1" can make dian Welfare: Council that there .might .\veu.·
    now. I am going to express my own ego and have' been included in the Criminai C·ode. a-
    my own views regardless of the fact that I preamble outli~ing its purpose. I \vill. not.
    may be able to make a better speech later." take up the time of the house to rep~at the
    Mr. Knowles: The ex.changes we h-a.ve just· quotation I made from that brief last year,.
    h.ad· help to. clear the ail' in part and do the or repeat the other submissions made along
    other thing as well. At any rate I think this this line.
    should be said. We have been discussing, Mr. f.ulton: What do you think of the title
    the minister and I just now, two questions. I suggested at that time?
    One is the right of members to discuss these Mr. Knowles: My quarrel with that title.
    questions of capital punishment and so on sugges t e d .b y the memb·er f or K am100·ps .ls·
    at various stages in the procedure that has that it seems to narrow the bill within .the--
    been outlin~d. The other is the minister's confines that '1 !3m now objecting to, \vhereas
    judgment 01' pseudo-judgment, to use his own it does seem to me we should treat crime as'
    prefix, as to whether or not it -is a .good idea. something not only to be punished but _to
    I wanted to have that c1ear-1 did not ask be prevented.
    fof that obiter dict-um-:-namely that members
    have the right if they wish to do so to dis- Mr. Fulion: That is what I suggested.
    cuss these questions at one or other of the Mr. Knowles: If I have misunderstood my
    stages I have indicated. hon. friend I will certainly-
    [Mr. Garson,]
    DECEMBER IS. 1953 953
    Criminal Code
    Mr. Fulton: Perhaps I may just quote a Mr. Knowles: In any case .the minister
    passage from page 1288 of Hansard dated has tried to make the point that there were
    January 23, 1953: defence lawyers interested in this codification
    I suggest that the title should be "An act for as well as lawyers for the prosecution, but
    the prevention and punishment of crime." That it seems -to me that the code as a whole has
    js what it is concerned with. not yet got away from that earlier view that
    I wonder if you would care to comment its purpose is to secure convictions.
    on that? Another comment is this. Here again, -Mr.
    Mr. Knowles: My comment on -that title- Bpeaker, it is a criticism that we made last
    and we are getting off the problem a -bit, year. I have not taken the time to check
    Mr. Speaker-was made a moment ago in through all the sections in order to see
    relation to the point the hon. member for whether changes were made, but certainly in
    Kamloops made that he did not think matters some cases that" I pointed out last year we
    relating to penal reform should be in the still have rather heavy increases in the pun-
    Criminal C.ode. I do' not see how you ·are ishments to be meted out. I think in particu-
    ·going to have an act which is concerned in lar of 'one that 1 mentioned last year where
    part with 'prevention of crime if it does not there was an increase in the .amendment
    'contain some reference to penal reform. How~ made in 1951 and "now there is a heavy
    eve:r., ',perhaps ,we are just differing on increase again in the new code.
    terminology. Perhaps this is just another phase of what 1
    My .main quarrel is not with the han. have" been speaking about "up to this point,
    .member for Kamloops. My main quarrel is and it is just -this. When we are revising the
    with the Criminal Code itself or with the code I think we should be concerned with
    .government that has brought it ,in for failing the whole philosophy of the treatment of
    to infusEl; into the crimin~.l law the results criminals- and crime. My view is that merely
    of the advanced thinking by psychologists to stiffen the penalties is "not to reveal the fact
    . and philosophers who have studied this whole tliat a great deal of studylngand thinking
    problem. has been done in this 'field. From my point
    Without getting into any of the details or of view, it 'is that sort of approach that
    sections of the bill which it ,is not in order 'should be involved in a ,aD-year revision
    to discuss- on _second reading, it does seem 'rather than just -a concern to end up with a
    to me something of 'that approach should be code that has a few -hundred sections less
    -included in the" revision or -codification of than was the case before.
    the Criminal Code after all these years. Then That inay or may not be a good thing.
    too, Mr. Speaker, it seems to me that when . Maybe it would be a better code if it had
    owe are revising the Criminal Code we should 2,000 sections' instead of being reduced to 753
    bear in- mind that it may be another 60 sections. My ;point is tha~ tl~e important
    years before it is done again, and we should aspect of this whole problem is to make sure
    "consider as a result of that situation whether that our modern kno\vledge and modern
    the purpose of the Criminal Code is to secure understan.ding of crime, its treatment and' its
    convictions or to prevent crime. prevention, and our modern ideas as to what
    , '-1 am" glad to know that our comments or to do to make sure that we a;re not making
    representations on" this point :last year both worse crimin'als out. of .people who break the
    in the house and in committee have been law-aU- of that-should find its expression
    "noted by the minister.· H,e appar'ehtly. was in .the criminal law of this country.
    conscious of them, for he went out of his There are just one or two other things I
    way several times tonight to 'draw 'to our want to say. We feel also that at a time
    e

    ~ attention the fact that the men" who served when, the Crimi:nal Code is being revised we
    qn the comini.ssion and the ·people connectea should be extremely careful. I go along with
    . with the rewriting of the code over the past the hon. member for Kamloops (Mr. -Fulton);
    "few years included a number of defence perhaps I go a little bit further, but I ce.r-
    lawyers as well as criminal lawyers. I tainly go all the way with him in his insist,-
    always smile when 1 hear the term ucriminal ence that there be no departure or no
    lawyer" but·1 only take those words out of detraction from the basic principles of justice
    the -minister's mouth. that have been enshrined in Canadian
    Mr. Garson: Mr. Speaker, on a point of criminal law and in British criminal law
    privilege, my term was Hcriminal qefence down across tlle years.
    lawyers" . -I am glad to hear the statement oi the han.
    'Ml'. Fulton: You are having the best of both member for Kamloops, as a lawyers -that he
    worlds. knows of feY' if any instances wh"ere there
    954
    CrimiMI Code
    HOUSE OF COMMONS
    1
    1
    has been, in the code, a departure from the when any of those freedoms or civil liberties J
    basic principle that a person is innocent until should be interfered with or cut down in'l
    he is proved guilty. But I suggest that there any way, ~1
    is even more than just that principle which Mr. Fulton: Hear, hear. 'j
    comes into play only when :people come
    before the courts. I have in mind the whole Mr. Knowles: I ani glad to hear my friend.:)
    basic question of freedom which is so terribly the hon. member for Kamloops say "hear-1
    important to the ,future of our society. hear" at that point. I remember something 1
    I am sure that all of us who read the state- he said along those lines a year ago. I may-~
    ment attributed to Mr. Adlai Stevenson the not quote him exactly, but if I do not para~;
    other day realized that he was saying some- phrase him correctly he will set me right.':,
    thing that had to be said; but it hurt when He said that we should take a stand such--:
    we noted that he said that people today- as the one I am now indicating without being-;
    deterred from it because some people who;j
    and he was speaking, of course, mainly of his
    own country-are living not under four free- have ideas that we do not agree with take j
    the same position. Let us not let the law of 1
    doms but under four fears. I will not repeat association that is applied in some localities ~
    them all, but the one that hit me most squarely deter us from doing what we believe to be-']
    between the eyes was his suggestion that right and what we believe to be part and i
    there was now a very real fear of freedom. parcel of our traditions and our destiny in'~:
    Mr. Speakerl I am delighted that our situa- this important aspect. '
    tion in this country seems to me much better
    than the situation in that great country to Mr. Fulton: Let us not be afraid because'
    the south of us in this respect l at least at the other people may have already muddied the
    present time. I certainly hope that what they water.
    are going through down there at this time is Mr. Knowles: The han. member has looked
    just a phase that will pass. At any rate our up his speech and is now quoting himself.
    concern is with our own atmosphere. If I Mr. Fulton: No; the han. member is quot-
    may once again paraphrase the words that ing me.
    Sir Winston Churchill used a year and a
    half ago in this connectionJ may I say that we Mr. Knowles: I shall be glad to do so if he
    must not lose confidence in democracy's will give me the reference to the page. '
    capacity to tolerate free speech. I know the Mr. Fulton: No, never mind.
    minister will say that he agrees with me in
    that regard. that he could not agree more, Mr. Knowles: As reported at page 1278 of
    Hansard of January 23. 1953 1 he said:
    and that there is nothing in the code that
    I take the view that notwithstanding the fact
    interferes in any way with that basic that the communists may have muddied the
    principle. water, we should not refrain from expressing our
    I just want to say at this time that one of own considered opinions . . .
    the reservations I was making a few moments Those are the words of the han. member
    ago, when I said on behalf of this group that for Kamloops. I am glad he yielded, to the
    agreeing to second reading of the bill does temptation to quote himself.
    not mean agreeing to all of the principles Mr. Speaker, there is just one other refer-
    involved in. the bill, was that we are not so ence I wish to make. We feel that when the
    sure but that in some of the sections dealing Criminal Code is being revised is no time to
    with sedition and treason the code borders bring what belongs in the field of ~abour'
    fairly closely on an attempt to legislate as legislation into the Criminal Code. Slllce I .
    to people's thinking and as to people's believe in obeying the rules of the. house. I
    utterances. cannot refer to the sections of the bl.ll; I will
    I suggest that we must be extremely care- not even look at it, though it is here on ~y
    ful in this field. Let us lean over backwards. desk. The minister knows what I hav~ III
    Freedom is one of the great traditions that mind. The members of the committee, ?f
    we have inherited from the British side of' course know the hours that were spent 10
    -our history. It is: one of the great traditions that c~mmittee on this question during the
    last session of parliament. The fact of the
    of this country. Like the han. member for matter is that we have labour lawS in thIs.
    Kamloops, I do not want to indulge in any- country. As a matter of fact we have eleven
    thing emotional; but this is certainly a field of them. We have our own federal labour
    where feelings are deep and where we are code l and each of the provinces has its labour
    dealing with something extremely sacred. I legislation.
    merely suggest that when the Criminal Code We feel that the handling of labour mat-
    is being revised it is a time to be on guard ters should be left to those labour lawS.
    to protect those freedoms rather than a time ·When you import into the Criminal Code
    [Mr. Knowles.)
    DECEMBER 15, 1953 955
    Crimina! Code
    sections or regulations that affect the rights that we will not need to have any substantial
    of labour, the rights of trade unionists, and repetition of that work during the coming
    particularly when you make reference to year.
    what is provided -by law-bearing in mind I think the special committee did most
    the fact that that law can be eleven different excellent work last session. In my judgment
    laws-you run the risk of putting in the they heard representations from a great many
    hands of some people a club against labour individuals and groups of people and
    and against the rights of trade unionists in organizatiuns, and gave" them every oppor"-
    this country. We are opposed to any move in tunity to present their views with respect to
    that direction. the revisions that ought to be made in the
    I do not want to infringe upon the rule Criminal Code after 60 years of experience
    which says we are not to discuss the sections with it. So I say I hope we wlll be able to
    'Ot a bill -when we are on second reading, but preserve all the good work that has been
    I do want to make it very dear that one of done and make the wisest use of it.
    the numbered sections to which the minister The han. member for Winnipeg Nurth
    referred in his summary a while ago is a Centre (Mr. Knowles) said that after 60
    section concerning which, when we get to it, years the criminal law should be revised
    we shall have something to say -and, indeed, and brought up to date. He felt that it should
    in its present form we would find it impos- be, and I thoroughly agree with him. We
    sible to accept. We -take that position have made progress. Human beings in their
    because we feel very strongly that the rights social affairs and social contacts have made
    that have been won by labour in this country great progress over the years, and I suppose
    are part and parcel of our great democratic we will now louk at some things somewhat
    tradition, part and parcel of the traditions of differently from the way people did 60 years
    freedom that mean so much to the life of this ago. But I remind the hon. member that
    country and that should not be lost in any what is in this Criminal Code is pretty muc4
    " way. what was laid down in fundamental law as
    Therefore, Mr. Speaker, as I have already far back as the time Moses received the
    indicated, we "are prepared to agree to the tablets of law on Mount Sinai, and that was
    ""procedure that h~s been suggested, accepting a "good many years ago.
    it solely as procedure, namely that the bill
    be given second reading so we can get into Mr. Knowles: There were only ten clauses
    committee, "and it is un.derstood that that in that law.
    does not carry with it approval in principle Mr. Low: That is quite true, but those are
    of the seJ;:tions of the bill. As the minister the fundamentals of law and they have not
    suggested, we will deal with the sections when changed one particle since that 'time. I do
    we come to them in the committee, and our not expect that I would be favourably
    "principal interest when we come to these inclined to changing apy one of them now
    sections will be to make SUre that nothing is in the way they are applied in our CriminaL
    done in this revision of the Criminal Code to Code. The rights of man are bound up in
    interfere with the established rights of labour these ten commandments, and they are" so
    " "or "the great traditions of freedom that mean important that we should make certain none
    so much to 'Our Canadian democracy. of them is" changed.
    Mr. Solon E. Low (Peace River>: Mr. Although I certainly wlll go along with
    Speaker, we regret that the hon. member for those who say that we should now be giving
    Red Deer (Mr. Shaw), who was our member considerable thought to the question of the ,
    I

    on the committee, is not able to be here philosophy of the treatment of crime and
    tonight because it was his intention to speak criminals, as stated by the han. member for
    for the Social Credit group in this debate. Winnipeg North Centre, nevertheless I dis-
    " So it devolves upon me to fill in for him. agree with him when he says that sort of
    I sp.ould like to assure the Minister of thing should be written into the Criminal
    Code. You cannot write that sort at thing
    Justice that we are in full agreement with into law. The philosophy of the treatment
    the procedure which has been agreed upon " of crime and criminals is a social matter that
    by negotiation with "the party representatives has its routs i~ the home, the school and the
    in connection witp. this bill, although at the
    church.
    "same time we will be concerned about every
    opportunity for full and free discussion by Mr. Fulton: And "may be reflected in the
    han. members of every phase of law that is law.
    to be 10und in the bill. I hope it will be pos- Mr. Low: "As the han. member for Kamloops
    sible for Us to preserve the vast amount of says, it may be reflected in the law; but these
    work that has already been done. I hope are matters about which you simply cannot
    ,S56 ~OUS!l OF COMMONS
    Criminal Code
    lay down any expression in law. It seems I wonder if it would be possible for him to;
    to me that we should .be urging a widespread make his remarks now, with the consent of'
    study of these social problems that have their the house, so we CQuid get _,second reading
    roots in the home, the school and the church. tonight. '
    I think they involve the matter of funda-
    menta~ respect for law J and I should like to
    Mr. Speaker: Do I understand that the hon i
    member does not propo.se to speak on second .;
    say at this point that it is my conviction that readin~? ~•.
    the social emphasis we place ,on the Criminal
    Code should centre around three factors which :Mr. Drew: Let us examine this situation 'oj
    I believ~ are essential if we are going to reasonably. Certainly there can, be no sug~ .:
    have rule o~ Jaw in our country. gestion that anyone .in ~his house can deny ,j
    The first is good, fundamental law. That any other member the l'lght to speak on any
    is, what we ,are trying to write into the subject. However, the discussion proceeded
    Criminal Code. But that would be useless if .and ~ontinued after an extended exchange of
    we did not have the other two factors. The . opinions concerning the appropriate proce- _
    second is viell o'rganized courts -composed dure, with the thought that we would then
    of righteous and just men and \Vomen. These be able to pass from this stage and be able
    first hvo would be worth very little if we to examine tl,!:e measure along the lines that
    did not hav.e· amongst the Canadian people have been suggested. I repeat that I am the
    widespread support for the courts, people hist to suggest that any member should be
    \vho are prepared to uphold the courts and denied the right to speak. but I do riot kno,,,
    their dignity and responsibility so tt.ere can what purpose will be served in extendin'g
    be enforcement. These. it seems to me. are the debate no\v, unless we know 'what the'
    matters that- involve the social aspect understandin~ is. We might be sitting her:e
    I should like to hear a good, broad dis- until tomorro\v morning.', :
    cussion' on the social aspects of law, particu- I do' not know t~at this .is the last' change
    'larly_ those that revolve around the treatment in the understanding that existed betwe'en us.
    of crime and criminals, bl,lt I 110pe we will n was only an understanding, and it could
    not get into that kind of discussion when we be no mpre, 'but it' is one of those under-
    aTe considering' this' fundamental law, the standings which does, on certaip. pccasions,.
    Criminal Code, because, I do not believe this permit o_rderly procedure in ~his or any other
    is the place for it.- similar legislative body. r certainly have no
    I see that it is ten o'clock, Mr. Speaker, desire to' insist upen the l,"'ules, but.· I do '
    and it is not my, intention to go on too long, think before we extend this debate no,.... wOe I
    but let me just say that while i,ve agree with should be sure where it is ·going. I must -say·!
    the procedure that has ,been announced by that I do not think anything is' going to be ,
    t'~e ~inister we feel as menibers of the gained by permitting the debate to' proceed
    House .of Commons that it is our responsibility at this tilrie, especially if it is going to" iJe
    to give all of the clauses of the bilL and more extended to subject matters that' ar!,! going. to
    I

    par.ticularlj those that have been singled out be referred to a 'commission. ,".
    as being so important to the .Canadian peop~" Mr. Winch: I can assure the han. ,~,e~"b~r ~
    ~he: fullest discussion and consideration., In that I have no desire to delay the procedur.e :
    addition it is our responsibility to Preserve . of the house. I should like, you. sir, and '
    completely unimpaired, as was 59 well stated han. members to knoy; that J had no knowl- ,
    by the hon. member for Kamloops, the funda- edge there was, a commi.tmen!' that there I
    .mental' principles of British 'justice which sho~ld be only- .
    ,\rill of course involve the freedoms of in-
    'dividual citizens of this country, Mr. Knowles: There was no sUGl). commit-
    ment.
    Mr. Speaker': Is it the pleasure of the house
    to' adopt the motion? Mr. Drew: May I interject at this point~ !
    I was not suggesting, and I thought I had ':
    Mr. Winch: I would ask leave to move the made it clear; that there could be any com- :
    adjournment of the debate' ,until tomorrow's mitment which could bind members. There:
    'sitting of the house. has been discussion ever since we arrived in
    Mr. Harris: Before you put 'the motion, Mr. the middle' of November concerning the best
    Speaker, may I say that I had hoped we could method of dealing with this bill: Qu~~tion,S
    have completed this debate tonight.. I was were asked on the very first day, an4 w.,e
    under the impreSSion, sir. that the debate, discllssed 'the business in relation to pro-
    while not limited-because we do not do cedure. _ I
    that here-was nevertheless going to be Now, the hon. member who has ta~en the- I
    participated in ,by representatives of the par~ floor has a right to do so. I would· pomt out. i
    ties concerned. 'While I appreciate the hon. how'ever, that he is not in a position to tell
    member's desire to, take part in the debate, us whether there are other members who are
    [Mr. Low.]
    ·DECEMBER 15, 1953 951
    OriminaL Code
    goi,ng to· speak. Unless there is some under- the bill on second reading as being merely
    standing along those lines~ then I would the question of whether a statute :which had
    Bl,lggest, Mr. Speaker, the wisest course is been on the books for 60 years should be now
    to call it ten o'clock and be done with it. consolidated. This arrangement expressly
    Mr. Winch: I still want to facilitate the contemplated that when we got 'into corn-
    procedure of the house if I can. My main mittee of the whole the fullest possible oppar-
    T€8S0n in rising and asking for the adjourn- tunity would be given to all members, inelud-
    ment is confusion which was ·brought about
    in the discussion concerning the position of tug the hon. member for Vancouver East,
    .a member in discussing this most important to express to his heart's content the views
    bill. A question was asked by the hon. mem- that he ha? wUh respect to) shall I say) -the
    ber for Winnipeg North Centrel and in reply question of capital punishment-
    the Minister of Justice stated that he had no Mr. Winch: That is the one 1 have in mind.
    objection during the debate on second reading
    to a discussion of. the principle of the bill. Mr. Garson: -notwithstanding the fact
    Speaking from memory I believe the minister that subject ,veuld have been, in the mean-
    added that if an han. member did so he while) sent to a joint committee of parliament
    would be expressing egoism-I think that for cori~ideration.
    :was the word...:...in speakjng without the report
    of the royal commission or the committee. Mr. Winch: May I ask a question, Mr.
    This disturbed me greatly, sir., because in Speaker? If it is sent to a joint committee
    his original 'statement the minister made it is the matter not sub judice and out of order
    very clear-I think these are his words-that for discussion in the house?
    this bill should be considered as a blll of the Mr. Garson: I think that can be cleared up.
    house and not a bill of the government. Vve
    would 'have, therefore, to be voting on the There is certainly no intention that either the
    principle of the bill as it is before us, and han. member or any other member of the
    ·one or two sections of the bill contain prin- house would be deprived of an opportunity
    Ciples to which I am unalterably opposed, to discuss it.
    -even though the minister has said these mat- Mr. Fulton: That is perfectly understood.
    ter~ a~e,gbirig to b,e referred to a joint com-
    mittee of this house and the other place or Mr. Garson: That is) if he wished to do so
    ..a royal commission. I could not see myself, \vithout the report. I am sure the hon. mem-
    Mr. Speaker, in the position of bei.ng asked ber for Vancouver East will not object to iny
    -to ,vote upon .and pass in principle- something having the feeling that I would prefer to get
    to which ,I am unalterably opposed. the report of the joint parliamentary com-
    The onlY oppor:tunity I coulc1. see for speak- mittee or the royal commission before I dis-
    ing on thIs principle, therefore, was on the cussed it, but I would be the last -man in
    .second r~a~ling of the bill. I hope, sir) you the house to deny his right to discuss it)
    ~mderst-atid the position in which' I find with or without a report of the royal comrrlls-
    myself.' If there is any way of clarifying sion or a joint committee. I do -not think
    it in order to speed up the procedure I would there was any thought that the hon. member
    be only too happy to abide by it. At the would be deprived of the fullest opportunity
    sarrie time I want to preserve my right to of discussing that particular clause when the
    ,speak on principles to which I 'am unalterably bill is before the committee of the whole .
    .opposed,· because I am not going to vote for
    them. . Mr. Winch: I could not ask -for more. I
    give way.
    Mr. Garson: T-9-e han. member for Van-
    Mr. Speaker: Is it the pleasure ,of the house
    couver East, who has just taken his seat, Mr.
    to adopt the motion?
    .'Speaker, '.has -ie~erred to some language of
    mine which I am anxious to explain to his Motion agreed tal bill read the second time
    :satisfaction as not being susceptible of the and the house went into committee thereon,
    interpretation which,' from his standpoint, he Mr. Robinson (Simcoe East) in the chair.
    .:ha's perhaps properly placed upon it. I thought On section I-Short title.
    I had made it clear, not once but several Mr. FuUcm: Ten .o',clock.
    -times, that it was the view of many that the
    -Mr. I(nowles: Stand .
    . most orderly manner of proceeding to debate
    the Criminal Code, which embraces so many Section stantis.
    principles, would be t"o treat the principle of Progress repor.ted.
    DOMINION OF CANADA

    HOUSE OF COMMONS
    DEBATES
    OFFICIAL REPORT

    FIRST SESSION-TWENTY·SECOND PARLIAMENT

    2-3 ELIZABETH II
    BEING THE 96TH SESSION FOR THE PERIOD 1867-1954

    VOLUME III. 1953.54


    COMPRISING THE PERIOD FROM THE EIGHTEENTH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 1954,
    TO THE TWENTY·FOURTH DAY OF MARCH, 1954, INCLUSIVE

    INDEX ISSUED IN A SEPARATE VOLUME

    Jo:DIvtOND CLOUTIER, C,M.G., O.A., D,S,P.


    QUEEN'S PRINTER AND CONTROLLER OF STATIONERY
    ottAWA, 1954
    FEBRUARY 26. 1954 2483
    CriminaL Code
    Mr. Knowles: Does the minister say there rather than that he should be asking me.
    was not such a clause in the former code? However, I do not think it is particularly
    Mr. Garson: Has my hon. friend the present material because the gravamen of the offence
    under clause 238 is this:
    code?
    Everyone who unlawfully supplies or procures a
    Mr. Knowles: Yes. drug or other thing knowing that it is intended to
    be used to procure the miscarriage of a female
    Mr. Garson: Will he look at- person, whether or not she is pregnant, is guilty
    of an indictable offence.
    Mr. Knowles: Section 303?
    Mr. Garson: Yes, and he will see there is The cases indicate that even where there
    have been used, for the purpose of accom-
    llO saving clause in the abortion section- plishing an abortion, drugs which would not
    Mr. Knowles: Does not the word Hunlaw- be effective for that purpose, the offence is
    ful" cover that? complete under the section if the person
    Mr. Garson: I do not think so. Clause 237, supplies it for the purpose of procuring a
    subsection 1, reads: miscarriage. One of the purposes of a clause
    Everyone who, with intent to procure the mis- of this kind is to discourage the practice of
    carriage of ,a female person, whether or not she is abortion.
    pregnant, uses any means for the purpose of
    carrying out his intention •.. Mr. Trainor: There is a case, I submit, Mr.
    Chairman, where a drug may be given and
    Intent is written into that clause. It is where the person concerned may know per-
    obvious that a person who intends to do fectly well that it will not produce an abor-
    that in breach of this section would certainly tion but the person to whom it is given may
    be liable. not know that and may think that it will
    Mr. Knowles: Is the minister satisfied that do so. As a consequence, the person who
    a doctor who performs such an operation gives the drug merely, we will say for
    for ,the purpose of saving the life of the example, to satisfy the individual person,
    mother is covered- might still be guilty of an offence, even
    Mr. Garson: Yes, I am sure he would be though he or she knew that it would not be
    , because there would be no mens rea in a case effective but the person to whom the drug
    of that sort, and in all these cases, without was given might think that it was going
    ': it b~ing specifically mentioned in each sec- to be effective. There are cases in which
    tion, it is necessary for the crown as part doctors may do that sort of thing where they
    · of its case to prove a guilty mind upon the are approached and are asked for something
    " ,part of the accused, whether it is so specified that would have the effect of procuring an
    or not. I am sure my han. friend would abortion. In order to satisfy the individual,
    agree that it is very desirable that when they may give a perfectly innocuous drug.
    that guilty mind is present. in the case of a Mr. Garson: I would suggest that that
    doctor, he should be held to account would be a very dangerous practice indeed
    criminally. for a doctor to engage in.
    ·Mr. Knowles: Yes. Clause agreed to.
    Mr. Garson: Most reputable doctors are Clauses 238 and 239 agreed to.
    very hesitant about performing an operation
    On clause 240-Blgamy.
    of this kind unless they take very· careful
    ! precautions against falling into difficulties Mr. Knowles: I notice that subclause 2 of
    of this sort. clause 240 Teads in part as follows:
    :' Mr. Knowles: Is the minister satiSfied that fonn No person commits bigamy by going through a
    of marriage if . . .
    : the principle of mens Tea covers that? (d) the former marriage has been declared void
    by a court of competent jurisdiction. .
    Mr. Garson: Yes.
    The marginal note out to the left of sub-
    · Mr. Fulton: Who is to say whether it is paragraph (d) reads: "Annulment". Can the
    (' justified?
    minister tell me what constitutes a court of
    '( Mr. Garson: Whether it is justified or not competent jurisdiction under the heading of
    ~ Is· a ·question of fact for the court to decide. "Annulment"?
    t· ~b. Trainor: With regard to clause 237, I Mr. Garson: I am afraid that I could not
    ,,·should like to ask the minister whether he give my hon. friend a comprehensive state-
    ~knows of any drug that may be used as a ment on that matter. It would be that court
    · means of proc1:lring an abortion.
    in the various provinces of Canada that had !
    ". Mr. Garson: I think that is a question I jurisdiction in respect of annUlment. I could
    S~ould be asking my han. friend who is look that point up for my han. friend but
    ;h1mself learned in the science of medicine I could not give him the answer offhand.
    2434 HOUSE OF COMMONS
    Criminal Code
    Mr. Knowles: When the minister refers to bench in our province, namely the Quebec
    a court of competent jurisdiction in any par- superior court, entertains petitions for nul1i~
    ticular province, does he have in mind only fication of marriage?
    a civil court or are there other kinds of Mr. Fulion: As distinguished from divorce.
    courts that are recognized by this language?
    Mr. Gatson: I am afraid that I do not.
    Mr. Garson: It is not a case of recognition
    by this language. We have to interpret this Mr. I<.:nowles: I am sure the minister sees
    language. But the court Which determines the difficulty that presents itself to us in
    these questions is a court established by the connection with this matter. As the minister
    provincial authorities under the law in effect knows, there is no court-no civil court, at
    in a province. any rate-dealing with divorce in two of the
    provinces of the country. Yet we are informed
    Mr. FuHon: Perhaps the minister would that annulments take place in those provin~
    deal with his own province and describe ces, after which there are instances of remar-
    the situation there. That would probably riage. So far as the Criminal Code is con-
    answer the question. cerned, does that mean that whatever body
    Mr. Garson: I can do that very easily. In it is in either of these provinces that annuls
    my own province it would be the court of marriages, that body is for all practical pur-
    king's bench which is the trial division of the poses a court of competent jurisdiction?
    superior court. Mr; Garson: No. I do not want my hon.
    Mr. Knowles: It is the court ot queen's friend to put words into my mouth.
    be!1ch now. Mr.. Knowles: Let the minister choose his
    Mr. Garson: That is quite right. It would own words.
    be the analogue of that court' in the other Mr. Garson: I know that he does not intend
    provinces. In all cases the identity of that to do that. Clause 240 (2) Cd) means that no
    court is established by provincial law. person commits bigamy by going through a
    Mi:'. Knowles: I do not want to get into a form of marriage either if the first marriage
    question here that is too thorny or too has been by divorce made a nullity or if the
    embarrassing to anybody nearby or to any- first marriage has been declared void on
    one farther away either. 'What about arinulment proceedings.
    the situation with respect to annulments that Mr. Diefenbalter: A marriage could not
    take place in provinces where they do not -be made a nullity by divorce.
    have a civil divorce court? Is the voiding of
    a marriage by the process of annulment in Mr. FuHon: The marriage bond is disy
    such provinces recognized by the code as the solved.
    annulment of a marriage by a court of Mr. Garson: My han. friend is right,
    competent jurisdiction? the relationship between man and wife is
    Mr. Garson: I cannot see my hon. friend's dissolved. The point my hon. friend is
    difficulty in this wording at all. It seems to making is that in annulment proceedings I

    me to be self~explanatory. It says this: a marriage is treated as null and void. That


    No person commits bigamy by going through a is the distinction, but in either case there
    iorm of marriage if . • • is no longer a marriage. Therefore, since
    (d) the former marriage has been declared void there is no marriage between the accused
    by a court of competent jUrisdiction.
    and any other person, it is not bigamy when
    Mr. Knowles·: What is such a court? he goes through a second form of marriage.
    Mr. Garson: That which is a court of com~ Bigamy is the offence of going throu·gh a I
    petent jurisdiction is determined by the law form of marriage when one is already
    in effect in the province concerned. If a civil married. If he is not married when he
    court or' an ecclesiastical court has jurisdic- goes through the form of marriC1:ge then
    tion to make such a declaration, then the only
    question that arises under this wording is obviously he does not commit bigamy.
    whether it is of competent jurisdiction. The Mr. Knowles: I shall not pursue the mat~
    word "competent" covers it. You could not ter, partly because I see that we are not get-
    determine it in any other way because if it ting anywhere. But I wonder if the minister
    were not competent then the declaration· of would be good enough to make a note of this
    nullity would itself be void and the marriage point and have someone in his department
    would remain in effect. advise me, even if the information has to be
    Mr. Knowles: Does the minister know sent to me in the form of a letter, whether
    whether the court in the province of Quebec it is federal or provincial law or the Quebec
    which corresponds to the court of queen's civil code that constitutes what is referred
    (Mr. Garson,]
    FEBRUARY 26, 1954 2485
    Crimina! Code
    to here as a court of competent authority Mr. Harkness: Are these courts of com-
    for declaring void marriages that have taken petent jurisdiction all courts within Canada
    place in that province. or are courts outside of Canada recognized?
    Mr. Maltais: ·1 might give these details Mr. Garson: Any court of competent juris~
    to the hon. member by way of further diction anywhere would be recognized. But
    clarification, and I may have some questions to this I must add a warning. Divorces
    to ask. From my own experience, having granted by courts of some jurisdictions
    only been married nine years, it would which are based upon an obviously false
    appear to me tl).at in the province of Quebec residence of some six or eight weeks are not
    competent jurisdiction would be that of the necessarily recognized as effective under
    authorities of the religion to which one Canadian law. But if a Canadian by a
    belongs. The people of Quebec do not rec- business transfer for example establishes
    'ognize the right -~f ~ourts in the province genuine domicile in some other· place, a
    of Quebec to declare void a marriage that domicile recognized under Canadian law, if
    has been consummated legally. So far as he has to go there because of business or
    P?Tagraph (d) of subsection 2 is concerned, family considerations and intends to continue
    under the Catholic religion the competent to live there; and having thus established
    authority would not declare that a marriage a genuine domicile secures a divorce there,
    was void but could give a declaration to the then that div'orce will be valid. That divorqe
    . effect that the marriage had never been court will then be a court of competent
    consummated. That is the situation. In jurisdiction, and the divorce granted by it
    accordance with our old tradltions we do will have the effect intended by this sub-
    not recognize the authority of any civil court section 2(c) of clause 240. But if the accused
    to j,nterfere in -marriages. That is why I has gone away and got a divorce upon the
    would say that under this clause the only basis of residence which is not recognized
    competent authorities would be the eccle- in Canadian law the divorce would not be
    siastical authorlti~s. valid here.
    Mr. Knowles: We all know that many MI'. Harkness: The minister has been
    churches do not follow the practice of dis- referring to divorce generally in foreign
    solving marriages performed under their countries, but I take it that SUbsection 2{d)
    aegis. 'Phe United Church of Canada, for is concerned with annulments rather than
    example, the one to which I belong, does divorces. Perhaps I should have framed my
    not follow the practice of declaring null and question more definitely. Are any courts
    void a -marriage performed by a United outside of Canada, whether ecclesiastical or
    Church clergyman, and I should like to know otherwise, looked upon as courts of com-
    where is the recognition in law of the prac- petent jurisdiction as far as annulment of
    tice to which the han. member for Charle- marriage is concerned?
    voix has just referred. Perhaps that is what Mr. Garson: Yes, as long as they are of
    I was asking for when I asked the minister competent jurisdiction. In addition, so that
    if he would have the matter investigated. my answer will not be misunderstood, the
    court not only has to be of competent juris-
    Maybe it is somewhere in the Quebec civil
    diction but the proceedings taken in that
    code. court and the facts in connection with those
    Mr. Maltais: I still say that under the proceedings must be such as, by the prin-
    Catholic faith the aUthorities do not dissolve ciples of private international law relating
    a marriage that has been consummated, and to marriage and divorce, will result in a
    only. interfere very rarely where there has finding by that court which will be effective
    been some serious mistake or misrepresenta- in Canada in order to have the divorce
    Hon. Our_ .authorities would take the posi- recognized here.
    tion that the marriage never took place, so
    there is no cancellation of a marriage that Mr. Harkness: I am still not clear. Do I
    has taken place. when something like that understand that if, for example, the ecclesias-
    happens, then under· their concept our tical court 'Of the archbishop of Mexico
    authorities just say that the marriage did not declares the marriage of two Canadian citi-
    take place. They say that there was no zens is mill and has never taken place that
    former marriage and therefore there is no would be recognized in Canada?
    dissolution. .once you are married under Mr. Garson: I have not the faintest idea.
    the Catholic faith you are married forever, This is a purely hypothetical question. It
    and that is why we do not want divorce in is quite impossible for anyone to sit here
    the province of Quebec. and rattle 'Off opinions with respect to
    83276-158
    24a~ HOUSE OF COMMONS
    Criminal Gode
    whether a personage 0.1' a. court in Peru or clause 291 is 14 years. Would the minister·
    any other country :would be a court of COID- comment? There certainly does not appear
    petent . jurJsdiction. Whether the civil or to me to be that much difference in the
    ecclesiastical court that grants the foreign seriousness of the two offences, and it strikes
    divorce of a Canadian marriage is a court me that the offence under 252 might be even
    of competent jurisdiction will depend upon more serious than that under 29!.
    the laws of the other country, upon the Mr. Garson: If my hon. friend were going
    question 'Of domicile and other difficult points. to the code and examining these punishments
    It is a matter both of the law of that other for the various crimes that are listed there,
    country and the law of Canada. For example, he would see that those which involve vio-
    if a Canadian man and wife go down to lence or the threat of violence to the person
    Reno to get a Reno divorce, it will not hold of the victim carry a heavier penalty, on the
    water in Canada because Canadian law does average, than those which do not involve
    not recognize the type of domicile that is violence. This is certainly true of the two
    established in Reno, which is mere residence clauses which my hon. friend is comparing
    for a period of time without any intention now.
    whatever 'Of staying there permanently. Under the present code and in the first
    Clause agreed to. draft of the new one, clause 252 only carried
    Clauses 241 to 246 inClusive agreed to. a penalty of .two years. It was increased to
    five years in the House of Commons special
    On clause 247-Newspaper. committee, and appears as five now by reason
    Mr. Fulton: Might I ask the minister, if of that increase. Now, extortion by violence
    the other members of the committee concur, or threat of violence comes under the head-
    if he would be kind enough to allow clauses ing of robbery, which is theft by violence,
    247 and 248 to stand? It was indicated to and it is the element of violence which
    him that members on this side would like to attracts the heavier penalty. In the case of
    make some extended remarks on defamatory this clause the penalty is the penalty that
    libel. has been in the existing code.
    Mr. Garson: That is satisfactory. Clause agreed to.
    Clauses 247 and 248 stand. Clauses 253 to 275 inclusive agreed to.
    Clauses 249 to 251 inclusive agreed to. On clause 276-Theft by person required
    to account.
    On clause 252-Extortion by libel.
    Mr. Diefenbaker: Has any change been
    Mr. Knowles: I shOUld like to ask the made in this section or 1s it entirely a reprQ-
    minister to comment on clause 252 in relation duction of the old section 355? I have not a
    to clause 291. It occurs to me that these two
    clauses are at least in the same field. As a Criminal Code before me.
    matter of fact, the marginal note on clause Mr. Garson: No change.
    252 is "extortion by libel", and the marginal Clause agreed to.
    note opposite clause 291 is just "extortion".
    As I read the two separate clauses, it strikes Clauses 277 to 288 inclusive agreed to.
    me that the offenee set out in clause 252 is On clause 289-Punishme.nt fo·r robbery.
    every bit as serious an offence as that set out
    in clause 291. In faet, I can see an argument Mr; Knowles: Would the minister care to
    being made for the position that the offence comment on this clause? Perhaps I should
    under clause 252 is more serious than the make the same request with respect to it
    one under clause 291. Let me read a bit of that I made with respect to the elause having
    clause 252. to do with capital punishment. Before doing
    Everyone commits an offence who, with intent so, ma-y I ask if I understand the situation
    (a) to extort money from any person, or correctly? It seems to me that the penalty
    (b) to induce a person to confer upon or procure
    for another person an ap'pointment 01' arece of has been increased from what it was in
    profit or trust, publiShes or threatens to publish the former code. It was 14 years befDre,
    or offers to abstain from publislllng or to prevent
    the publication of a defamatory libel. was it not, and it has now been increased
    (2) Every one commits an offence who as the to imprisonment for life and whipping. I
    result of the refusal of any person to permit money I 1 tl i ht
    to be extorted or to confer or procure an appoint- . am sorry, was on y par y r g . It was-
    ment or office of profit or trust, 'publisces or 14 years and whipping and it has been
    threatens to pubUsh a defamatory libel. increased to life imprisonment and whipping.
    Despite the fact that that strikes me as a I think it would only be reasonable to make'
    rather serious offence, the punishment for it the same request I made with respect to,
    is only five years, whereas the penalty under capital punishment, and ask that this clause,
    (Mr. Garson.1
    DOMINION OF CANADA

    HOUSE OF· COMMONS


    DEBATES
    OFFICIAL REPORT

    FIRST SESSION-TWENTY-SECOND PARLIAMENT

    2-3 ELIZABETH II
    BEING THE 96TH SESSION FOR THE PERIOD 1867-1954

    VOLUME IV, 1953-54


    COMPRISING THE PERIOD FROM THE TWENTY-FIFTH DAY OF MARCH, 1954.
    TO THE SIXTH DAY OF MAY, 1954. INCLUSIVE

    INDEX ISSUED IN A SEPARATE VOLUME

    EDMOND CLOUTIER, C.:h'[,G., Q.A., D.S.P.


    QUEEN'S PIUN'IER AND CONtROLLER OF STATIONERY
    Q-TTAWA, 1954
    3920 HOUSE OF COMMONS
    CriminaL Code
    the fact that the banking and commerce or that of the official opposition as to the
    committee is now sitting, and as this' is not necessity for some such provision. It is just
    a matter involving only legal considerations that this is a quite complicated matter and
    but one involving also questions of counterw we would like to know what the mechanics
    feiting and the like, the sections in this of the procedure would be.
    amendment might be referred to the banking Mr. Garson: ~ay I suggest that it might
    and commerce committee, discussed there be wise if my colleague were to withdraw'
    and reported back. his amendment. This text might be submit-
    We have completed our discussion of the ted to the committee on ban~ing and com-
    rest of the code. This is new and comes merce and discussed there. Then when the
    before us just at the last m'Oment. As the bill goes to the -other place, as it will have
    Minister of Finance is here, perhaps the two to do, and be considered there clause by
    ministers might confer on my suggestion. clause, it would be a simple matter indeed
    Mr. Abboll: I unders,and this hill is to go for the Senate to put in a Senate amend-
    from this house to the other place. The ment. That would be passed in due course
    section before us is one to which the Bank and come back to the House of Commons.
    of Canada attaches some importance, parw Mr. Fulton: In other words you suggest
    ticularly because, as the house knows, we that we should approve of it.
    are bringing out a new series of Bank of
    Canada notes in September. They will be Mr. Garson: No.
    rather different from the present Bank of Mr. Knowles: It will have to come back to
    Canada notes. I should not anticipate what us afterwards.
    they will be, but I have approved the Mr. Abbo!!: We will have the Senate put
    designs. the amendment in. Then it will come back
    Mr. Knowles: How much will they be here to us.
    worth? Mr. Knowles: Will the Senate do whatever
    Mr. Abboit: Oh, they will be, as they you want them to do?
    always have been, the strongest currency in Mr. AbboU: It may refuse it.
    the world. They will reprE;sent character-
    istic Canadian scenes. I think it is; impor- Mr. Knowles: We know they do your bid-
    tant that there should be a proper provision ding; but we are surprised you admit it.
    in the Criminal Code to prevent facsimile The Chairman: Is it understood that the
    reproductions of currency, because a good amendment is to be withdrawn?
    many people are easily taken in by that sort
    of thing, and they are protected by the pro- Mr. AbboU: Yes, I will withdraw the
    amendment.
    vision in the Criminal Code.
    I _would say there would be no objection The Chairman: Has the mInister leave to
    to the suggestion that the proposed amend- withdraw the amendment?
    ment should be looked at by the banking Some hon. Me~bers: Agreed.
    and commerce committee, and perhaps the Amendment withdrawn.
    deputy governor of the Bank of Canada
    might go there and elaborate upon the Section agreed to.
    reasons he has given in the letter to my Title agreed to.
    deputy minister. I do nut suppose the house
    would want it to come back here; If the Bill reported.
    banking and commerce committee were Mr. Depuly Speaker: When shall thi~ bill
    satisfied with the explanation, it could be be read a third time?
    referred to the other place and dealt with Some hon. Members: Now.
    there.
    So far as I am concerned I would be Mr. Fulton: No.
    happy to have the officers of the Bank of Mr. Depuly Speaker: When shall this bill
    Canada report before the banking and com- be read a third time? Next sitting?
    merce . committee the reasons they feel Mr. Fulton: Agreed.
    proper provisions should be put in the
    Criminal Code now to prevent the facsimile Mr. AbboU: By leave, now.
    reproduction of Bank. of Canada notes. Some hon. Members: Now.
    Mr. Fulton: I wish to assure both ministers Mr. Garson moved the third reading of the
    that there is IlIa dispute either on my part hill.
    [Mr. Fulton.t
    APRIL 8, 1954 3921
    CriminaZ Code
    Mr. Sianley Knowles (Winnipeg North We felt that the sentence provided with res-
    Centre): Mr. Speaker, before the bill 1s read peet to sedition, namely, fourteen years, is too
    the third time, there are a few things I wish great, too severe, particularly in view of the
    to say; and I shall move an amendment to way in which this offence is defined. In
    the minister's motion for third reading of that connection we have already registered
    the bill. our objection to the fact that the sentence
    As hon. members are aware there are a for seditious utterances has been increased
    great many clauses in this bill, which we have twice in the last three years. The penalty
    been considering now for a long time, to was two years up until 1951. In 1951 it
    which we take no objection. Indeed, we are was increased to seven years; by this bill
    pleased that so much effort has been put into it is being increased to fourteen years.
    the process of revising and consolidating the Shnilarly, Mr. Speaker, we feel that the
    Criminal Code, so as to bring it up to date. clauses having to do with treason include
    Many parts of it have been improved im- too many offences under that heading. We
    measurably, and that is due to the tremendous pointed out when we were in committee of
    amount of work that has been put into it by the whole that we were very interested in
    all those who have taken part in the effort the history of the law of treason which the
    over the last four or five years. minister gave. We appreciated the point he
    Nevertheless there are some features in made when he indicated that across the years
    the bill to which we take very strong objec- we have moved in the direction of narrowing
    tion. Those features are perhaps well known, the number of offences that are to be defined
    in view of the objections we have been raising as treason. We feel that in this bill there
    in the committee of the whole during the is a reversal in that course of history and
    la~t few days. It is not my purpose to we object, as I say, to the greater number
    sUggest that the time of the house be taken on of offences now being included under the
    a series of third reading amendments with a heading of treason.
    view to testing the house on all the clauses Likewise, Mr. Speaker1 we feel that the
    to which we take objection. However there sections dealing with the use of force to
    are two particular clauses which we feel suppress troubles and diffiCUlties, particularly
    should be reconsidered; and when we say we the sections dealing with the reading of the
    feel they should be reconsidered we mean riot act1 are too severe. When we were in
    either that they should be deleted altogether committee of the whole it was pointed out
    or that they should be amended. that the authority, the right, under certain
    It will be the purpose of the amendment circumstances to read the riot act is extended
    I shall move in a few minutes to place our right down to the deputy of a sheriff. We
    opposition to those clauses before the house. ,pointed out also that the penalty provided
    However1 before dQing so may I point out for those who fail to disperse when the riot
    that our quarrel with the bill in the form act is read, or at least within thirty minutes
    in which it is now before us is not limited of the reading of the riot act, is life imprison-
    to the two subject-s which will be mentioned ment, which again we feel is too severe. We
    in the amendment I shall move, nor is it associate these sections of the code that 'deal
    limited to the matters I will mention in these with the reading of the riot a'ct, as well as
    few minutes tonight. those related to sedition, with instances ih our
    history related to economic difficulties and
    However, Mr. Speaker, we have pointed' economic disturbances, and for these reasons
    out during the course of the discussion this we regret that our opposition to some of the
    week that we are not satisfied with the terms in these sections was not given greater
    clauses in the bill that deal with such sub- consideration by the government.
    je~ts as sedition, treason and the reading of However, Mr. Speaker, as I have already
    the riot act. We feel, despite the case the indicated, it is not my purpose to move an
    government has endeavoured to put forward amendment which would attempt to cover all
    with respect to these sections, that the ·ques- of the things that we think are wrong with
    tion of civil liberties, the question of freedom the bill in its present form, but rather it is
    of speech, and the whole question as to my purpose to move an amendment which
    whether or not force and suppression might will cover the two greatest shortcomings)
    be used against our people in time of economic which will deal with the two -clauses in the
    difficulty, as well as other important questions, bill which we f.eel are most important, parti-
    are involved in these matters. We pointed out cularly to organized labour. These two are
    that we felt that the clauses dealing with sedi- the clauses dealing with criminal breach of
    tion are worded too ambiguously; that they contract -and with mischief. We dealt with
    make possible the defining in some instances these two clauses yesterday and today, one
    . of legitimate attempts at reform as sedition. of them being clause 36~ on which we spent
    3922 HOUSE OF COMMONS
    Crimina! Code
    most of today, and the other being clause 372 The minister has shown remarkable patience.
    on which some time was spent last evening. I have not seen anything like it since I came
    As the hon. member for Kamloops (Mr. into the house, patience not only in the house
    Fulton) pointed out last evening, and my but outside, and I am disappointed that this
    colleague, the hon. member for Vancouver- amendment .now comes in.
    Kingsway (Mr. MacInnis) pointed out earlier The minister discussed the question of
    todayI the clause dealing with mischief, labour with the three outstanding unions in
    clause 372, is one that attempts to combine Canada, and brought in amendment after
    some 15 clauses of the old code containing amendment to suit the Trades and Labour
    some 50 different offences, and it has put Congress of Canada, but it did not suit all
    them all in one pot of porridge, which the the others completely, which would be a very
    hon. member for Kamloops suggests is served difficult thing to do.
    up without any salt. In addition to the fact While I adinire the C.C.F. in a good many
    that there is a lack of definiteness as to the ways, they remind me now of two teams who
    offences covered under this catch-all clause, had thrown their best into the game and
    we feel that it is a dangerous one in so far then because one side lost they complained
    as labour relations are concerned. We agree bitterly. Now we have this amendment and
    with the labour people who have asserted I think it is discourteous to the minister. I
    that this clause is properly named, that it do not know that I can make my attitude any
    is a mischievous clause, and we feel that it plainer than that.
    should not be in a code being enacted by
    parliament in the year 1954. Mr. Winch: We never say die.
    Likewise we feel, Mr. Speaker, that the Mr. Angus MacInnis {Vancouver-Kings-
    government has not really faced up to the way}: Mr. Speaker, may I assure the hon.
    issues involved in the debate that has taken member for Fort William (Mr. McIvor) that
    place in the committee of the whole today, the last thing .1 would not only agree to do
    during which we have contended that labour here but even think about would be to do
    matters should not be in 365, dealing as it anything that would be discourteous to the
    does with criminal breach of contract. This Minister of Justice (Mr. Garson). But let
    clause is extremely important to organized me also assure him that as long as we believe
    labour and I submit for the consideration of that the b!ll before us can be Improved we
    the house that what is Important to organized would be' unfair not only to ourselves but
    labour is important to the economy and the to the people of Canada, to the people who
    well-being of Canada as a whole. Therefore, sent us here, no matter how few they are, if
    Mr. Speaker, we feel that the house should we failed to use the facilities of this house
    have an opportunity to express its view, at to the best advantage possible to improve
    least in general terms, with respect to these this bill. If hon. members do not agree with
    last two clauses, these last two subjects what we are asking the house to' do now then
    about which I have been speaking. they will, of course, express themselves in
    At this stage there is only one course left that way and the democratic principle of our
    for us to follow, and I propose to follow it parliamentary institutions will have gone the
    and to give the house an opportunity to record full round.
    its approval or disapproval of these two The hon. member for Fort William referred
    clauses as they now stand. I am not sug... to the patience shown by the Minister of
    gesting to the house that all han .. members Justice in piloting this important bi11 through
    have to agree with any particular alteration the house, while he brought in amendment
    in these clauses that we might suggest, but after amendment. I will do the Minister of
    I am urging the house to agree with us that Justice credit and say that he did not bring
    in their present form clauses 365 and 372 in any amendment to this bill unless he
    are unacceptable and should not be included thought that amendment would improve the
    in the Criminal Code. Therefore, to bring bill. He did not bring in an amendment to
    this matter to a head, and to give the house satisfy one organization or another. It is quite
    an opportunity to express its view on these possible he thought the bill was all right
    clauses, I move, seconded by my .colleague, but that certain amendments would not do it
    any harm and he therefore agreed to intro·
    the han. member for Vancouver-Kmgsway! duce them. It is only on that understanding
    That Bill No.7 be not now read a third time but
    that it be referred back to the committee of the that we can ever believe in the sincerity of
    whole house. for the purpose of reconSidering clause the minister and the work he is doing.
    365. dealing with breach of contract. and clause 372. I am not going to say anything fUrther
    dealing with mischief.
    with regard to the conduct of the minister
    M~. Daniel McIvor (For! Wi11iaml: Mr. during the time this bill was before not only
    Speaker, I should like to say just a word. the house but the parliamentary committee.
    [Mr. Knowles.]
    APRIL 8, 1954 3923
    Criminal Code
    I have said all I want to say on that aspect important single protection which an indi-
    ~f the matter and I do not intend to take 'vidual has against unlawful arrest and
    an'ything back or to detract from .anything I against the power of the state. It is the right
    have said. I am ,certainly not going to apolo- of the individual to require the authorities to
    gize to anyone for using the facilities of this show cause why he should be detained, and
    house in the interests of the people of Canada. we feel that the taking away of that right of
    Mr. E. D. Fulton (Kamloops): Mr. Speaker, further proceedings by way of writ of habeas
    I am glad the hon. member for Winnipeg corpus after the initial rejection should not
    North Centre (Mr. Knowles) has moved this be incorporated in our law.
    amendment. I believe he has been farsighted I am not going to go into any further detail
    in the wording of it because, whatever differ- beyond stating the principle, and that we
    ence of opinion there may be in detail as to feel the departure from that -principle is so
    what should be done with these two clauses important and of such far~reaching conse~
    365 and 372, he is not asking us to tie our- quences and so unacceptable that the bill .
    selves down but is simply asking that they should be referred back to the committee to
    be referred back to the committee for the give the committee of the whole further
    purposes of reconsideraUon in committee. As opportunity to reconsider and indeed, I would
    we in -the official opposition have expressed hope, reject the .changes incorporated in
    ourselves quite strongly with respect to both clauses 690 and. 691. I accordingly move:
    these clauses and the inadequacies and weak~ That the amendment be amended by adding
    nesses thereof, we certainly would have no thereto the following words:
    "and clauses 691} and 691 dealing with proceedings
    other course but to support the amendment. by way of writ of habeas corpus."
    I am glad the hon. member has moved it. Mr. E. G. Hansell (Macleod): Mr. Speaker,
    Indeed I am prepared to confess to having before you take a vote on the amendment
    been caught short. I had overlooked, or, if may I say that perhaps we have listened to
    you like, misinterpreted the rules, and had the discussion more than we have spoken to
    not anticipated that the third reading would it. We have spoken whenever we felt it was
    arise tonight. It was my intention to move necessary to do so. We have more or less
    a similar amendment on third reading and always favoured the proposals and am~nd­
    I am grateful to the hon. member, not only ments introduced by the minister. We believe
    for having brought up this particular motion he has been most reasonable in this matter.
    but for having given me time to prepare my We have voted against many of the amend~
    own ~mendment in which I can incorporate ments proposed by those who sit on this side
    the reasons for which we think this bill of the house. Perhaps we will do so again.
    should be referred back to the committee of I do not know. That depends on the amend-
    the whole. ments they propose and whether they go back
    Our reasons .have to dq with clauses 690 to the committee of the whole before the bill
    and f;j91,_ two clauses dealing with proceedings is read a third time. But if some other
    by writ of habeas corpus. I am not going to amendment can be made that may solve the
    discuss the clauses in detail but simply point problem 'and be satisfactory to the minister
    out that a very substantial change has been and to the whole house, then we are quite
    made in that, according to clause 690, once willing to give it another try. We do not see
    proceedings by way of writ of habeas corpus much hope in it, but for this time we shall
    have :been refused on the merits then no vote with the opposition that the bill be
    further proceedings Shall be taken in respect. referred back again for us to have at least
    to the person involved before the judge one more try, even though we have tried so
    rejecta the appeal of any other judge. That often in the p'ast little while.
    runs counter to the trend of our law for many
    years, and it is diametrically opposed to the Hon. Stuart S. Garson (Minister of Justice):
    judgment delivered in the House of Lords Mr. Speaker, I think it would be rather an
    by a prominent judge, ,Lord Hailsham, in a act of supererogation on my part to review
    at any great length the matteoo which have
    case which came up in 1928 and which I will been raised in this motion. The seriousness
    quote in part. He said, each judge, and now of the motion itself and the amendment is
    I quote: indicated by the fact that about 10 per cent,
    has jurisdiction to entertain an application for a I should think, as many arguments have
    writ of habeas corpus • . • and is bound to hear
    and determine such an application on its merits been made in support of this motion as were
    notwithstanding that some other judge has already made in connection with the same subject
    refused a similar application. matters when we were in committee. I am
    We attach particular importance to this not complaining about that fact. I am glad
    question of proceedings by way of writ ·of indeed that that small percentage of argu~
    habeas corpus as ,being IJ.)ossibly the most ments was made.
    3924 HOUSE' OF COMMONS
    Crimina! Code
    Mr. Knowles: The minister had better be or judge who is in charge of the case will
    careful. There are a good many speakers know, by reading that section, just what he
    over: here if the minister wants them. is su~posed rt;o do.
    .. Mr. Garson: I agree. I am not complaining Mr. Knowles: Is -that a fair description of
    ~t all. judges or magistrates?
    Mr. Knowles: Withdraw. Mr. Garson: No. But-that is the impression
    Mr. Garson: I think perhaps I might be my han. friend seems to have. We on the
    forgiven if I at least put on the record in other hand think that the members of the
    reply one or two points which I think are judiciary are intelligent enough to reach a
    relevant. In Ithe first place, with regard to wise decision upon the facts of the case that
    the matter of habeas corpus. I was rather comes before them, and within the wider
    taken with the idea that it should have been terms of reference provided in Bill No.7.
    the han. member for Kamloops (Mr. Fulton) In order to demonstrate just how inef-
    who moved the amendment to the motion in fective is this method which my han. friends
    connection wtth habeas corpus because the advocate, I should like to refer to the side-
    purpose of the lSection we have provided in notes only of the main section 510 dealing
    the new bill is to restore to the province of with mischief in the existing code. In, con-
    British Columbia the very excellent method necti-on with mischief it refers to damage to
    of having an appeaL from the judgment of house, ship, or boat; to bank, dyke, or sea-
    the trial judge who turned down an applica- wall; to bridge, viaduct or aqueduct; to
    tion for habeas corpus. I thought that a railway; to cattle; to -ship; to signal; to bank, I
    lawyer practising in British Columbia would dyke or wall; to river or canal; to flood gate I
    be grateful to us for restoring to them what or sluice; to private fishery; to goods; to
    they apparently had always desired to have machines; to hop-bind; to letter bag; to tree
    and did have for many years until a judg- or shrub and so on. All these are separate.
    ment of the supr-eme court made it unavail- The point I would make-is that after specify-
    able. ing all these, of other things that could be
    An hon. Member: Maybe he· did not know the subject matter of mischief there must be
    that. scores more that are still not covered and
    that have to be covered by an omnibus
    Mr. Fulton: Oh, yes. But I do not agree clause.
    with the minister's interpretation.
    Mr. Fullon. With a maximum penalty of
    Mr. Garson: As to the other matter, two years.
    namely section 365, criminal breach of con-
    tract, I do not know how we could have done Mr. Garson: Yes. It was precisely for the
    anything more ¢han to have continued upon purpose of providing a more rational method
    the !Statute books a provision taking care of of defining crime that the new code was
    wilful breach of contract which has been drafted. The commissioners were instructed
    on the statute books of Canada and of Great to try to reduce the compass of the code and
    Britain for the last seventy-five years. they succeeded in that regard by reducing it
    Having reached that decision, I do not know from 1150 sections to 750 sections. To what
    how we could have provided a saving clause purpose. This is what they say on this point
    to take care of the trade union congresses in in their report:
    any better way than to get in direc.t contact The work of consolidation has been designed to
    with them and di"Scuss with them the terms do away with duplication and needless repetition
    and to draft provisions that will. where llossible,
    in which that saving clause was drafted. eliminate particularization and reduce the need
    With regard to the matter of mischief, for amendment.
    there is here I think a fairly fundamental Most of us are perhaps guilty of intellec-
    difference .of opinion between the han. mem- tual vanity, each being proud of his own
    ber for Winnipeg North Centre (Mr. Knowles) brain-child and maybe a little bit prejudiced
    and the h-on. member for Kamloops on the in his vlewpoint on that account. I am
    one hand and the government upon the therefore not suggesting that the members
    other. They seem to favour the idea that in of the royal commission on the -one hand
    drafting a Criminal Code one should specify 01' the government on the other should
    every single kind of mischief, every single have their views accepted as to whether
    kind of forgery or every single kind of the methods we have followed is the only
    larceny that can possibly take place, spell proper method of drafting a criminal statute.
    them all out and provide a separate penalty But upon this very same subject let me
    for each one of them so that in terms of their read from one of the great British drafts-
    thinking the rather unintelligent magistrate men who was responsible for the monumental
    [Mr. Garson.]
    APRIL 8. 1954 3925
    Criminal Code
    imperial consolidated acts in the middle of approach to the provision of a good Criminal
    the nineteenth century. This is what he Code of Canada to be conducted on a com~
    said. Incidentally, he was also the author pletely non-partisan basis and that each of
    or the editor of "Russell on Crime" lone of us should vote in a non-partisan manner on
    the classical books on criminal law. He said the merits of each section as it came up.
    this:
    I am very strongly in favour of general clauses I must say that I never sat on any legisla-
    when they can be used without any others. They tive committee, either in provincial politics
    are not only clear and simple; but, if I be not or in federal politics, in which there was less
    very much ;p1istaken, would reduce the length of
    our statutes to a greater extent than any other partisanship, a more objective consideration
    plan that could be devised. Let it be considered of the merits of each section and a willingness
    what might be effected in forgery alone. No satis-
    factory reaSon can be given why t1;1e forgery of to listen to ideas no matter whence they
    every written. instrument should not be included came. We had some communist organizations
    in a single clause. . . That clause might be so there and it was a matter of great pride to
    framed as to include all existing and future instru-
    ments; and tiS no forgery can be tried by any me as a Canadian that they received the same
    Court of Quarter Sessions. there is no reason why courteous attention and the same considera- I
    the same wide discretion as to punishment should
    not be given to the court as in cases -of man- tion of their arguments as if they had not I
    slaughter. been people, whose political principles we
    Then further 'on-and this a man who was condemn by considering them and rejecting
    one of ·the great draftsmen of the last them. It seems to me that is the essence of
    century-he said this: genuine freedom of expression and real
    Hitherto the 'usual system of framing criminal democracy. I want to say to the members
    acts has been to specify each and every act
    intended to be subjected to any punishment: of the house, particularly to those who sel,'ved
    such a course has the advantage of calling direct on that committee, that as the minister in
    'attention to all the acts that are made penal ~ but charge of this bill I am most deeply grateful
    such a course is open to this objection, that it
    often leaves offences of equally great criminality to them for the splendid manner in which
    unprovided for, and thus affords the artful a they co-operated in producing what I think
    chance of evading punishment. Several courses
    may be adopted to remedy this object, A clause is quite a good piece of legislation.
    may be framed in such general terms as to include
    all cases of the same kind within it. This is the The house divided on the amendment to
    simplest, -and; perhaps, the best course; and it the amendment (Mr. Fulton) which was
    leaves the judgment of the court entirely unfettered
    as tp the punishment in every case. pegatived on the following division:
    I think the argument of my friends the hon. YEAS
    member for Winnipeg North Centre and the
    Messrs:
    hon. member for Xamloops would have been
    much more convincing if they could have Aitken, Miss Johnson (Kindersley)
    Balcer Johnston (Bow River)
    told us of any cases of these particularized Barnett Jones
    offences of mischief that were not covered Blackmore Knight
    Blair Knowles
    by the section in the bill. If they are all Brooks Leboe
    covered'in the section that we have, why Bryson Macdonnell
    should we have to take five or six pages of Cameron (Nanaimo) MacInnis
    CampbeU MacLean
    printing to describe what can be covered Casselman McCUllough (Moose
    in half a page'? For that reason, Mr. Speaker, Castled en Mountain)
    I certainly cannot support my hon. friend's Charlton Mitchell (London)
    Churchill Monteith
    motion. Coldwell Nicholson
    I should like to take this opportunity of Dinsdale Noseworthy
    Drew Patterson
    thanking my friend the hon. member for Fort Ellis pearkes
    William (Mr. McIvor) for his complimentary Fairclough, Mrs. Perron
    remarks,as well as my ftiend the hon. member Fleming Poulin
    Fraser (Peterborough) Quelch
    for Vancouver-Kingsway (Mr. MacInnis). At Fulton Regier
    the same time I should also like to express my Gillis SmaU
    Girard stanton
    deep appreciation-and I am very sincere in Green Starr
    this-for the magnificent co-operation which Hahn Thatcher
    We have had from all the members of the Hansell Tustin
    Harkness White (Hastings-
    house, particularly those who sat on tpe Herridge Frontenac)
    special 'committee of the House of Commons Hodgson Winch
    Holowach Zaplitny-59.
    last year. We said when we launched this Howe (Wellington~
    bill in the first place that we wanted the Huron)
    83276-248
    3926 HOUSE OF COMMONS
    CriminaL Code
    NAYS rise? I say this because if we are agreed we
    Messrs:
    are ready for the question now we could
    Abbott Langlois {Gaspe} proceed without having the bells rU!lg again:
    Applewhaite Lapointe Mr. Knowles: The·re may be. some Who
    Ashbourne Leduc missed the other vote.
    Balcom Lefran\:ois
    Batten Legare Mr. Speaker: That is quite true. I shall
    Blanchette Lesage therefore ask for the yeas and nays. All those
    Boisvert MacDougall
    Bonnier MacEachen who are in favour will please say yea?
    Boucher (Chateauguay~ McCann
    Huntingdon-Laprairie) McCulloch (Plctou) SOnle hone Members: Yea,
    Bourget McIlraith Mr. Speaker: All those opposed will please
    Bourque McIvor
    Breton McWilliam say nay?
    Brisson Mang Some hon. Members: Nay.
    Bruneau Masse
    Buchanan Michaud Mr. Speaker: In my opinion the nays
    Byrne Philpott have it.
    Cameron (High .Park) Picard
    Cannon PickersgUl And more than five members having risen:'
    Carter Pommer
    Claxton Power (Quebec South) Mr. Speaker: Call in the members.
    Cloutier Power (St. John's West)
    Cote Proudfoot The house divided on the amendment (Mr.
    Crestohl Purdy Knowles) which was negatived on the follow~
    Deslieres Batelle ing division:
    Dumas Reinke
    Fairey Richard (Ottawa East)
    Fontaine Roberge yEAS
    Fraser (st. John's East) Robertson Messrs:
    Garson Robichaud Aitken, :Miss JQhrison (Kindersley)
    Gauthier (Portneut) Robinson (Simcoe East) Balcer Johnston (BoW River)
    Gingras St. Laurent Barnett Jones
    Gingues Schneider Blackmore Knight
    Goode Shaw Blair Knowles
    Gourd (Chapleau) Simmons Brooks Leboe
    Gregg Stick Bryson Macdonnell
    Hanna stuart (Charlotte) Cameron (Nanaimo) MaCInnis
    Hardie Thibault Campbell MacLean
    Harrison Tucker Casselman McCullough (Moose
    Henry Valois Castleden Mountain)
    James Viau Charlton Mitchell (London)
    Jutras Villeneuve Churchill Monteith
    Klckham Weaver Coldwell Nicholson
    Kirk (Shelburne- Weir Dinsdale Noseworthy
    Yarmouth-Clare) Weselak Drew Patterson
    LaCroix White (Waterloo South) Ellis Pearkes
    Lafontaine Winters Fairclough, Mrs.. Perron
    Langlois (Berthier-Maski~ Wood-94. Fleming Poulin
    nonge-Delanaudiere) Fraser (Peterborough) Quelch
    Fulton Regiel'
    Mr. Speaker: I declare the amendment to Gillis Small
    the amendment lost. Is the house ready fol' Girard Stanton
    the question? The question is on th~ follow- Green Starr
    Hahn Thatcher
    ing motion of the Minister of JustiGe: Hansell Tustin
    That Bill No.7, an act respecting .the criminal Harkness White (Hastings M

    law, be now read the third time. Herridge Frontenac)


    Hodgson Winch
    Mr. Knowles: Mr.· Speaker, I trust you are Holowach Zaplitny-59.
    not forgetting the amendment. Howe (Welllngton~
    Huron)
    Mr. Speaker: No, I am putting the whole
    question. The hon. member for Winnipeg NAY~

    North Centre, seconded by the han. member Messrs:


    for Vancouver-Kingsway, moved: Abbott Bourque
    That Bill No. '1 be· not now read a third time Applew~aite Breton
    but that it be referred back to the committee of Ashbourne Brisson
    the whole house, for the purpose of reconsidering Balcom Bruneau
    clause 365, dealing wIth breach of contract, and Batten Buchanan
    clause 372, de~1ing with mischief. ' Blanchette Byrne
    Boisvert Cameron. (High Park) .
    The question is on the amendment to the Bonnier Cannon
    Boucher (ChateaUguaYM Carter
    main motion. Those who are in favour .. of Huntin·gdon-La'prairle) Claxton
    the amendment to the mail), motion will pl~ase Bourget . Cloutie_r
    [Mr. Garson.]
    APRIL 8, 1954 3927
    Criminal Code
    Cote Legare Stuart (Charlotte) Weaver
    Crestohl Lesage Thibault WeIr
    n-esliereS MacDougall Tucker Weselak
    Dumas MacEachen Valois White (Waterloo South)
    Fairey McCann Viau Winters
    Fontaine McCulloch (Pictou) Villeneuve Wood-93.
    Fraser (St. John's East) McIIraith
    Garson McIvor Mr. Speaker: Shall the main motion carry?
    Gauthier (Portneuf) McWllliam
    Gingras Mang Mr. Knowles: On division.
    Gingues Masse
    Michaud Motion agreed to on division and bill read
    Goode
    Gourd (Chapleau) Philpott the third time and passed.
    Gregg Picard
    Hanna Pickersgill
    Pommer BUSINESS OF THE HOUSE
    Hardie
    Harrison Power (Quebec South)
    Henry Power (St. John's west) Mr. Green: What will be the business
    James Proudfoot tomorro,v? .
    Jutras Purdy
    Kickham Ratelle Mr. Winters: Tomorrow we will take the
    Kirk (Shelburne- Reinke estimates of various departments, in the fol-
    Yarmouth-Clare) Richard (Ottawa East) lowing order: public works, northern affairs
    LaCroix Roberge
    Lafontaine Robertson and national resources, national defence)
    Langlois (Berthier~ Robichaud fisheries.
    Maskjnonge~ Robinson (Simcoe East)
    Delanaudfere) St. Laurent Mr. Abbo!!: What a day!
    Langlois (Gaspe) Schneider It being five minutes after ten o'clock the
    Lapointe Shaw
    Leduc Stick house adjourned, without question put,
    Leiran!;ois pursuant to standing order.

    83276-248,
    DOMINION OF CANADA

    HOUSE OF COMMONS
    DEBATES
    OFFICIAL REPORT

    FIRST SESSION-TWENTY·SECOND PARLIAMENT

    2-3 ELIZABETH II
    BEING mE 98TH SESSION FOR THE PERIOD 1867.1954

    VOLUME VI. 1963·64


    COMPRISING THE PERIOD FROM THE NINTH DAY OF JUNE. 1954,
    TO THE TWENTy.gIXTH DAY OF JUNE. 1954, INCLUSIVE

    INDEX ISSUED IN A SEPARATE VOLUME

    EDMOND CLOUTIER, C.M,G., O.A,. D.S.P.


    QUEIru'S PRWTER AND CONTIlOLLl'lII OF STATIONERY
    OTTAWA, 1954
    5913

    HOUSE OF COMMONS

    Tuesday. June 15. 1954 Mr. Knowles: By leave.


    ~."_·.'ihe house met at eleven o'clock. Mr. Marlin moved the third reading of the
    bill,
    ',-' ,,-. ',- EXTERNAL AFFAIRS Motion agreed to and bill read the third
    .:SU~GESTED ·VISIT TO OTTAWA BY 8m WINSTON
    time and passed .
    ., , CHURCHILL AND MR. EDEN
    CRIMINAL CODE
    r.} :6~ 'the orders of the day:
    '~:;:··.~hon •. George A. prew {Leader of the REVISION AND AMENDMENT OF EXISTING STATUTE
    :-;Oppositionh Mr. Speaker, I wish to direct -CONCURRENCE IN SENATE AMENDMENTS
    ;'1(" ,question to the Prime Minister. May I Hon. Siuar.t S. Garson (Minister of Justice)
    !:jiSK _whether, in view of the announcement moved the second reading of and concurrence
    'f'\vhich has just been made that Sir Winston amendmenis made by the Senate to Ei!1
    ?Churchill and Mr. Eden are going to fly in No.7, respecting the criminal law.
    i?!O ·Washington on June 25, the ,Prime Minister
    l"wlll consider inviting them td come to" Ottawa Mr. Stanley Knowles (Winnipeg North
    i,,'tor 'a: discussion of Asian problems, and also Centrel: Mr. Speaker, I wish to say just a few
    £'{gr _.~----possible conference ot, commonwealth words-
    £, Jnbiisters to consider problems affecting Some hon. Members: Hear, hear.
    ,:·~atlons· of the commonwealth in common at
    ~~s·t~e. ·Mr. Knowles: Maybe I will change my
    ",":, mind about that. I wish to say just. a few
    '->, it'ighf Hon. L. S. St. Laurent (Prime words in support of the motion that we
    :~Mjnister): The matter will receive considera- concur in the amendments to the Criminal
    r~oit; Mr. Speaker. Code which have been made by Their Honours
    in the other place.
    ~MOTOR VEHICLE TRANSPORT According to Votes and Proceedings for
    :,-l'ij:ovrSION FOR REGULATIONS OF m'I'ERPROVINCIAL Thursday, June 10, as recorded at pages -732
    t"': - --AND INTERNATIONAL IDGHWAY TRANSPORT to 734 Their Honours have proposed a total of
    i·-::·:iion. siuart s. Garson (for the Minister of 10 amendment-so Some of th-em are purely a
    ~~iJ'r_a~sport) moved the third reading of Bill matter of renumbering in consequence of
    I~O. 474J ,respecting extra-provincial motor other changes made. But I wish to say that,
    ;-yehicle transport. -- . so far as we can ascertainJ and so far as they
    ~.-/- go, all of the changes proposed by the Senate
    t?
    1,,;-lofr. .spea~er: Is it the pleasure of the house are a'cceptable to us. Indeed, there are two
    adopt the motion? of the changes we are very pleased Their

    "'
    [- Som.e hon. Members: Agreed.
    ,Mr. Fleming: On division.
    Honours saw fit to make. And I am glad
    to note the smile on the face of the Minister

    I Ithe third ,time and passed,


    of Justice (Mr, Garson), I take it that smile
    , Motion agreed to on division and bill read' means he is pleased that the Senate made
    those changes-
    Mr. Fleming: It does not mean a thing.
    I' NATIONAL PHYSICAL FITNESS ACT
    Mr. Knowles,-despite the fact that he
    REPEAL OF EXISTING LEGISLATION opposed us when we tried to achieve the same

    r ~' Hon. Paul M~lltjn {Minister of Nanonal results when the bill was in the House of
    eC!:1ih and Welfare} moved the second read.. Commons.
    ::~, of Bill No, 475. to repeal the National I ,,{ould refer first to the change with
    ,hysical Fitness Act. respect ,to applications for writs of habeas
    :. Motion agreed to, bill read the: second corpus. As the Minister of Justice is aware,
    ~.~~J considered in committee and reported. this is a matter that was discussed at
    considerable length in our own committee
    ~~!-Ir. SpeaIter' When shall the bill be read on which the hon. member for Vancouver-
    ~tbird time?
    Kingsway (Mr, MacInnis) and the hon.
    ~ -~c:ane hon. Members: Now. member for Y~rk South (Mr. Noseworthy)
    5974 HOUSE OF COMMONS
    CrImina! Code
    were our representatives a year ago. It was There is another w,ord I wish to say, Mr.
    their contention, as it was the contention of Speaker. It ~s this: I am sorry that Their
    members from other parties on the committee, HonoUrs did not pay the same attention to
    that the rule respecting habeas corpus should the amendment we moved to third reading
    remain the way it was. The minister suc~ ,in. t.his house as they appear to have paid
    ceeded in persuading the majority togo alori:g" .fa' the subamendment that 'was moved at
    with the change he proposed, and that change that time. As I indicated a moment ago, there
    was included in Bill'No. 7-when it went from was- a subamendment 'asking for reconsidera· I
    this house .to.the other place .. tion. of the clauses having to do with habeas!
    'By virtue . of 'tlie 'ninth of the propose9 corpus, Thetr Honours have paid attention:
    ,amendments J').ow before us, the Senat? has to that request. But ther~ was also our I
    'now put the law respecting habeas corpus amendment-In "this house asking that recon- I
    back in the position in which it was prior sideration be given -to clauses 365 and 372,
    to the introduction of this bill. We think having to do with criminal breach of con-
    that is a good idea, and we are glad the tract and with mischief. I regret that Their
    Senate has made that change. ,I might also Honours did not see '-ftt, as a result of their
    say that the proposal that the question of consideration, to r-ec'omm~nd changes in tho~e
    habeas corpus be reconsidered was the sub~ two clauses along the lines that we advocated
    ject of a subamendment moved by the hon. when the bill was in the house, in order
    member for Kamloops (Mr. Fulton) when we that the rights of labour might be fully
    reached third reading of the bill in this house. protected.
    Therefore I am sure he 'as well as others I recognize, Mr. Speaker, and I am
    will likewise be pleased th~t this change has reminded of it by the look in your eye, that
    bef,:!n made. wOe camicit at' this stage discuss matters
    Another change included in these amend- beyond the. scope of tn.e am,endments pro~
    ments has to do with the reading of the riot posed by Their Honours,' and the look in your
    act. The third of the ten amendments pro- eye is getting to' the point where I realize
    posed by the Senate calls for the insertion of I must not transgress any further. I merely
    certain words after line 42 on page 24 of express my regret that the.se sections have
    Bill No.7. The proposal is that the words not been altered as we suggested, but we are
    "if he is satisfied that a ·riot is in pro~ pleased to welcome such improvements as
    gress" shall be inserted in clause 68. The Their Honours have mad~ in this bill.
    effect of that change would make clause 68
    Hon. George A. Drew (Leader of the
    re.ad as follows: Opposition): Mr. Speaker, I wish to refer to
    A justice., mayor or sheriff or the lawful deputy the one amendments or the one changes that
    of' a mayor or sherifi' who receives notice that, at
    any place within his jurisdiction; twelve or more has been'made in the contempt of court pro~ ,
    persons are unlawfully and riotously assembled eeedings. I do so because there is still an I

    together. shall go to th~t place and. after approach- opportunity for the Minister of Justice
    ing as near as safely he may do, If he is satisfied (Mr. Garson) to. deal in committee with a
    that a riot is' in progress, shan command slIenee
    and thereupon make Or cause to be made in a loud problem that 'is not solved merely by pro 4

    voice a proclamation in the following words or to viding the right of appeal. This subject has
    the like effect; been discussed earlier. The right of a:9pe.~1
    Then follows the formula that has to be in itself provides some measure of protectioh
    read out on such an occasion. As I say, we in a field where protection did not exist
    are glad that that addition Is being made, in the earlier provisions of the code; but I
    namely, the inserting of the words "if he submit that there is stlll reason to give
    is satisfied that'a riot is in ·progress". consideration to the introduction of some 4

    As we indicated when we were in com- thing that would offer a guide to the courts
    in determining what shall be contempt in
    mittee on the bill-I recall particularly the
    remarks made by the hon. member for .Cape the face of the court or from outside the I
    court, and also some gauge as to what the
    Breton South (Mr. Gillisl-we are still not
    satisfied with the law respecting the riot penalty should be.
    act in all of its details. We are concerned Perhaps it is only when we come ,to dis~
    in particular as to the various persons down cuss a subject of this kind that we find to ;
    the line wh9 can read the riot act; but at our surprise that there are still mediaeval:
    any rate this is a slight improvement, and survivals of law that we have inherited. The'
    we welcome it as such. British system of law that was adopted in
    Most of the other changes proposed by the this country from the. long-established prac~
    Senate amendments are technical in charac- tice, and incorporated in the Criminal Code
    ters and we see no objection to any of them. for the whole of Canada, has carried forward
    Indeed, -there are several others that we not only the provisions of the code Itself, but
    welcome. certain other long.. established practices. It
    [Mr. Knowles.]
    JUNE 15, 1954 5975
    Crimina! Code
    ,- :necessary to go back a very long way to and punished there must be some provision
    ~.d :-the root of this extremely important which defines the offence and measures the
    "- uestion of contempt of court. One might say punishment that should be ,meted out in
    ~bat before 1066 it was the law of the the event that the person is found guilty.
    j 'ndle -in many respects. After that date, \Ve still will have no such definition of
    , -~n:gS began to appoint lawyers to represent the law. 'We still will have no such measure
    ~d ·to 'adjudicate the issues arising between of the penalty. What happens in the case
    flldividuals among the people and also be- of an appeal is simply that we multiply the
    tween the crown and the people. Later it was number of judges whose discretion will be
    found that grievances against the crown 1t-
    ·;-·eif.needed to be dealt with. This led to the exercised in determining what the law is
    '~pPointment of a lawyer to consi~er these and what the penalty should be.
    g-rlei,~ances, an~ .that was the genesIS. of the In saying this I am not, nor is any other
    ~-ch~mcellery dIvIsion. of the ,court In the member of this house l in any way reflecting
    - United Kingdom WhICh has gIven so much upon the judgment exercised by the judges
    : to'\'our law. However, those judges in the of this countrYI nor is any hon. member of
    ea~ly' days, answerable only to the king and this house questioning the necessity for some
    fu,,'no _sense to parliament, were of ?eces- procedure by which respect for the authority
    sHy" compelled to protect the authority of of our courts can be maintained.
    ,\tlie courts. Since they acted in large measure It is obvious that when criminal proceed-
    fiiriiply upon their appointment by ~he C!OW? ings a're taking place there should be some
    -~ncl not under laws passed by parliamentl It procedure by which the judge responsible for
    ';-Wa-s natural that they themselves should be the fair trial of the individual or individuals
    ";~ven' _authority to enforce respect for the
    being tried for any offence shall be able to
    -courts over which. they presided. assure the fair, impartial l and unprejudiced
    ~:;"-'l.n.th-ose days it became necessary to devise trial of the individual or individuals affected .
    .yery stern measures against th,ose who in I am sure there is not a single hon. member
    '. any way indicated a lack of respect for the of this house who would not feel it is essential
    _avt,1:lOrity of the courts. We -have iI].herited that some such authority exist.
    th;at common law practice. Bit by bit some
    ~tlempt has been made to define different Having said that, can we be satisfied in
    ~pes of contempt of court. As was pointed the face of the evidence before us that we
    'out on earlier occasions l there have been are observing the fundamental principles of
    · .amendments to the Criminal Code dealing the rule of law when we still leave undefined
    . 'with' specific forms o~ contempt. There is, what contempt of court may be in the case
    · . however, that broad question of contempt either of the 'press or of individuals in com·
    _,.of _court by -the press, by writers, either in menting upon some case before the court?
    , the _court or outside .the courtl which is yet May I emphasizel Mr. Speakerl that it is
    'undefined by statute and in respect of which n-ot only the press, but it may be an individual
    ~ we,--are still carrying on with the inherited as well, whose comments might be chal·
    :'~Ql1lIIlon law practices which were adopted lenged. I spoke of the press particularly
    .in. this country and which leave to the judge when this subject was before us on an
    ~he responsibility for deciding what the law earlier occasion because there have been a
    is..! .the responsibility for dectding what the number of -casesl where contempt of court by
    '-llenalty will b.~, as well as deciding whether the press has been a subject of widespread
    · :l~e. 'person charged is guilty of the offence and discussion throughout the country; and par-
    .~ubject to punishment for thf:l,t offence. The
    ticularly, having regard to the fact that the
    ., ,:H~ht of appeal from such a decision, which offence is undefined, we are called upon to
    ,wlli now be accorded if the proposed amend- discuss this subject from a new point of
    ~~nt is a"dopted in regard to appeal 'from
    view because of a warning issued by the
    punishment for contempt of courtl will un- chief justice of Newfoundland to the effect
    doubtedly be a substantial improvement. It that there should be no discussion and no
    wUl undoubtedly offer some opportunity for publication of the pleadings in civil pro-
    a''-second consideration of the circumstances ceedings.
    ,--under which the statements were made, and I pointed out on that occasion that this is
    . lhe . appropriate penalty which should be a new concept of contempt of court in this
    p;nf1ose~~ - country, Ordinarily it is in fact part of
    ,- Nevertheless, I would point out that this the assurance of justice itself that civil pro-
    i~ .still riot consistent with our fundamental ceedings may be published and that the dis-
    principles inherent in the rule of law that cussion of the civil trial and of everything
    :.~yery person shall Imp-w what the law is, related to that trial may be carried in the
    and that before they can be haled into court press. This has been regarded as part of
    83276-378
    5976 HOUSE OF COMMONS
    Crimina! Code
    the open, public, and free trial" which assures may be proposed to parliament itself, which
    Canadians that kind of open~handed justice is the final authority in this case. It is the
    of which we have been so proud. parliament of Canada which must decide,
    In the case of the press, which serves to . and I am still earnestly suggesting that a~
    protect the freedom of the individual by this time ,the Minister of Justice consider the
    reporting trials of this kind, there is a very advisability of defining in some way what
    · .real necessity for some understanding as to contempt of court will be, and place some
    what will or will not constitute contempt of guide before the judges as to the nature of
    · court. ,j:+ '.~.' the penalty that may be imposed.
    May I say most emphatically that I am not I repeat that in providing an appeal we
    questioning for one moment that in the case shall have provided the opportunity for a
    . of some of those statements published in second consideration. The appellate court in
    i recent years, which have led to contempt of
    each province wl11 be able to decide whether,
    court proceedings, which were widely dis~ in the collective judgment of the judges of
    cussed throughout Canada, there was some that court, the penalty which was declared
    need for restraint on discussions such as and the penalty imposed were fair and just
    under the circumstances. But now that this
    then took place. subject is before us, in these days when the
    However, the recent warning issued by the difference between the rule of law and the
    chief justice of Newfoundland-with par~ rule of complete state authority is perhaps
    ticular reference to one of the newspapers the thing that defines two systems of life as
    there and in fact, I believe, to both news~ much as anything else, I believe that we
    papers in the city of St. John's-leaves the shoulq take this occasion to establish the
    newspapers as well as individuals uncertain rule of law not only for the advantage of
    as to what mayor may not be discussed ,in individuals in this country but for the
    [regard to civil proceedings, as well as advantage of the judges themselves who are
    criminal proceedings, which are now before called· upon to maintain the dignity and
    · the courts in that province at this time. I responsibility of the courts.
    am in no way referring to the merits of the Mr. E. D. Fulton (Kamloops): Mr. Speaker,
    issues before the courts. I am referring only I would have thought that before we were
    - to 'the effect of such a general warning in asked to adopt these amendments we might
    regard to what should be regarded as the perhaps have from the Minister of Justice
    law relating to contempt of court. a word as to whether the government itself
    If in anyone province, under our criminal concurs in every amendment proposed by
    law and under our inherited law, it ,is pas· the Senate to this bill.
    sible to prevent discussion of civil proceed·
    ings, then that might very well be followed Mr. Garson: In view of the point which
    my han. friend has raised, Mr. Speaker, I
    in other provinces, and the long established may say that ,the government concurs in
    practice of fail' comment about trials in our every amendment proposed by the Senate.
    courts might be limited to an extent where
    the securitY of the individual might 'conceiv~ Mr. Fulton: I thank the minister for that
    ably be substantially lessened through the information. Of course we are in a position
    blanket of silence that could now be thrown where it is desirable to bring this matter to
    around trials that have taken place in the some final conclusion. The bill has now been.
    past so openly in this country'. in the process of consideration for going on,
    We do not want to have the right of any I suppose, six years altogether. We are now, '
    individual before the courts impaired in any one would hope, getting towards the end of
    this session and it would seem perhaps
    way. We do not want the trial of any rather pointless to get into a contlict with
    individual prejudiced. Most certainly in the the Senate over the details of amendments
    ~a!3e of a person charged with some serious which, as has been suggested, are not in
    criminal offence it is of the most vital irnpor~ themselves extensive. To make any amend-
    tance that nothing shall be said by the press ments to these proposed amendments would,
    or by anyone else that could conceivably of course, involve the possibility of long
    prejudice the jury or lessen -the possibilities confere~ces and might just delay the passage
    of a completely fair trial. of the bill at this session. I do not think that
    would be a desirable result. It is therefore
    Having said' that, it is equally part of our not OUr intention to move any amendments
    long~established judicial proceedings in this at this stage, although I must say that I
    country that there shall be an open trial would otherwise have been somewhat
    which s4all be known to the public so that tempted to do so. '
    if in any individual case injustice may be The amendments that, in my opinion, the
    done in the opinion of the public, then reform Senate should be asked to reconsider are
    [Mr. Drew.]
    JUNE 15, 1954 5971
    Crimina! Code
    their first and secOl;d proposed amendments. read to the committee the wording of their
    -s 'tthat is something that can be don~ at proposed subsection 4 which is as follows:
    . ~ t'er date in another year, by a posItive A peace officer who is proceeding lawfully to
    ~otion to a'mend the Criminal Co4e. Su.ch arrest, with or without warrant, any person for an
    motion would .not create the difficultles offence for which that person may be arrested
    without warrant, and everyone lawfully assisting
    ~ hleh otherwise might be created if oue were
    tt~erefore
    move these amendments now. I wBl
    just indicate the thoughts we have
    the peace officer, is justified, if the person to be
    arrested takes flight to avoid arrest, in using as
    much force as is necessary to prevent the escape
    'on the matter so !hat t?ey may perhaps be by flight, unless the escape can be prevented by
    reasonable means in a less violent manner.
    -taken under consIderation by the govern~
    ment. I would ask anyone who is interested in
    ·.I~ dealing with the first amendment which the matter what this means. I would be
    ~overs the subject of contempt of court so glad of any assistance in establishing just
    ~dm)rably summarized ,by the Leader of the what is meant by those last three lines:
    'Opposition (Mr. Drew) a moment ago, may •.. is justified •.. in using as much force as is
    , -I -say that I realize that the Senate has to necessary to prevent the escape by flight, unless the
    escape can be prevented by reasonable means in
    ",some extent gone furth~r than th~s hou~e a less violent manner.
    : :went when it adopted BIll No.7. Smce thIS
    :problem of contempt of court is bec:oming That provision seems to me to be a con-
    a -rather vexed one, and since some Judges, tradiction. In the first place you state he is
    j

    justified in using as much force as is neces-


    I 'think it is fair to say, have of late shown
    8." high degree of sensitivity as to what con- sary to prevent the flight. Therefore he is
    ~iitutes a contempt of court, I would think only justified in using force if it is ·necessary.
    that we should, provide an appeal not only Mr. Garson: I wonder whether my han .
    .: ~'galnst the punishment but against the con- friend would permit me to interject some·
    Viction, even in the case of a conviction for thing very briefly?
    contempt in the face of the court. The
    Senate has made this change. As Bill No. 7 Mr. Fulton: Yes.
    went to them, it was necessary to obtain the Mr. Garson: May I say that this clause
    -1eave of a judge of the court of appeal to which he is criticizing has been part of the
    appeal in any event. They have removed Canadian criminal law for a great many
    :' that necessity. As. we _had left it, if that years; I believe it has been so ever since
    . leave to appeal were granted, the convicted 1892. It is the section which is provided in
    <person could appeal either the conviction or the existing code, namely section 41, for
    -Q1e -sentence, even in the case of contempt the protection of peace officers and persons
    _ III the face of the court. I think it would be assisting peace officers in preventing escape.
    desirable-and I think consideration should The reason this section was, as a -Senate
    be given to it for another year-to provide amendment, introduced in the Senate is tha~
    the royal commission, the Department of
    an -appeal from the conviction even for con- Justice, the Senate and the House of Com ..
    tempt in the face of the court. I am pre- mons all had previously overlooked it. There
    ,pared to admit that there would not be is not any question at all as to the need for
    lllany cases where such an appeal would be it. I am rather surprised that my hon. friend
    taken or where it would succeed. I suppose, is criticizing it in any respect.
    generally speaking, we all know what con-
    Mr. Fulton: The minister may be surprised
    stitutes a contempt in the face of the court.
    but that does not lessen the validity of the
    But in view of what I have called, and after
    criticism. Section 25 is a consolidation of
    s,orne reflection consider to 'be, a tendency
    sections 23 to 27, 29, 30 to 37} 39 and 41 to 45.
    towards undue sensitivity on the part of
    some judges with respect to what is actually Mr. Garson: This provision was left out
    contempt of_ court and what is not, I make by an oversight.
    that observation or suggestion. Mr. Fulton: An attempt to consolidate that
    Then with· respect to the' second amend-:- many sections must obviously involve change
    ment made by Their Honours as found at in the wording.
    j

    page 733 of our Votes and Proceedings lor


    June 10, I must say-and I say this with due Mr. Garson: No; there is not any change in
    ·respect, and particularly with respect for this wording. If my h9n. friend will examine
    the highly qualified lawyers who sat on this the existing code, I think he will see that this
    matter over there-that their proposed sub- amendment is a verbatim copy of present
    section 4 of clause 25 strikes me as being Criminal Code section 41.
    unnecessary and redundant. I am going to Mr. Speak~r: Order.
    83276-378,
    5918 HOUSE OF COMMONS
    Crimina! Code
    'Mr. Fulton: You cannot consolidate about the propos~d subsection 4 added by the
    18 sections into one section without changing Senate, particularly when there seems to be
    the wording. . a contradiction contained in the last three
    Mr. Garson: If my hon. friend will look lines where it says in effect that he is justi.
    at this section he is criticizing and compare fied in using as much force as is necessary-
    it carefully with section 41 of the existing again that limitation-unless the escape can
    code, he will see that the sections are be prevented by reasonable means in a less
    identically the same. violent manner.
    If he does not have to use force to prevent
    Mr. Fulton: That may be so. This proposed the escape then he is not justified in using
    subclause may be identical with the wording force at all, and that would be the situation
    of one of the former clauses of the Criminal
    without the addition of the last words there,
    Code. However, the point is that in the . ((unless the escape can be prevented by rea ..
    consolidation produced and presented to us
    sonable means in a less violent manner". In
    in section 25, the matter of using force and
    of the force that may be necessary to effect view of the consolidation represented by the
    arrest has been fairly carefully worked out first three subsectionss I think. there is an
    and worded. The three subsections of clause unnecessary and confusing addition involved
    25 as passed by the house seem to me to in this subsection 4. If it is felt necessary to
    cover pretty adequately the circumstances add anything at all, I think it would be more
    under which the use of force may be neces- consistent with the wording of the first three
    sary. The fact is that we have in clause 25 subsections ·U the words used were some..
    now an outline of the amount of force that thing to this effect: "1s justified only in using
    may be used in the concluding words of sub- as much force as is necessary to prevent
    section 1 which reads as follows: . the escape by fiigl1.t" or His justified in using
    • . . is, 1£ he acts on reasonable and probable only so much force as may be necessary to
    grounds, justified in doing what he is required or prevent the escape by flight".
    authorized to do and in using as much force as is Thats it seems to me, would reflect the
    necessary for that purpose.
    meaning more clearly than what is set out
    Then, we have in addi~ion the safeguard here because, as I say, it seems to me that
    of subsection 3 which makes it clear that a there is a contradiction. First you say that he.
    person is not justified "in using force that is is justifieq. in using force if necessary. Then
    intended or is likely to cause death or griev- you s;ly he is not justified in using force if it
    ous bodily harm unless he believes on rea- is not necessary. It does not seem to rp.e to
    sonable and probable grounds that it is be necessary to add the second qualification.
    necessary for the purpose of preserving him- Therefore I think it is not the best draftsc
    self or anyone under his protection from manship which could have been devised for
    death or grievous bodily harm". Therefore the purpose of this consolidation.
    it would appear that the amount of force These are the only two observations I wish
    which may be used is quite adequately set to make with respect to the proposed amend~
    out in the pr~sent three subsections. We now ment. As I say, we would have moved an
    have this one added, and I am not at aU amendment ourselves, particularly with
    dismayed by the fact that it may have respect to the contempt matter) had it not
    existed in exactly the same wording in one of been for the fact that at this stage of the ses- .
    the old sections of the code. sion it might have involved us in a protracted.
    What I am suggesting, in view of the con- discussion with the other place and therefore
    solidation represented by the firsf three sub- delayed the session, and also because we can
    sections of the new section, is that this one give more consideration to the matter and
    is not really necessary and that added as it can bring it forward as a substantive motion
    is now it creates confus~on because it is at another session if it s~ould then still be
    already -set out that a person is justified in considered necessary.
    using force if necessary and therefore if it Mr. Angus MacInnis (Vancouver-Kingsway):
    is not necessary to use force he is not justi- Mr. Speaker, it is not my intention to debate
    fied in using it. Nothing could follow more this matter. I rise to say that I regret that it
    clearly than that from the words of the has been considered necessary to debate it at
    present section 25. After all, the infliction all because nothing seems more futile to me.
    of death or grievous bodily harm is already at this stage than to .debate amendments made
    a crime. Therefore, even under section 25 by the other place if the government, as I
    you would only be justified in doing that understand is the case, is willing to accept
    which inflicted bodily harm if it were neces- them. As the hon. member for Kamloops (Mr.
    sary to do it. I can see no reason for restat- Fulton) said before he sat down, these ques-
    i~g that simple and obvious proposition under tio~s are farwreaching, and if changes are to
    ~Mr. Speaker.]
    JUNE 15, 1954 5979
    CriminaL Code
    be made I think ·of necessity they must be trensfer a charter from one province to
    made at the next or some future session of another and conduct races as the result of
    parliament when we will have plenty of time having done so.
    to debate them. Hon. George A. Drew (Leader of the
    0_: I have been closely associated with the Opposition): Mr. Speaker, I am not going to
    'study of the Crlm~nal Code. Because of that deal with the contents of the bill except to
    i: studied the amendments made by the other point out to the Minister of Justice (Mr.
    place very .carefully and on the whole I think Garson) that the very fact we have this bill
    they have resulted in a slight improvement. before us indicates how easy it would be for
    · I must admit that I could not see the reason him to provide an amendment in a separate
    ~why .some amendments were made 'but then measure defining the subject I have already
    ..i am not learned in the mysteries of the law. discussed.
    · ; However, I felt that they did not take away
    . ',materially from what had been done by the Mr. Speaker; Order .
    · ,-house. There is nothing we can do now Motion agreed to, bill read the second time
    · .. unless we wish to have a conference with the and the house went into -committee thereon,
    · other place, and I do. not think there is anyw Mr. Robinson (Simcoe East) in the chair.
    - ,thing of sufficient importance for that. There-
    - .fore why should we not let this measure go On clause 1-0peration of parimu.tueL
    ::throitgh-? system.
    .,,~.;:_:-Motion agreed to, amendments read the ·Mr. Charlton: I think probably we realize
    >'c':;~econd time and concurred in. -the object-s of this measure, but I think some
    little explanation is needed as to the wording.
    CRIMINAL CODE As the amendment is lWorded here it says:
    ,LIMITATION ON OPERATION OF PARIMUTUEL (2a) Subsection (2) does not apply in respect of
    a race meeting .•.
    BETTING
    And that is to be inserted immediately
    ~::~ ,-Right Hon. J. G. Gardiner <Minister of
    after subsection 2 of section 235 of the
    ":Agriculture} moved the second reading of
    Criminal Code, chapter 36 of the Revised
    'Bill No. 476, to amend the Criminal Code Statutes of 1927. It is true that there is a
    . ,{race meetings).
    section 2 where this amendment CQuld come
    - '-:--'·~r. CharBon: Is the minister going to in, -but later in this amendment there is a
    :;~x~lain the bill? reference to subparagraph (i) of paragraph
    ,;:' Mr. Gardiner: Mr. Speaker, the amend- (c). Well, there is no subparagraph CD of
    .-ments made -by the Senate to the Criminal paragraph (c) in chapter 36 of the Revised
    - Code which we have just discussed contain Statutes of 1927, so I should like the minister
    " 'a -reference to this particular matter. How- to explain that. .
    eyer, 'the Criminal Code does not -come into Mr. Gardiner: It is paragraph 1.
    effect until January and it is thought to be
    ~'advisable that in the interval between now Mr. Charlton: But it has a dot over the "fl';
    "J:ind that time the same provisions of the subparagraph (i) is under paragraph (d) in
    'Criminal Code should apply. This bill has the first subsection of section 235. There -is
    been considered in the Senate and comes here a slip-up some pla-ce.
    'JIow, and its purpose is to make that possible. Mr. Gardiner: Paragraph (c) relates to bets
    The purpose of the amendment is to ensure made 01' records of bets made through the
    '·that a racing association that has -been incor- agency of the parimutuel system only as
    porated in one _province shall not -be entitled hereinafter provided upon the race course of
    to 'conduct race meetings with ,parimutuel any association. Then, there ,is subparagraph
    )~etting on racetracks that it acquires in one, which is an "i" with a dot over it, and
    'another province. It simply prevents a rac~ if you are continuing the same kind of num-
    ing association which has a charter in the bering you put two Hi's" with a dot over
    ,'province of .Manitoba, let us say, from trans· them. These are just different ways of mark-
    ing the subsections of an act. Then, .in this
    ferring that charter to the province of Ontario case they continue I\vith sections A, B, and
    "-9r Quebec or some other province and con- then there is subsection two, which has two
    -;.ducting races with parimutuel betting with f'i's" and then -it goes on with subsection
    'inspection by our department. The natural three and four which is in Roman numerals
    ·way for them to get a charter-:-to conduct IV. It is the Roman numeral method of
    :racing in the other province is to go to the markIng the section.
    --province itself and obtain the right to COll- ·Then, at the end of the whole numbering
    -duct racing there rather than to simply -you will notice ·it is not Roman numerals that
    Canada

    1JBtbatt~ of tUt ~tnatt


    OFFICIAL REPORT

    THE HONOURABLE WISHART McLEA ROBERTSON, P.C.,


    SPEAKER

    1963·64
    FIRST SESSION, TWENTY-SECOND PARLIAMENT
    2-3 ELIZABETH II

    The Session was opened on November 12, 1953,


    and was prorogued on June 26, 1954.

    EDMOND CLOUTIER, C.M.G .• O.A .. D.S.P.


    QUEEN'S PRINTER AND CONTROLLER OF STATIONERY
    OTTAWA,1954.
    MAY 4. 1954 437
    CRIMINAL CODE BILL would hope, therefore, that the appropriate
    FmST READING
    committee of the Senate would apply itself
    to consideration of the bill that now comes
    A message was received from the House of before us and report to this house just as
    Commons with Bill 7, an Act respecting the soon as possible. I am not trying to ten
    Criminal Law. the committee what it should do, but I do
    feel that the bill should not fail to pass at
    The bill was read the first time. this session.
    The Hon. the Speaker: Honourable sena- Some Hon. Senators: Hear, hear.
    tors, when shall this bill be rea9, the second
    time? Hon. Mr. Haig; I think it should come back
    from committee as early as possible, so that
    Hon. Mr. Macdonald: Honourable senators, we may consider any amendments and pass
    when we last met I suggested that we proceed the bill before prorogation. Delay is upsetting
    with the second reading of this bill at the to the practice of criminal law, to some extent,
    present sitting. I had hoped that the bill and I believe it would be in the interest of
    would be distributed to honourable senators the administration of justice to. have the
    during the Easter week, so that they might revised code 'enacted very shortly. I would
    have an opportunity to peruse it before we urge my fellow senators to spend as little
    reassembled. However, the bill had to be time as possible in debate on the second read-
    reprinted and it was not distributed until late ing stage, with a view to expediting reference
    this morning. It is a very important measure, of the bill to committee. After it is reported
    and in the circumstances I will not move back from committee it can be discussed on
    second reading tonight. third reading just as well as on second read-
    ing-a procedure that is perfectly proper
    I have been in communication with the
    under our rules. I make that suggestion
    honourable senator from Toronto {Hon. Mr.
    with all due respect.
    Hayden) and the honourable senator from
    Toronto~Trinity CHon. Mr. Roebuck), who The motion was agreed to, and the bill was
    advised me that they will be prepared to ordered to be placed on the Order Paper for
    proceed tomorrow. Therefore, I would move second reading tomorrow.
    that leave be given to proceed with the
    motion for second reading of this bill INTERNATIONAL RAPIDS POWER
    tomorrow. DEVELOPMENT BILL
    Hon. Mr. Haig: Honourable senators, may FIRST READING
    I be permitted to say a word? I was hoping
    that when the bill reached this house there Hon. Mr. Macdonald presented Bill B~15,
    would not be a long discussion on second an Act to amend the International Rapids
    reading, but that at an early date it would Power Development Act.
    go to committee, where we could avail our- The bill was read the first time.
    selves of the very fine report on the whole
    bill that our Parliamentary Counsel has The Hon. the Speaker: Honourable sena-
    made. tors, when shall the biU be read the second
    time?
    Some Hon. Senators': Hear, hear.
    Hon. Mr. Macdonald: Honourable senators,
    Hon. Mr. Haig: When the Criminal Code I would ask that this bill be placed on the
    Bill was last before this house a subcom- Order Paper for second reading at the next
    mittee consisting of the honourable senators sitting of the house. However, I may say that
    from Toronto (Hon. Mr. Hayden), Toronto- it is not my intention to proceed with second
    Trinity (Hon. Mr. Roebuck), Grandville (Hon. reading at that time.
    Mr. Bouffard) and Vancouver South (Hon.
    Mr. Farris) made a detailed study of the
    CANADIAN CITIZENSHIP BILL
    bi~1. Their amendments, I thought, greatly
    improved the proposed legislation, and I FIRST READING
    take this opportunity to commend them for the
    Hon. Mr. Macdonald presented Bill C~15, an
    splendid service they rendered. So much was
    Ac~ to amend the Canadian Citizenship Act.
    accomplished at that time that a lengthy
    discussion should not be necessary now. I The bill was read the first time.
    MAY 5. 1954 439

    THE SENATE a number of changes have to do with sec-


    tions which in my view are controversial,
    some of which" sections the Senate took a
    very decided stand on when the bill was
    Wednesday. May 5. 1954 before "it, and I want to comment particularly
    on the treatment those sections received in
    The Senate met at 3 p.m., the Speaker in the Commons. I do not propose to deal with
    the Chair. all the seventy-one changes. If the patience
    Prayers. of honourable senators does not run out I
    Routine proceedings. may deal with a number of them, but cer-
    tainly with not more than 5{) per cent. With
    some of them I may deal fully; with others,
    REPRESENTATION BILL very casually.
    THIRD READING
    The first section I wish to refer to in Bill 7
    Hon. :Mr. Macdonald moved the third read- is section 9, which was section 8(2) in the
    ing of Bill 420, an Act to amend the Repre- bill we sent to the Commons. The subject-
    sentation Act. matter of that section is contempt of court.
    The motion was agreed to, and the bill was EVen at the present time there is no appeal
    read the third timel and passed. provided from" a conviction for contempt "of
    court. When the matter was originally
    CRIMINAL CODE BILL before the Senate" committee . . ./e felt it was
    a very drastic, very arbitrary power which
    MOTION FOR SECOND READING- could be exercised by a judge or magistrate.
    DEBATE ADJOURNE~ The circumstances in which he would be
    Hon. Saltax A. Hayden moved the second called upon or permitted "to exercise that
    reading of Bill 7) an Act respecting the power would be peculiar. Usually the con-
    criminal law. . tempt, if it" took place other than in the face
    He said: Honourable .senators, this bill in of the court, would be brought to his atten-
    one form or another has been before us on "tion, he would order the offender to be
    several occasions, it having been first intro- -called before him, he would read the article
    duced in the Senate about- two years ago in or statement complained of and if he decided
    the form in which it had been drafted as there was contempt of court he would impose
    a result of the work of the Criminal Code the penalty; and there was no appeal from
    the conviction or sentence. Likewise, "there
    Revision Commission which studied the sub-
    j~t-matter for a number of years. At the was no appeal from the conviction or sen-
    1952 session our Banking and Commerce tence of a person for contempt committed in
    Committee made some sixty-three amend- the face of the court-that is, before the
    ments to that bill. At the following session judge or magi~trate who finds the person
    a redrafted bill, incorporating in the main guilty and imposes the, sentence.
    the amendments which had been proposed by We felt that that was basically wrong and
    the Senate, was int"roduced in this chamber; provided for an appeal in this fashion: we
    and after the bill had been studied by the said that where a person was convicted of
    same committee and a Bubcommittee, contempt in the face of the court-where a
    approximately 116 changes were made, "some person "during proceedings in court waS
    sUbstantial and some more or less "minor. guilty of conduct or of making remarks which
    The bill" with those amendments was then -could be construed as holding the court or
    sent to the House of Commons, and it was judge up to ridicule or contempt, and where
    considered in a committee of that house that in the interest of maintaining the decorum
    session. At the present session the bill was and dignity of the court the judge· should be
    introduced in the House of Commons, as
    given strong powers-such a person should
    -Bill No.7, incorporating some of the changes
    proposed" by the committee last session. be allowed a right of appeal from the sen-
    tence only. It might very well happen that
    The" bill as it now comes before us, after the judge, under pressure of the c;ircum~
    further study by the House of Commons and stances-for "judges are human-would im-
    one of its committees this session, contains pose "a penalty which upon reflection he
    some seventy-one changes from the bill would regarp. as being a bit too severe.
    whiCh we p"assed and "sent to that house.
    Some of the changes amount simply to a On the other hand, we provided a" right
    l'ephrasmg of certain" sections without, in my of appeal both as to conviction and sentence
    view," "effecting" "any cliange in the substance for contempt not -committed in "the face of
    'Of those sections." Other changes involve "the court. "
    "changes" in penalty, \vhich in most instances The House of Co~~onsi in its considera~
    wouid represent ail increase in penalty. But tion" of "the" measure, changed" the section to
    440 SENATE

    provide a right of appeal against conviction chose to restrict that protection of ·officers to
    for contempt in any event whether it took proceedings brought in respect of any death
    place in the face of the court or otherwise. or injury that is caused ('by reason of resist_
    However, the proposed right of appeal is not ance" to the performance of duty by peace
    an absolute right, but is subject to leave officers and those assisting them. Possibly
    being- given by the court of appeal or a that is a reasonable restriction. I have no
    judge of that court. strong views on it one way or the other, and
    Honourable senators may feel, as I do, I simply pass it on without comment. .
    that the right of appeal should be an abso~ We next come to a section which provoked
    lute right, and not subject to leave being considerable discussion in the other place.
    given. The value of the right of appeal, in That is section 46, dealing with treason.
    my thinking, lies in the absolute nature of Section 46 of the bill as it originally came
    that right. In these circumstances, our com- before us, as drafted by the Revision Com-
    mittee might very well give further con- mission, provided in section 46(1):
    sideration to this question of contempt of Everyone co;mmits treason who. in Canada,
    court, and decide whether perhaps our earlier (e) conspires with an agent of a state other than
    Canada to communicate infonnation or to do an act
    thinking on the subject was correct, or that is likely to be prejudicial to the safety or
    whether we should accept· the change made interests, of Canada.
    by the House of Commons. Now, as the result of our deliberations on
    Perhaps I should add that the subject of that section we concluded that this was a
    contempt of court has been given particular departure from the well-known concept of
    prominence lately. I am not attempting to what constituted treason, and while we were
    express any opinion on -convictions under perfectly prepared to provide a penalty for
    that charge, because without a full state- an offence of the character described by the
    men t of the facts it would be very. dangerous words I have read we felt that We should not
    to do' so. But one recent case which struck confuse the concept of treason by calling such
    me rather forcibly was that of a news dealer an offence treason; so we took that paragraph
    who was sent to jail because some offending (e) out of section 46 and put it into section
    magazines were found on his counter. His 50, under which the act described in the
    explanation apparently was that under his paragraph became an offence, and we pro-
    contract he could only get a supply of certain vided for a penalty of fourteen years. We
    publications if he accepted certain other also made one change in the phrase "prejudi-
    publications which were sent to him and cial to the safety or interests of Canada", by
    over which he had no right of selection. I striking out the words "or interests". Well,
    may say that New York state has recently the Commons restored paragraph (e) to sec-
    realized the danger of such a contract, and tion 46, with some change in the language, and
    has introduced a law making it illegal. made the act treason. So the proposed section
    Nevertheless, this charge to which I refer 46(1) now reads:
    certainly placed the news vendor in a most Everyone commits treason who. in Canada,
    (e) without lawful authority, communicates or
    difficult situation. He was charged with con- makes available to an agent of a state other than
    tempt and he defended himself in the only Canada, military or scientific information or any
    way he could. There seemed to be some merit sketch, plan, model, article, note or document of a
    to his defence; nevertheless he werit to jail. mfIitary or scientific character that he knows or
    ought to know may be used by that state for a
    I am not suggesting that the judge was arbi- purpose prejudicial to the safety or defence of
    trary, but it was an arbitrary exercise of an Canada.
    absolute power; and in the interests of justice It will be noted that that language is more
    and democracy there should be a means by particular, and the elimination of the words
    which the correctness of such a charge and "or interests" by the Senate' has been con-
    conviction could be tested as of right by an firmed in the amendment. Also, the unlawful
    appeal. communication is not of information in the
    I wish to refer briefly to section 33 of the broad term as used originally, but it is now
    bill, which s~ction, by the way, bore the information of a military or scientific charac-
    same number in the bill that we sent to ter, and the paragraph goes on to elaborate
    the House of Commons. That section has on that.
    to' do with the duties of officers at the time Having regard to the way in which inter,
    the riot act is read. As the bill went to national affairs are now carri-ed on and have
    the, Commons it contained a provision that been carried on for some time, the develop-
    if death or injury resulted to persons as- ments in modern methods of warfarel the
    sembled, the pea'Ce officers or any person importance of scientific information in rela-
    drafted to aid them could not be charged in tion thereto,· and the know-how in conn~ction
    any civil or criminal proceedings in respect with these processes, it may now be more
    o~ ~ny such death or injury. The Commons important than ever that a country should be
    MAY 5. 1954 441

    able, by the most drastic penalties possible, (c) of section 50, relating rto the conveying
    to safeguard that information and to provide of information, has been removed from that
    against its possible -communication to other section and returned to secti-on 46. I have
    countries where it could be used against the no comment to make on the addition to
    best interests of Canada. It may be that, as paragraph (a) of the words "wilfully assists".
    schemes of defence against modern develop- I come now to a series of sections which
    iuents in warfare are progressive things, with are, I believe, the kernel of this matter,
    developments occurring from day to day. their and I should like to discuss them together.
    importance to the safety and defence of to.€ I refer -to sections 52, 365 and 372. I should
    country ·is such that we must be prepared to like to take a few moments to tell the house
    treat the communication of information about what these sections embody, what the
    them to the agent of a foreign state as the pra-ctice has been in respect of them, and
    most serious .offence, so far as Canada is con- perhaps express some vi-ews about them.
    cerned, that a person can commit, and term Section 52 is known as the sabotage section,
    it treason-a word which denotes the most section 365 as the -criminal breach of contract
    awful offence of which one can be guilty in section, and section 372 as the mischief
    relation to his own country. In any event, section. .
    the Commons has included this offence under
    the heading of "treason". I think the section Under section 52 the basic element of
    itself is now much better phrased. There are sabotage is. that the prohibited act must be
    still attached the qualifying words that the prejudicial to the safety, security or defence
    purpose for which the information is com- of Canada, or the safety or security of ,-the
    municated must be prejudieial to the safety naval, army or air forces of 'any state other
    or defence of Canada. than Canada that are lawfully present in
    Canada. A "prohibited 'Rct" is then defined
    In this connection I would refer honourable as being an act or omission that impairs the
    senators to section 47, which prescribes the efficiency or impedes the working of any
    penalties, and in which several changes have vessel, vehicle, aircraft, machinery, apparatus
    been made. For treason in its original con- or other thing, or causes property, by whom-
    cept, embodted in p9-ragraphs (a), (b) and (c) soever it may be owned, to be lost, damaged
    of section 46, the penalty of death is retained; or destroyed; That is the essence of
    for the offences indicated in paragraphs (d), sabotage,
    (f) and (g), the penalty may be death or life
    As defined in section 365, criminal breach
    imprisonment, In the case of the particular of contract stems from acts which may result
    subsection to which I have been referring, and in endangering life, causing serious bodily
    which I have read to you, relative to the injury, endangering property, depriving
    communication of military or scientific infor- citizens of certain services or delaying or
    mation, the penalty is to be death or life preventing the running of trains. I w-Quld
    imprisonment, if a state of war then exists point out, however, Jihat an offence of criminal
    between Canada and another country at the breach of contract might not be sabotage, for
    time the information is communicated; but if in the case of sabotage the act must be
    there is not a state of war, the penalty is prejudicial to the safety, security or defence
    fourteen years. of Canada. An act of mischief is also some-
    it may be that, as a result of all the dis- thing that falls' below the_ charaCter of being
    cussion whleh has gone on, with the weighing prejudicial to the state.
    of all points of view, the method of treat- Having made these general ·observations
    ment which is here set before us is by and I shall proceed ,to state what was done by
    large a -satisfactory way of dealing with the the Senate. The bill which originally came
    matter, and that we should not feel that, before us restated more or less the existing
    because heretofore treason bas been identified law in those three sections, which· we passed
    only with offences of a certain character, without any amendment .providing for a
    there are not circumstances under which the saving claus,e exempting any group or groups
    concept should be enlarged. My own view is of people from .<the application of those pro-
    that if the application' of the term "treason" visions. Thus the sections, as passed by the
    to the communication of information under Senate, simply restated the present law. I
    these circumstances is more likely to strike would point out that section 372 represented
    terror in the heart of some person or persons an attempt to restate in one section what
    who may be urged to so communicate infor- is contained in perhaps ,as many as twenty
    mation of this kind, one may be perfectly con- sections in the present code. The House of
    tent to have such acts described as treason. Commons add'ed saving clauses, both in the
    Section 50, to which some amendments same language, to sections 52 and 372. The
    have been made, is included in the same saving clause in section 52 provides:
    group of sections as those pertaining to No person does a prohibited act:'within the mean~
    treason. As I have already stated, paragraph ing of this section by reason only that
    442 SENATE
    (a) he stops work as a result of the failure of his as it appears in the bill before us. The sec~
    employer and himself to agree upon any matter tion simply says this: If property damage
    relating to his employment,
    (b) he stops work as a result of the failure of results from a workman walking off the job
    his employer and a bargaining agent acting on his at a time when all steps provided by his con-
    behalf to agree upon any matter relating to his tract and by law with respect to the settle-
    employment, or ment of industrial disputes have been taken,
    (c) he stops work as a result of his taking part
    in a combination of workmen or employees for and there are no other steps to be taken short
    their own reasonable protection as workmen or of legal strike, then the saving clause in the
    employees. section would apply if the act of walking off
    Subsection (4) was also added, as follows: the -job was not a wilful one. The House of
    No person does a prohibited act within the Commons attempted to provide a further pro-
    meaning of this section by reason only that he tection against any multipliCity of prosecu-
    attends at or near or approaches a dwelling house tions by providing that no prosecution can
    or place for the purpose only of obtaining or com- take place under this section without the
    municating In£onnation.
    consent of the Attorney General of tb.e prov-
    That same saving clause was added to ince, Frankly, I can see no objection to the
    section 372 J but the saving clause added to form in which the section now appears. If
    section 365 was different. Reference was a walkout occurred after all negotiation pro-
    made by an honourable senator to the treat- ceedings had been exhausted, and when there
    ment that was given to section 365, his com- was a right to strike, I would think. that even
    ment being based on the saving clause that without the .saving clause there is inherent
    was embodied by the Commons in section in the section the right of a workman to walk
    365, but that clause underwe.nt considerable out as long as he did not wilfully break a
    amendment before appearing in its present contract. If he quit work after his right
    form in Bill 7. It now reads: was exhausted., and damage to property
    (2) No per.o:on wiUully breaks a contract within resulted, and he was charged with criminal
    the meaning of subsection (1) by reason only that breach of contract, I think it would be a good
    (a) being the employee of an employer, he stops defence in law for him to say, "My contract
    work as a result of the fallure of his employer and
    himself to agree upon any matter relating to his is at an end for this purpose". In my view,
    employment . . . therefore, all that the saving clause does
    The next part is the important one: is to make explicit what I regard as already
    implicit in the section, even without the
    (b) being a member of an organization of
    employees formed for the purpose of regulating saving clause. Therefore, I have no criticism
    relations between employers and employees, he to offer.
    stops work as a result of the failure of the I have indicated the view of the labour
    employer and a bargaining agent acting on behalf
    of the organization to agree upon any matter relat- organizations; and I think even management
    ing to the employment of members of the has said, in similar language, that if there
    organization, must be a saving clause the paragraph now
    if, before the stoppage of work occurs, all steps in section 364 is the best that could be done, I
    provided by law wIth respect to the settlement of
    industrial disputes are taken and any provision for and it is satisfactory to them.
    the final settlement of differences, without stoppage I cannot look with equal approval upon
    of work, contained in or by law deemed to be
    contained in a collective agreement is complied section 52, which deals with sabotage, or sec"'
    with and effect given thereto. tion 372, with mischief. The two sections
    are entirely different. Section 372 has to do
    In addition a new clause has been added: with wilful damage to any property, but
    (3) No proceedings shall be instituted under this
    section without the consent of the Attorney
    section 52 goes farther and affects the safety,
    Genera1. security and defence of the state. The saving
    clause has been added in both sections, ·and
    Hen. Mr. Aseltine: Is that the section operates in this way: If a workman engaged
    about which some honourable senators have by an employer, where there is a contract of
    received correspondence? I have received at employment, decides to quit his job to go and
    least half a dozen letters requesting me not join a picket line to help other members of I
    to vote in favour of Bill 7, in order to preserve his union who are on strike at another plant
    the freedom of the people of Canada, and all having no relationship to the plant from
    that sort of thing. which he quit, the saving clause permits him
    Hon. Mr. Hayden: I do not know, of ~ourse, to do so. May I point out that the language
    what is contained in the correspondence you of the section is that he is hot guilty of
    have received. I know that I myself have an offence under that section by reason only
    received letters dealing with these three sec- of doing so. In order to indicate to honour-
    tions. I think that by and large the labour able senators what was intended, I will read
    organizations feel that if section 365 is at all what the Minister of Justice and Mr. Knowles
    necessary it is in its most acceptable form said in the other place. In dealing with these
    MAY 5, 1954 443

    saving clause amendments Mr. Knowles said One is provided here by reason only of the
    as reported in the House of Commons Debate; situation of a man leaving his job ·to join a
    of April 7, 1954, at page 3875: picket line at another plant, and in picketing
    Does it not also have this effect, that with the disregarding his obligations under his own
    words in there, which the amendment now proposes contract with his own employer. That is a
    to take Qut, the saving effect of the clause was saving clause which it is difficult for me to
    limited to the persons who had actually stopped accept. I am not saying that my mind is
    work at the plant in question; whereas now it is
    possible for others than those actually on strike closed to it, but that it is a difficult proposi·
    from a particular plant to be part of the picket tion for me to understand. Perhaps I have
    line? Is not that the' effect? not looked at it long enough, but I have
    And the Minister of Justice replied: looked at it as long as it has been in this
    Yes, of attending for the purpose of obtaining bill and have not ·been able to adapt my
    or .communicating information. thinking to a full acceptance of it. It seems
    to me that by adding this saving clause in
    Now we know the purpose of the saving the language as given we are attempting to
    clause is to permit workmen} in violation of excuse what otherwise might be sabotage in
    a contract so far as the offence of sabotage relation to the safety, security or defence of
    is concerned, to quit work to go and join a Canada, or in relation to the safety and
    picket line or have a meeting with other security of foreign troops that may be law~
    members of the union about any matters fully stationed in Canada. It may be that
    affecting the rights and protection of work- there is some happy hunting ground in l)e-
    men; and in so doing, unless a workman does tween where some language might be
    something more than simply quit work, the evolved that would give comfort to those
    saving c~ause applies. That is one interpreta- who are concerned about the absolute nature
    tion of the section. There is another obvious of rthe section; but the section in its absolute
    interpretation, it seems to me. If a man quits form has been in existence down to this
    work when he is under contract to work time, and all I can say is that if there was
    and there has been no default in the con- ever a time when strong laws in regard to
    tract, and·if he is the operator of a machine the safety, security and defence of Canada
    ?-nd knows that if he walks out the machine
    will be damaged, it might be inferred that are needed, it is at present.
    as part of his employment under the con- An Hon. Senato~: Hear, hear.
    tract it is his duty to protect that machine Hon. Mr. Hayden. To the extent that this
    by turning it off or doing whatever else i~ saving clause may weaken the law, I would
    necessary, Ibefore he walks out and that ,vant to give more serious consideration to
    otherwise in walking out he wouid be guilty whether I should support it or not. All I am
    of a criminal breach of contract and of an seeking to do is to 'bring to the attention
    offence under section 365. But if the offence of honourable senators what the saving
    affected the safety, security or defence of clause does. The decision is for honourable
    Canada it would ·be called sabotage. I do not senators to make when the bill is in com-
    know that it is good business to settle for mittee, and again when it is returned. tq this
    something else, or whether it is proper to house for further consideration.
    take the attitude that a workman ·operating
    under a contract that is in good standing The same kind of saving- clause has been
    may walk off the job in circumstances which put into the mischief section. This section is
    would protect him from prosecution under not as broad as the sabotage section, for of
    section 52, yet render him liable to punish- course sabotage affects the state. In so far
    ment for a criminal breach of contract under as the mischief section goes, it would apply
    section 365. That is a bit puzzling to me. to any property damage. I am thinking of an
    I am not suggesting that any special incident which occurred some years ago at
    burdens should be imposed on workmen. Arvida, Quebec, where the workmen went on
    They have rights to which they are entitled; strike and left pots full of molten metal to
    the law protects them, to some extent, as a cool and freeze, and thus caused very sub-
    matter of con~ract; they have the right to stantial destruction of property.
    strike, and n.o question about the right to Hon. Mr. Howard: A tremendous loss.
    strike is. involved in our consideration of
    Hon. Mr. Hayden: A tremendous loss resul~
    these sectionl>. AIl we have to consider, in ted. That is the sort of thing which) if it
    ~he first instance, is this: Where the safety,
    does not go so far as to be sabotage and pre-
    security or defence of Canada is concerned, judice the defence, security or safety of Can-
    ~ certain relationships, should there be any ada) certainly affects a contract in good
    saving clause, and if ·so how broad should standing. Such an incident might very well
    that saving clause be? The law down to this be the basis of an offence under either section
    date has provided no saving clause at aU. 372 or section 365, depending on .whether
    444 SENATE
    there was a contract, the nature of the con· The opening words of subsection 2 of that
    tract and the circumstances under which the section in Bill 0, as sent on to the House
    men walked out. of Commons, read as follows:
    Honourable senators, I am sorry that I have Everyone commits an offence who, being a party
    taken more time than I intended on those to a contract with the government directly or
    Indirectly subscribes, gives or agrees to subscribe
    sections, but they strike me as being of con· or give, to any person any valuable consideratlon_
    siderable importance; certainly, the House
    of Commons spent some time on them. I may Incidentally, I do not think that valuable
    add that representations were made to the consideration includes the m"aking of speeches;
    Commons which were not made to us with at least, it has not been interpreted as such.
    respect to the saving clauses. I do not say Some discussion took place on this particular
    that I resent that sort of thing, but I do think subject in the Commons; and as a result an
    we should have had the opportunity of con· amendment was adopted which I think hon-
    sidering them, because we had the bill before ourable senatots would appreciate as being
    us for a long time and we gave seriolls con- very satisfactory. Subsection 2, as amended,
    sideration to that subject. However, it is now reads:
    before us now. Everyone commits an offence who, in order to
    obtain or retain a contract with the government,
    I should like now to consider a group of or as a term of any such contract, whether express
    sections, namely 64 to 69, and particularly or implled, directly" or indirectly subscribes, gives
    section 69," which have to do with unlawful or agrees to subscribe or give, to any person any
    assemblies and riots. Bill 0, which we sent valuable consideraUon-
    to the House of Commons, provided that once This clearly expresses the matter, so that he
    the riot act has been read people must who runs may read and understand what
    immediately disperse. The problem has come the true situation is. It may not be said to
    up as to what is meant by "immediately". be in any way inhibitory. Perhaps I should
    Apparently some police officers immediately add that the penalty for an offence under
    went into action upon the riot act having been this section is imprisonment for five years.
    read by the mayor or other official. This gave I turn next to section 116, which deals with
    rise to complaints and disorders. As a result a witness who gives contradictory evidence or
    the House of Commons has -provided an who perjures himself. Of course we all
    amendment to the effect that people must share the feeling that the proper conduct of
    disperse and depart within thirty minutes our courts is a most important thing, and one
    after the reading of the riot act. of the strongest contributing elements is the
    The next section to which I would refer ability to rely on testimony being honestly
    in passing is section 88. By the way, I given. True, it may not always be a faithful
    should say that from section 88 onwards the statement of the facts, but at least we would
    section numbers in the new bill correspond hope that it is honestly given. And to assure
    with those in Bill 0, which we sent to the that it will be honestly given, we provided in
    House of Commons. Bill 0 that a person who has given contradic-
    Honourable members of the other house tory evidence on two different occasions"
    were so disturbed about the threat of what could be charged with an indictable offence,
    are normally called switch-knives or spring- and the onus was on him to defend himself
    knives that they added. to section 88 subsec- by establishing that none of the evidence
    tion 3, which explicitly provides that: was given with the intention to mislead the
    Everyone who without lawful excuse, the proof of court. The House of Commons has adopted
    which lies upon him, has in his possessIon or sells, a little more lenient approach to that ques-
    barters, gives, lends, transfers or delivers a spling~
    knife or switch-knife is guilty of an offence punish~ tion by placing upon the crown the onus
    able on summary conviction. to establish certain things. Part of subsection
    It was hoped that by setting out this specific 1 of section 116 reads as follows: "
    . . . but no person shall be convicted under
    provision in the code, merchants would be section unless the court, judge" or magistrate, as the this
    discouraged from selling this type of knife case may be, is satisfied" beyond a reasonable doubt
    to youngsters who feel it is a smart thing to that the aCCUsed, in giving evidence in either of
    be equipped with a knife on which the press~ the judicial proceedings, intended to mislead".
    ing of a button or lever causes the blade to In other words, it reverses the proof.
    swing into action. There is the further safety clause provided
    Section 102 of the bill is a section which by subsection 3 of section 116 which reads as
    I should think, after having been a member follows:
    of this house for some years, would be of No proceeding shali be instituted under this
    no interest to honourable senators. However, section without the consent of the Attorney
    I might in passing tell you the nature of the General.
    section. It has to do with the matter of sub~ This provision would mean, for instance,
    scribing to what might be°-called party funds. that a private litigant who lost a civil action
    MAY 5. 1954 445

    because a witness changed his story, could if there was a possibility of miSinterpretation
    "nof prosecute without the leave of the I think the change, which removes any rea-
    Attorney General. Although section 116, as son for doubt, is good.
    we submitted it to the House of Commons Section 250 deals with the pUblication of
    in Bill 0, was somewhat stiffer, I have no defamatory libel known to be false, section
    comment to make on the amendment. 251 with the publication of defamatory libel,
    Section 120 deals with the question of and section 252 with extortion by libel. In
    public mischief. In Bill 0 the opening words ,these three sections all that the Commons
    of that section read: has done has been to increase the penalties.
    Everyone who causes a peace officer to enter For instance, in section 250 of the bill as we
    upon an investtga.t!.on wilfully- passed it the penalty provided was imprison-
    The Commons thought there might be some ment for two years or a fine of $5,000 or
    co~fusion in the interpretation of ,those words, both, and· the Commons provided for a
    and amended them to read: straight term of imprisonment of five years
    Everyone who, with intent to mislead, causes a with no provision for a fine. Section 251 as
    peace officer "to enter upon an investigation by- we sent it forward to the Commons provided
    It is a clarification, and I do not think it for a penalty of imprisonment of two years
    seriously changes the scope of the section. or a fine 'of $1,000 or both, and the Commons
    In sectiori 131, which deals with the ques- made the penalty two years. In section 252,
    tion of corroboration in ,certain types of for extortion by libel, we provided for a
    sexual offences, the Commons added section penalty of two years Dr a fine of $l j OOO or
    142 to the group of sections under which a both," and the Commons substituted a term
    material particular of the evidence given of imprisonment for five years without any
    must be corroborated before there can be a provision for a fine.
    conviction. Section 295 deals with possession of house-
    Next I will mention .secti:on 150, on the breaking, vault-breaking and safe-breaking
    question of crime-comics. I commend' to instrum~nt.s. This secti'On as we passed it
    honourable members a careful reading of read:
    this section, and particularly subsection 7 Everyone who without lawful excuse, the prooj
    ·(b). Frankly, I have some doubt whether of which lies upon him,
    (a) has in his posseSSion any instrument for
    that paragraph (b), which was put in by house-breaking, vault-breaking of safe-breaking, or
    the Commons, adds anything of substance (b) has his £ace masked or coloured or 1s other-
    but it contains some nice sounding words in wise disgUised, "
    is guilty of an indictable offence and is liable to
    any event. imprisonment for fourteen years.
    Section 164, which has to do with what we
    might ordinarily describe as the offence of The Commons rephrased that to provide for
    vagrancy, was the subject of considerable a penalty of fourteen years where there was
    discussion in the Commons. In the form in possession of any instrument for house.
    which the bill was sent over from the Senate breaking or vault-breaking, etc., but for a
    that section said: penalty of 'Only ten years if the convicted
    Everyone commits vagrancy who
    person had his face masked or coloured or
    (a) not having any apparent means of support was otherwise disguised.
    ei} lives without employment, or Ron. Mr. Aseltine: Did they make any pro-
    (il) is found wandering abroad or trespassing
    and does not, when required, justify his vision for more jails?
    presence in the place where he is found. Hon. Mr. Hayden: No, they did not. I take
    There was -considerable discussion on the it that it would still be perfectly in order for
    possibility of that language being interpreted masquerade parties to be held without run-
    to mean that unemployed people were auto- ning into conflict with this section.
    matically guilty of an offence under this Hon. Mr. Euler: Is there a saving clause
    section. Well, in their wisdom, the Commons for that?
    saw fit to run all the words together and
    thereby to make it clear that it was a com- Hon. Mr. Hayden: No, there is no saving
    bination of these things that had to result clause except the combination 'Of the
    before the offence would exist, and section language in the section", which would be suffi-
    cient. It reads Hwith intent to commit an
    164 (1) now reads:
    indictable offence", So if you wear a false
    Everyone commits vagrancy who
    (a) not having any apparent means of support is face and the crown cannot establish intent
    found wandering abroad or trespassing and does to commit an indictable 'Offence, you escape.
    not, when required, justify his presence in the As I intimated before, I am skipping over
    place where he is found.
    a large number of sections where the changes
    There may have been some justification did not, in my opinion, involve any change
    for the concern over the former wording, and in substance. We can refer to -them and
    446 SENATE

    call for an explanation and understanding I now draw attention to a rather important
    of them in committee, but I do not want to section. Section 481 provided for the con.. '
    take time to deal with them here. tinuance of proceedings where a judge or
    Section 328 deals with fraudulent conceal- magistrate was unable to act. The -clause as
    ment of documents of title, etc., and the approved by us was rejected by the Com-
    Commons saw fit to add a clause requiring mons and replaced by a much lengthier one
    the consent of the Attorney General to which spells out in considerable detail what
    prosecute in such a case, steps must be taken. For instance, if the
    The Commons altered the penalty in sec- Judge or magistrate before whom a trial is
    tion 339, which has to do with the salting commenced dies, or for any reason is unable
    of a mine and the salting of a sample taken to continue, certain provisions are made ap-
    from a mine. The penalty in the bill as it plicable. If he had got to the stage of
    left the Senate was five years, hut the Com- adjudication, but had not imposed sentence,
    mons saw fit to increae it to ten years. some other magistrate may step in and
    In section 341 there is a change, but it impose sentence. If he had not got to the
    is only a rephrasing and we do not need to stage of adjudication, the judge or magistrate
    J€ concerned about it at this time. who substitutes for him will start de novo:
    Section 343 creates an offence of making, and procedures to cover these situations are
    circulating or publishing a false prospectus, outlined. The only difference I can see is
    and the Commons increased the penalty that, in the form in which the section was
    from five to ten years. passed by this house the procedure eQuId have
    I have· already dealt with sections 365 and been worked out by regulations or rules of
    372, so I do not need to spend any time on criminal practicej but in its present form
    them now. the section eliminates the necessity for rules
    Next I want to refer to section 432, which by spelling out the procedures in the various
    deals with the detention of things seized subsections of section 481.
    under a search warrant. It will be recalled Section 628, as revised, deals with compen-
    that in the Senate bill this section provided sation for loss of property. It is provided
    that when things are seized under a search that a court which convicts an accused of
    warrant they must be brought as quickly as an indictable offence may award, out of
    possible to the justice who authorized the moneys found in the possession of the accusecl
    issue of the search warrant. The changes at the time of his arrest, "an amount by way
    made by the Commons in this section are. of satisfaction or compensation for loss of or
    lengthy, but all they do is to provide in more damage to property suffered .. /' Again we
    detail for the manner of disposal of goods find a somewhat elaborate procedure attached
    which have been seized under search war- to the section as amended. In the circum-
    rant when they are no longer required for stances t have mentioned it is provided that
    the purposes for- which they were seized. the judge may order an accused to pay "to the
    Section 438 is an important section. It aggrieved person an amount by way of satis-
    deals with a situation where a person has faction or compensation for loss of or damage
    been arrested without warrant and, it may to property, and where the amount so ordered
    be, by a person who is not a peace officer. to be paid is not paid forthwith, the applicant
    In the section as passed by us it was pro- may, by filing the order, have it entered as
    vided that anyone who arrests a person with- a judgment in the Superior Court in that
    out warrant shall deliver that person to a particular ca·se, and all the incidents that
    peace officer, and that the peace officer shall, attach to a judgment of record will then fol-
    as soon as possible, bring such person before low for the purposes of ensuring the collec-
    a justice to be dealt with according to law. tion of the money.
    Apparently it was felt in the Commons that Under section 629 we -have exactly the
    the term "as soon as possible" was not same situation in relation to compensation to
    precise enough, so the section was amended bona fide purchasers. Where somebody has
    to provide that where a person who has been stolen goods and sold them to "someone else
    arrested without ·warrant is delivered to a who is a bona fide purchaser, a procedure is
    peace officer, the peace officer must, if a spelled out as to how that purchaser may,
    justice is available, bring him within twenty- when a conviction is made, get an order of the
    four hours before that justice, and if a jus- judge for reimbursement of the amount of
    tice is not available within that period of money which had been paid for the goods,
    twenty-four hours the peace 'officer must
    bring him before some justice "as soon as and the judgment is enforceable in the same
    possible". I cite these facts to illustrate the manner as if it were a judgment of a court
    great care and consideration which this sec- of record.
    tion has received .. We have an interpretation I think honourable senators will be inter-
    of "as soon as possible". ested in section 631, which deals with the
    MAY 5, 1954

    costs in proceedings by indictment for de- CO'T-PUS, mandamus, certiorari, and other pro-
    famatory libel. The section sent to the ceedings of that kind. In their concern that
    Commons provided that a successful de- these appeals should be promptly heard, the
    fendant in a prosecution for defamatory Commons inserted SUbsection (3), which speci..
    libel would be entitled to his costs. The ftcaUy provides that the appeal of an appel-
    section as amended by the Commons pro- lant who has filed notice of appeal shall be
    vides that the reasonable costs of the suc- heard within seven days after the filing of
    cessful party may be recovered. This means proof of service of the notice of appeal upon
    that, whichever side is successful, the costs the respondent and, where a notice of appeal
    follow the event. is filed when the court of appeal is not sit-
    Sectio~ 632 is merely consequential upon ting, a special sittings of the court of appeal
    the clause to which I have just referred. shall be convened for the purpose of hearing
    I turn now to section 641, with the remark the appeal. This clause is no doubt justified,
    that· honourable senators may ,begin to but in my view it provides something that
    breathe more easily, as we are within o_ue might have been covered by the' rules of
    hundred sections of the end of the Ibill. Sub- criminal procedure.
    section (3) of sec~ion 641, as passed in this I should like to refer to section 743, to
    chamber, provided that every sentence of which the Commons added a new subsec-
    whipping should 'be carried out in accordance tion (5);
    with regulations to be made by the Governor (5) The Attorney General of Canada has the
    in Council. Apparently honourable members same. rights of appeal in proceedings instituted at
    of the other place felt some concern about the instance of the Government of Canada and con-
    what these regulations might be, because ducted by or on behalf of that government as the
    they have spelled out in subsection (3) and Attorney General of a province has under this Part.
    in new subsections (4) and (5) the conditions This has to do with appeals following trials
    und"er which a sentence of whipping will be cle novo. In certain circumstances a trial de
    administered. Provision is made for the type novo may be held before a county 'Court judge,
    of instrument to be used, the circumstances following an appeal from a conviction or an
    under which whippings may occur, and for acquittal by a magistrate. There is a provision
    supervision by a medical practitioner. In elsewhere in the code for an appeal on any
    short, instead of leaving these matters to be question of law.
    determined by regulations of the Governor
    in Council, specific directions are incorpo- Hon. Mr. McDonald: Are the offices of
    rated in the section itself.. Minister of Justice and Attorney General of
    Section 690 is one of a group of clauses Canada always held by the same person?
    relating to extraordinary remedies. The par- Hon. Mr. Hayden: Those offices may be
    ticular one with which it deals is where ~n held by the same person and usually are. At
    application has been made for habeas corpus. the present time the Minister of Justice is
    In the bill as passed by us it was provided also the Attorney General of Canada.
    that, where an application for habeas corpus I should direct the attention of the house
    had been refused, successive applications to section 746, which deals with the transi~
    could not be made. I presume that honour-
    able members of the House of Commons tion between the operation of the present code
    became a little concerned as to whether or and the new code. For instance, the section
    not that was sufficiently dear, so they added provides for the handling of cases where
    the words "on the merits". In other words, offenders charged under the present code
    if the application for the habeas corpUs is are not brought to trial until the new code
    refused on the merits, then successive appli- is in operation.
    cations cannot follow. Hon. Mr. Davies: May I interrupt the hon-
    Hon. Mr. Aseltine: Who makes that ourable gentleman to ask a quest~on?
    decision? Hon. Mr. Hayden: Certainly.
    Hon. Mr. Hayden: I suppose that if a per- Hon. Mr. Davies: On several occasions you
    son tried to fly in the face of the law by have said that certain 1hings cannot be done
    attempting another application he would be without the permission of the Attorney Gen-
    refused .on the basis of this section. I admit eral. I take it that you have been referring
    that putting in the words "on the merits" to the Attorney General of Canada and not
    might promote quite a scope of argument as to provincial Attorneys General?
    to whether or not the merits had actually
    been gone into. Under the section passed by Hon. Mr. Hayden: No, I have been referring
    the Senate there was certainly some finality to 1he Attorneys General of the provinces.
    to the proceedings. I should have referred honourable senators
    In passing I should like to draw attention to to section 744, which deals with fees and
    section 691, providing for appeals in habeas allowances t.hat may be allowed to peace
    448 SENATE
    officers, witnesses and interpreters. For felt it was unnecessary to deal with amend_
    peace officers the mileage rate of 20 cents ments which merely involve rephrasing with-
    which we proposed, has been reduced to 10 out change in substance. I referred to changes
    cents per mile. The fee f.or witnesses has in penalties where I thought it might be
    been increased from $3 to $4 per day, and useful to call these changes to the' attention
    the mileage rate has been reduced from 20 of the house. The substantial changes are
    cents to 10 cents per mile. The allowances not many and are confined to the important
    for living expenses of interpreters has been headings of treason, sabotage, wilful breach
    increased from $5 rto $10 per day, and here of coniract, mischief, contempt of court and
    again the mileage rate reduced from 20 cents possibly a few others. Those are the major
    to 10 cents per mile. In other words, the ones that loom up at this time. In the pro- I

    Commons increased the per diem allowance cess of boiling, :which has gone on in our
    for witnesses and interpreters over. what consideration of the various drafts of this
    the Senate had provided, but reduced the code over a period of two or three years,
    mileage rate. many problems have been worked out and
    Hon. Mr. McDonald: What was the ·recom- common ground reached. Certain others re-
    mendation of the Senate as to the per diem main and some may· prove to be very
    rate? contenHous. I hope that my presentation of
    Hon. Mr. Hayden: We set the rate for today may be of some assistance to honour-
    witnesses at $3 per day, able senators in thefr deliberations of this
    Honourable senators, I have covered all matter.
    the sections which I deem of sufficient imw Some Hon. Senators: Hear, hear.
    portance to call to your attention at ~his
    time. I believe I have dealt with thirty On motion of Hon. Mr. Roebuck, the debate
    of the seventy-one amendments that have was adjourned.
    been made by the C-ommons, and it may be
    felt that some of the others should be dis- The Senate adjourned until tomorrow at
    cussed in this chamber or in committee. I 3 p.m.
    454 SENATE

    THE SENATE has 382 pages, while the bill has 297, or 85
    fewer pages. That is a conservative· calcula~
    tion, because from a comparison of the two
    documents I am quite sure that there is
    Tuesday, May 11, 1954 more reading to the page in the code than in
    the bill; so in reading matter the bill is
    The Senate met at 8 p.m., the Speaker shorter than the tOde by more than 85 pages.
    in the Chair. Perhaps I am over.stating the value of con~
    Prayers. densatio~, but reITIember that the Criminal
    Coqe is a public document that is supposed
    Routine proceedings. to be understood by the common people at
    this country, not by magistrates and lawyers
    DIVORCE PETITIONS alone, and that it affects the lives -of thou~
    REPORTS OF COMMITTEE sands upon thousands of people. Therefore,
    the advantage of a short, simple, concise and
    Hon. Mr. Roebuck (Chairman of the Stand~ readable statement of the code is almost
    ing Committee on Divorce) presented the com~ inestimable.
    mittee's reports Nos. 390 to 399, dealing with
    petitions for divorce, and moved that the Condensation, however, is not the only
    said reports be taken into consideration at accomplishment that one finds in this new
    the next sitting. bill., Generally speaking, in my judgment
    the rewl,'iting of the measure has resulted,
    The motion was agreed to, on division. first, in a clearer statement of most" of the
    sections, secondly, in the elimination of a
    CRIMINAL CODE BILL very considerable amount of dead~wood; and
    SECOND READING thirdly, in a better arrangement of the
    subject~matter, a very important improvement
    The Senate resumed from Wednesday, in an act of parliament which is being used
    May 5, the adjourned debate on the motion daily in magistrates' courts, as is the. code.
    of Hon. Mr. Hayden for the second reading The work that has been done on this
    of Bill 7, an Act respecting the criminal law. bill, I suggest to honourable seantors, is
    Hon. Arthur W. Roebuck: Honourable another illustration of the part which the
    senators, this long and difficult bill has been Senate plays in the revision and improve-
    the subject of. study for some five years, first ment of legislation. When the bill was
    by the Criminal Code Revision Commission, introduced here in the first place it was
    and since then by this and the other house. regarded by some as an almost perfect
    I approach discussion of it by expressing measure; it was backed by some great names
    gratitude to the honourable senator from of both bench and bar and by high officials
    Toronto (Han. Mr. Hayden) for the very of the Department of Justice. We were
    capable review which he gave of the bill as assured by the Minister, who spoke in this
    it came back to us from the House of Com~ house on the presentation of the bill, that
    mons. I am grateful to him not only for it was a very fine piece of legislation-and,
    what I learned from what he said, but also of course, in the main it was, notwithstanding
    because his review makes it unnecessary for the fact that we pulled it to pieces and found
    me to attempt any comprehensive discussion opportunities for improvement. We made no
    of the measure and leaves me free to refer less than one hundred and seventy-nine
    only to those sections in which I am especially changes in the bill before it was sent to the
    interested or on which I think comment would House of Commons, and under provocation
    serve some useful purpose. of the scrutiny which the bill received at our
    Will honourable senators permit me a hands the Department of Justice worked' on
    general comment? In my humble opinion this it again during the parliamentary recess. At
    bill in its present form is a better statement the present session, the bill was brought
    of the criminal law of Canada than that which down in the Commons, and that house made
    is contained in the Criminal Code now in seventy-one amendments to it before sending
    force. Not only is it a better, but it is a it on to us.
    shorter statement, and that is of some virtue. I would like to make as forcibly as I can
    There are in the code 1,152 sections; in the this general observation: there is simply
    no substitute for what takes place in the
    bill before us there are 753. In other words, discussions of deliberative assemblies in the'
    the bill we are now considering is shorter preparing and perfecting of legislative
    than the code by 399 sections. What has been measures-measures to which large numbers
    omitted from the bill is a considerable docu~ of men must submit.
    ment in itself; as a matter of fact, it would The criminal law, like the city of Rome,
    make a fair~sized book. Further, the code was not built in a day. It is the result of
    MAY II. 1954 455

    many years of development. It is the produc't there should be an appeal against both con-
    of time, of experience and of endless dis- victions and penalties in cases of contempt
    cussion, not only in high places but in low of court. When I returned to Toronto for the
    places; on the bench, in magistrates' courts, Christmas vacation, I wondered just what
    in legal circles and in parliament. The sum would be said to me by judges because
    total of all this thought has produced the of the limitations of authority which I had
    criminal law of today, In my opinion the suggested, but when I interviewed a number
    House of Commons improved on the work of the high court judges I was surprised to
    that we did, as we improved on the work find that they were all in favour of my
    of the royal commission and of the depart- proposal; indeed, Chief Justice McRuer, of
    mental officials. Ontario, had actually published a pamphlet in
    The first of the sections in which I am which he advocated this idea, and he sent me
    specially interested is clause 9, with respect a copy of his brochure. ·However, I was
    to appeals from convictions for ,contempt assured by the judges that, if we took away
    of court. Usually, I have found, there _is the arbitrary character of these adjudications,
    a tremendous resistance to any proposal to there would be many more convictions for
    change from the established order. As a life- contempt of court and many more penalties
    long reformer, I can say that with some feel- imposed than there have been in the past.
    ing. But -in this instance-a very refreshing That frightens me not in the least, for I h,ave
    . instance indeed-I have found a rather new already shown that contempt of court usually
    experience. From time hnmemorial the judge consists in contempt of the rights of some
    has exercised absolute authority in the court individual who is subject to the court-an
    over which' he presides. Contempt o,f court interference between the court and some per-
    procedure has a much greater purpose than of son indicted that may make a fair trial im-
    merely sustaining the egotism or the vanity possible, or it may consist in interfering in
    of somepody who sits on a bench. That, really, litigation so as to prejudice the case of one
    is not the idea at all. Contempt' of court is litigant and advance the case of another.
    the holding up to ridicule, not necessarily of That is interference with the course of justice
    the judge personally, but of the administra- which should not be all'Owed. Therefore, I
    tion of justice which is in his hands. Con- am not at all worried by the statement that
    tempt of court is interfering with the pro- abolition of the present arbitrary procedure
    cesses of the court, so _as to impede or to would result in more convictions and more
    prevent the granting of justice as between penalties than have been imposed in the past.
    the crown and an individual on trial or as I need hardly remind honourable senators
    between individual and individua1. Finally, . that the proposed amendment was praised
    it is the disobeying of the court's orders. The in the press from coast to coast; and now the
    jurisdiction 'Of the judge in matters of con- Commons, too, have expressed their ap-
    tempt of court extends "far beyond the con- proval, much to my satisfaction. However,
    fines of t~e 'court its~lf, and the judge may the Commons went farther than we did. In
    summon a person to appear before ,him to our effort to be moderate we did not provide
    answer for an act to which the judge objects. an appeal from a conviction 'by a judge for
    In charges of contempt of court the judge an offence of this kind committed in the
    m~y be the witness against the accused; he face of the court-that is, committed while
    registers his judgment without the interven- the court is in session-but we did give an
    tion of a jury, and he finally imposes the appeal from the penalty imposed under those
    penalty. It can be seen, therefore, that the circumstances. The Commons went farther
    authority of the judge is not 'Only wide but and gave an appeal from the conviction as
    it is arbitrary; and under criminal law from well as the penalty, and whether the 'Offence
    time immemorial, both in this. c'Ountry and in is committed in court or out of court. I am
    Oreat Britain, there has been no appeal from ready to go along with them in that, but
    either the conviction or the penalty which a unfortunately they have made the right of
    judge may impose for contempt of court. As appeal subject to leave of the court of appeal
    far as I know thel'e is no limitation, either by or a judge thereof. I am opposed to that. In
    s,tatute or common law, on the severity with my judgment, an application for leave to
    whi9h a judge may deal with the accused in exercise the right of appeal is 'unneces-
    convictions of this kind. sary and serves no usefUl purpose. The argu-
    ment for the right of appeal must necessarily
    When this legislation first came before the
    Senate, as Bill H-8, I thought fit to suggest be upon the merits of the case; likewise, the
    that -there should be an appeal in these cases, argument with regard to the conviction itself
    and at that time the newspapers published or the penalty must necessarily be upon the
    widely my suggestion. The Senate agreed, merits of the case. The aggrieved party must
    both in committee and in the house, that thus present to the court of appeal two
    456 SENATE

    arguments when one will suffice. Two pro- change was that it reduced the penalty from
    cedures, when one will do, but add to the death to fourteen years' imprisonment. How~
    expense of appeal, and of course involves ever, I was not at all satisfied that the sec-
    delay. tion should be retained at all. So, I am very
    Finally, in my judgment an appeal should much pleased that the Commons did what
    be allowed as of right and not as a matter of I think we should have done, that is replaced
    grace or of favour. I hope that when the a badly drafted and objectionable section by
    committee examines these sections it will a completely new section. The substituted
    recommend to the house that we accept the section now reads:
    widening of the grounds of appeal as sug- 46 (1) Everyone commits treason who, in
    gested by the Commons, but that we strike Canada,
    out that provision added by the Commons (e) without lawful authority-
    making necessary two procedures for one Which is a good provision.
    purpose, We should strike out the require- --communicates or makes available to an agent of
    ment for consent to appeal, for it is of no a state other than Canada, mUitary or scientific
    value and involves the extra expense and lnfonnation-
    delay of two arguments. That is a different matter from all
    The next section to which I wish to refer information.
    is that wIth regard to treason. I suppose it -or any sketch, plan, model, article, note or docu-
    is unreasonable to expect that honourable ment of a military or scientific character that he
    senators will now recollect the protest which knows or ought to know may be used by that
    state for a purpose prejudicial-
    I made against section 46 (e) in Ibill H -8,
    when - it came before us two sessions ago. Not to the interests of Canada.
    That section then read as follows: -to the safety or defence of Canada.
    46 (1) Everyone commits treason who, in I wish to congratulate both the Minister of
    Canada,
    (e) conspires with an agent of a state other than Justice and the House of Commons upon
    Canada to communicate information or to do an having put something which is treason into
    act that is likely to be prejudicial to the safety or this treason section, and upon wiping out
    interests of Canada. the highly objectionable wording to which
    Observe, honourable senators, the para- I have referred. Obviously the betrayal of
    graph does not say "communicate informa- valuable scientific or military information to
    tion prejudicial to the safety or interests of a foreign state which the betrayer knows or
    Canada", although that could be read into it: ought to know will be used to the disadvan-
    it applies to all information. What are the tage of Canada, is treason of the most
    interests of Canada? Are they the interests despicable kind, and should be clearly pro-
    of some class in Canada? If so, such a sec- hibited and punished.
    tion would indeed be pernicious. Were we There are three sections to which I should
    making it treason to tread upon the toes of like to refer, and which the honourable sena-
    the corporate or financial interests of Bay tor from Toronto (Hon. Mr. Hayden) in his
    street or St. James street? Evidently the excellent speech of last Wednesday men-
    Senate agreed in part at least with my tioned as a group, because each has a labour
    denunciation of this section, because we connotation. I refer to sections 52, 365 and
    struck out the words t1interests of Canada". 372. I may say that these sections, from my
    And then perhaps honourable senators will personal experience, have been regarded in
    recollect that I protested against making it union circles from coast to coast as anti-
    an offence .to communicate informa.tion to union; and so widespread has been the objec-
    the agents of a foreign state. There are tion taken to them by large numbers of
    literally thousands of people who might be -people that the Commons saw fit to save
    described as agents of a state other than organized labour harmless from their
    Canada: indeed, all the civil servants ,of application. To the Minister of Justice I
    another state are the agents of that state, as give credit for his efforts to make this par-
    are members of the armed forces, and there ticular criminal law acceptable to the labour
    are many others. To ban the giving of all unions of Canada.
    information to so large a body of people is But observe this: these sections although
    an unwarranted limitation of freedom of made inapplicable to the activities of unions,
    speech and the press in Canada. I argued still apply to the rest of us. and I submit
    further that the prohibition of giving that legislation sufficiently vicious that it
    information of that kind was not in keeping
    with the historic idea of treason; and I suc- must be made to by-pass the organized and
    ceeded, if you will remember, in having that the powerful, and left to apply to the unor-
    section transferred from the treason pro- ganized and the uninfluential, should be
    visions and placed under the heading Hpro- eliminated entirely. I do not like making fish
    hibited acts". One of the results of that of one and flesh of another, and there is that
    MAY 11, 1954 451

    element in the amendments which now come prejudicial to Canada or our armed forces
    to us with regard to these three sections. Now, without coupling that type of loyalty to
    let me take them one by one and in the private property rights? I confess, honour-
    numerical order that I have mentioned. I able senators, that I am much more con-
    commence with section 52. First I will read cerned with human rights than I am with
    it as we passed it in Bill 0, property rights. Property rights are, after
    52. (1) Everyone who does a prohibited act for all, the rights of humans with regard to
    a purpose prejudicial to property, and I object to hitching property
    (a) the safety or interests of Canada, or rights, and all that goes with such rights, to
    (b) -the safety or security of the naval, army
    or air forces of any state other than Canada that the loyalty of those who would not for the
    are lawfully present in Canada, is guilty of an world interfere with the safety of our armed
    Indictable offence and is Hable to imprisonment for forces.
    ten years,
    And then,' as though section 52 were not
    Now, as I said, I took objection to that enough to support the sacred rights of prop-
    phrase "the interests of Canada" because it erty, there now appears in Bill 7 a section
    might mean the interests of some class in entitled "Mischief", which is number 372.
    Canada, and I see that the Commons have Let me read it as it a-ppeared in Bill 0, which
    struck out the phrase in this section as they we revised. . This is under the title of
    did in another, and they have sUbstituted "Mischief":
    lI(a) the safety, security or defence of Canada". 372. (1) Everyone commits mischief who wilfully
    That is a very great improvement. I con- (a) destroys or damages property,
    gratulate the Commons 'and the Minister (b) renders property dangerous, useless, inopera·
    upon doing what I think we should have done ttve or ineffective.
    (c) obstructs, interrupts or interferes with the
    when the bill was before us. lawful use, enjoyment or operation of property, or
    I \'1ill now read the section as it appears in (d) obstructs, interrupts or interferes wIth any
    section 52 of Bill 7, t1;le bill that is before us: person in 'the lawful use, enjoyment or operation
    of property.
    52. (1) Everyone who does a prohibited act (2) Everyone who commits mischief that causes
    for a purpose prejudicial to actual danger to life is guilty of an indictable
    (a) the safety. security or defence of Canada. or offence and is liable to imprisonment for life.
    (b) the Safety or security of the naval, anny or (3) Everyone who commits mischief in relation
    air forces of any state other than Canada that are to public property is guilty of an indictable offence
    lawfully present in Canada, is guilty of an indict- and is liable to imprisonment for fourteen years.
    able offence and is liable to imprisonment ror t-en (4) Everyone who commits mischief in relation
    years. ':0 private property is guilty of an indictable
    I submit that·the section, so far as I have offence and is liable to imprisonment for five
    years.
    read, is much less objectionable than it was
    in Bill 0, if it is objectionable at all. But, let Honourable senators, I have no objection
    me go on. I will read subsection 2 of section to penalizing any person who endangers
    52 of Bill 7: human life. I might not make the punish-
    (2) In this section. "prohibited act" means an ment quite so severe as life imprisonment,
    act or omission that but there is no objection in principle to
    (a) impairs the efficiency or impedes the work- defending the citizen against threats to his
    ing of any vessel, vehicle, aircraft, machinery,
    apparatus or other thing, or life. There is no objection to defending
    (b) causes property, by whomsoever it may be public property. There are other sections
    owned, to be lost, damaged or destroyed. in the bill which do that in both instances.
    Let me comment on that. I have no objec- And there is no objection to defending
    tion at all to penalizing those who prejudice private property; indeed, in the code you will
    the safety, security or defence of Canada or find provisions prohibiting the wilful destruc-
    of our armed forces, but I do object to hitch- tion of property. To that we are ·all agreed,
    ing that prohibition to publicly or privately but to make it "mischief" in this fashion
    owned property. There is no need to drag is quite another matter. When this section
    in all property and make that an element in was before us at the last session of
    the offence. As the subsection now stands parliament I pointed out that no strike ever
    it means that anyone who impairs the occurred in Canada or elsewhere which did
    efficiency of any publicly or privately owned not'in some way interfere with the operation
    mechanical device, from a jacknife to a cargo or enjoyment of property. Obviously the
    purpose of a strike is to interefere in some
    ship, or causes any kind of property to be way with the profitable use of property. In
    lost, damaged or destroyed, risks being liable committee I submitted an amendment as
    to a ten-year term in the .penitentiary, if the follows:
    result is prejudicial to our own or any visit- A lawful act done in fUrtherance of the purpose
    ing armed forces and observe that this of a trades union is not mischief.
    applies both in times of peace and in times I then found myself in the somewhat
    of war. Is it not sufficient to prohibit acts humorous position of being the only one who
    83280-30
    458 SENATE
    voted for my amendment. Honourable sena~ (d) to deprive the inhabitants of a city or placej
    tors may smile when I recall my quip at the or part thereof, wholly or to a great extent, of
    their supply of light, power, gas or water, or
    time in this house that I stood in what I , Ce) to delay or prevent the running of a loco~
    called "splendid isolation", but I added these motive engine, tender, freight or passenger train
    words: "You will hear about this clause in,. or car, on "a railway that is a common carrier,
    the future, or I am no. prophet", Honourable Is guilty of
    (f) an indictable offence and liable to imprison~
    senators, I was a prophet, and a [&'od ment for five years.
    prophet, for my words alerted the labour
    unions of this country from coast to coast With regard to this first subsection, I agree
    and Iiberal~minded people all over Canada, that no employer or employee should condone
    including members of the House of Com~ bad faith in the breaching of contracts.
    mons and the Minister of Justice; and the Integrity in the observation of contracts is
    result is that both these objectionable sec- the basis of civilized life. But let me point
    tions, namely 52 and 372, come back to us out that contractual rights are civil rights,
    with provisions added which purport to and from time immemorial civil rights have
    make them non-applicable to labour unions. been enforced in civil courts. Such courts
    Unfortunately, however,. they are left applic- may order specific performance or give dam~
    able to the rest of us. Let me read the saving ages for breach of contract. In the past, it
    clause. I will read that which appears in has not been criminal to breach a contract,
    Bill 7 as section 52, subsection (3), and sena~ but now we are asked to make breach of
    tors will note that alrilOst exactly similar contract a crime, incurring penalties. I say
    words have been added to both sections. that society is perfectly right in protecting
    (3) 'No person does a prohibited act within the itself against such disasters as the cutting off
    meaning of this section by reason only that of supplies of light, power, gas, water an~
    (a) be stops work as a result of the failure transportation. But I would add _that, in
    of his employer and himself to agree upon any
    matter relating to his employment, respect of that right, it makes little difference
    (b) he stops work as a result of the failure of whether any contract or breach ot contract
    his employer and a bargaining agent acting on his is involved. I am not prepared to agree that
    behalf to agree upon any matter relating to his society's right to defend itself exists only
    employment, or
    (c) he stops work as a result of his taking part when there is a breach of a contract. It is
    in a combination of workmen or employees for inherent in society to protect itself whether i
    their own reasonable protection as workmen or or not a contract is involved and whether i
    employees, or not there is a breach of contract. It seems I
    Then, subsection (4): to me, therefore, that the enforcing of the
    (4) No person' does a prohibited act within the contract should be left, where it belongs, to
    meaning _of this section by reason only that be the civil courts, and that the protection of I
    attends .at or near or approaches a dwelling house society against the loss of its public services
    or place for the purpose only of obtaining'or com- should be a matter of comprehensive legis"-
    municating information.
    lation for which some government should
    I congratulate the House of Commons and take responsibility;" ,rather than having both
    the minister on relieving labour unions from these matters dealt with in this haphazard
    the operation of these highly objectionable fashion in the proposed 'Criminal Code as we
    sections. But the question naturally arises, find it. It is bad draftsmanship; it is not
    what about the rest of us? Are we to remain good statesmanship; it has not been well,
    subject to restrictions and penalties simply thought out; and I submit that the Senate
    because we are not so well organized to should courageously redraft the entire
    protect our liberties? I favour the amend- section.
    ment as it stands, but as I do not believe in
    making fish of one and flesh of another I In my view section 365 is not sound legisla~
    submit that both clauses in their entirety !ion, and the government in" consequence ran
    should "be eliminated. into difficulty with the labour unions" in
    I now refer to section 365. It is associated respect to it. There has been a widespread
    with sections 52 and 372 because of its actual outcry from coast to coast against what labour
    or possible effect upon labour unions. In unionists regarded as anti-unionist legisla-
    section 365 there is reference to the breaking tion. I give the Minister of Justice credit
    of contraets. I will read the clause as it for struggling manfully to satisfy the labour
    appears in Bill No.7: unions. As a result of his efforts he secured
    365. (1) Everyone who wilfully breaks a con~ some very, very qualified approval from
    tract, knowing or having reasonable cause to the three congresses of labour to the amend-
    believe that the probable consequences of doing so,
    whether alone or in combination with others, ments which he made to this section. The
    will be section comes back to us with the following
    (a) to endanger human Ufe,
    (b) to cause serious bodily injury. amendment:
    (c) to expose valuable property, real or per~ (2) No person wilfully breaks a contract within
    sonal, to destruction or serious Infury, the meaning of subsection (1) by reason only that
    MAY n. 19H 459

    (a)· being the employee of an employer, he stops responsible for the imprisonment of an indi-
    work as a result of the failure of his employer
    and himself to agree upon any matter relating to vidual to show authority for his detention.
    his employment, or, There has never been any appeal by the
    (b) being a member of an organization of crown against a habeus corpus order, for
    employees fanned for the purpose of regulating officials of the crown must by law be ready
    relations between employers and emploYees, he
    .stops work as a result of the failure of the at all times to justify in the courts the
    employer and a bargaining agent acting on behalf imprisonment of an individual.
    of the organization to agree upon -any matter Should a judge order his release, the
    relating to the employment of members of the
    organization, 'prisoner is set free immediately, and that is
    if, before the stoppage of work .occurs, all steps the end of it. No appeal is provided for the
    provided by law with respect to the settlement of applicant, because appeals take time, and the
    industrial disputes' are taken and any provision fat'
    liberty of the subject is -a matter from day
    the final settlement of differences, without stop~
    page of work, contained in or _by law deemed to to day. Since appeal in these circumstances
    be contained in a is impracticable, the appU:Cation for a writ of
    cOllective agreement is complied
    i.vith and effect given thereto. habeas corpus may be secured from any judge
    Honourable senators, I have read. and who is available. The prisoner's friends or
    reread this section. I have considered every counsel may apply to as many judges as may
    word of it) Put I admit that I do mot know be reached in order to find one who will take
    'what the. section ·means. Does it mean that the responsibility-and it is not ·a great one
    a. workman who quits work during the term -of requiring the crown officials to justify
    of an ·agreement, -and so brea-ches ~he agree- the detention of the prisoner.· Honourable
    ment, does not in fact breach .it if, prior to senators, that system has been in effect from
    to quitting ¥(ork, the conciliation 'processes the time of Magna Carta, and it has furnished
    o.f eitiher .dominion or provincial law have a cardinal, basic, legal provision for the
    been -run through, and all steps deemed by security of the subject.
    law to be contained in .the 'Collective ·ag;ree- Sections 690 and 691 propose to abolish the
    ment have been .observed? Does the section right of the subject to apply for an order of
    provide that a breach of 'Contrad is not a habeas corpus to all judges available or to as
    brea-ch ,of contra.d under these circumstances? many as necessary, and in the place of such
    On the other hand, does the section .prohibit right to grant the right .of appeal from the
    the quitting of w-ork after the termination ·of first judge'S decision, should he refuse to
    an agreement ·,but before conciliation IPro- grant the application. Honourable senators,
    cedures and everything ·deemed to be in the this is a major change in a primary, time~
    -3'greement have 'been 'completed? Finally, honoured, British, right of the individual. In
    does the section give the force of -criminal la'\v my judgment, the proposal to grant an appeal
    10 a·cts of provincial legislatures now in effect to the crown agaiflst a habea,s order to pro-
    or later to be enacted? It looks as though it duce the body ·is even more grave, for it means
    does. Honourable senators will not be sur- that authorities may continue the imprison-
    IPrised when "I tell them that the debate in ment of an individual after a judge has
    tp;e . other house on this particular question granted an order of habeas corpus, or actually
    filled thirty-one pages of Hansard. So doubt- ordered his liberation, by simply filing a notice
    ful did that- house appear ·to be about this of appeal, at least until the matter finally
    section that the government. took the pre- comes before a court of appeal. The gravity
    caution of adding the further provision that of that proposed change was recognized by
    ho proceedings under the section shall be the Commons when they added to section 691,
    instituted without the consent of the Attorney subsection 3, as ~ol1ows:
    General. I suggest that this section should Notwithstanding anything in part XVIII or. in
    be read with extreme care by every senator rules of court, the appeal of an appellant who has
    in this house. I further suggest that we filed notice of appeal shan be heard within seven
    days after the filing of proof of service of the
    should not approve this legislation until we notice of appeal upon the ;respondent and, where a
    have· heard the officers of the three great notice of appeal is filed· when the court of appeal is
    federal unions: The Trades and Labour Con- not Sitting, a speCial sittings of the court of appeal
    gress of Canada, The Canadian Congress of shall be convened for the purpose of hearing the
    Labour, and The Canadian and Catholic Con- appeal.
    federation of Labour. That is to say, even though the court is in
    There are only two more sections to \vhich session, the notice of appeal need not be served
    I wish to refer, namely, sections 690 and 691, until the end of a whole week after a judge
    has ordered the jailer, to produce the body,
    which deal with· applications for habeas
    or after a judge has said that the man should
    corpus. Under the code as it now reads, and be freed. That is a decided and important
    under criminal law as it has stood from time restriction upon .the right of habeas corpus
    immemorial, there is no appeal from a judge's which should be justified to us beyond all
    decision refusing an order compelling those measure of· doubt before it passes this house.
    8328~30'
    460 SENATE

    At the moment I am not prepared to argue present bill is referred to our Banking and
    completely the wisdom or unwisdom of this Commerce Committee many honourable
    new suggestion, but, honourable senators, senators who do not belong to the legal pro~
    when I see a major change made in one of fession will say that it is a matter for the
    the fundamental rights that we call British lawyers to discuss and decide. I want to say
    justice, it gives me pause, .and I want it most emphatically that the decisions to be
    justified beyond all peradventure before I made are the responsibility of every member
    consent to it. of the committee, and perhaps the responsi~
    I suppose this house will send the bill to bility is a little greater for the members who
    the Banking and Commerce Committee. are not lawyers.
    Hon. Mr. Reid: May I ask the honourable Hon. Mr. Reid: Hear, hear.
    senator a question? Hon. Mr. Haig: Undoubtedly this will be
    Hon~ Mr. Roebuck: Yes. our last opportunity to discuss the criminal
    law, as the bill will be passed at this session
    Hon. Mr. Reid: Am I to understand that, in some form or other. The subject has been
    under the section as it now stands, a man before par1i~ment long enough to permit us
    who has been freed from' jail by some judge to decide what conclusions should be reached.
    could be held, when an appeal is filed, for Therefore, if I may speak on behalf of the
    seven days or more? Senate, I implore every member of the I
    Hon. Mr. Roebuck: Yes, that is right. As Banking and Commerce Committee to attend
    r
    the law now stands, a man ordered by a its meetings. True, at times the subject·
    judge to be freed is released right then and matter may seem dull to some members. But I
    I
    there, and that is the end of it. If anybody law, as an abstract thing, is a little dull, and
    feels that some relative or friend has been perhaps -even a little stupid, especially to
    improperly imprisoned, and he can find a people who are not lawyers ..
    judge who will make an order of habeas Hon. Mr. Macdonald: Now, now.
    corpus, the prisoner is brought before the
    Judge at once and the jailer is 'required to Hon. Mr. Haig: As both the honourable
    show his authority for detaining the prisoner. senators from Toronto-Trinity (Hon, Mr.
    That is the most fundamental provision of Roebuck) and Toronto (Han. Mr. Hayden)
    all British law~to maintain and protect the have pointed out, there is often a difference
    security of the subject. I hope this bill of opinion. But it is important to remind
    will go to the Banking and Commerce com- ourselves that we still have trial by jury In
    mittee, and that that committee will refer it this country. In the province of Manitoba
    to, a smaller committee, or to several small lawyers are exempt from jury duty, and I
    committees, so that each one of the bill's think it is genera:lly so throughout Canada
    provisions may receive the same meticulous that juries are composed of laymen. They
    care, inquiry and scrutiny that was given to are the people who decide the law in the
    Bill H-8 and Biil 0 when they came before country.
    us in previous sessions. Hon. Mr. AseUine: They decide the facts.
    Tha,nk you. Hon. Mr. Haigt Yes, they find the facts.
    Some Hon. Senators: Hear, hear. We are by this bill drafting new legislation.
    and if, for instance, the senator from
    Hon. John T. Hai~: Hono'1-u'able. senators, I Toronto (Hon. Mr. Hayden) should take one
    do not intend to make a speech on this bill, side of a question and I should take another,
    but I do want to appeal to the members it will be up to the laymen on the committee
    of the Banking and Commerce Committee, to to decide which view in their opinion should
    which this bill will undoubtedly be sent. become the law of Canada, Every member
    Many other important pieces of legislation of the committee must share responsibility
    have come before this house in the last ten for what the committee does.
    or fifteen years, but this bill deals with a The Banking and Commerce Committee of
    very important matter affecting this country, this house has done some fine work. The
    namely, the criminal law as set out in the outstanding example is its work in respect to
    code. This proposed legislation, of course, the income tax legislation, It was the Senate
    is a re-enactment, not only of the old Criminal which advocated the setting up of the Income
    Code in Canada, but of the common law in ·Tax Appeal Board, and it took the House of
    England Commons two or three years to recognize
    As the honourable senator from Toronto~ the importance of our committee's investiga~
    Trinity (Han. Mr. Roebuck) has pointed out, tion and to adopt its recommendations. The
    this bill in one form or another has been Income Tax Appeal Board has done much to
    before us on two occasions. But the prac~ make the income tax law of Canada readily
    tical problem as I see it, is that when the enforceable.
    MAY 11. 1954 461

    I repeat, it is the responsibility of every of the nature of s~botage, wilful damage to


    member of the committee, lawyers and lay property and endangering of public health
    members alike, to give adequate considera- and life, and when you single out a section of
    tion to this important bill. I do not think the community to benefit from those saving
    its consideration will take as long as my clauses, instead of extending the benefit to
    honourable friend from Toronto-Trinity all the people, there must be very sound
    (Hon. Mr. Roebuck) anticipates. The subject reasons for doing _so. Being driven by his
    has been well covered by the two senators logic, my friend first says that he congratu~
    who have spoken on the second reading of lates the Minister of Justice upon having
    the bill. However, undoubtedly a vote will provided the saving clauses, because these
    be taken in committee on some sections. two sections seem to be aimed at labour
    Perhaps I may be permitted to say that and their unions. Then, logical as he is} he
    this has not been a busy session. But now we says he cannot see any justification for a
    have a real job of work in. the proper section which creates a criminal offence) yet
    examination of the proposed new <code, and which exempts from its effect a certain group
    we should all do what we can to ensure that of people because they may be more vocal
    C;;mada's criminal law is just as good as we through their organizations than the rest of
    can make it. the people; and therefore, he argues, these
    I should like to suggest that the Minister sections ,should disappear entirely.
    pi Justice attend the committee's meetings; Now, to say that section 52 -should dis-
    at least} that he be invited to attend them. appear entirely is t,o say that we have no
    He has a first-hand grasp of the subject; need in our law for an offence known as
    whether we agree with his views or not} I sabotage in the terms in \vhich it is pro-
    think he has more knowledge in this field vided in this bill. And to s_ay that there is
    ~han (!.ny other -member of the House of no 'need for section 372, which deals with
    Commons. He has made a great contribution mischief-and I am more concerned about
    to the discussions in that house, and he would the offence itself than the name used to
    be of invaluable assistance by meeting with describe it-is to say that we have no need
    us and telling us why he did this or that for an offence dealing with \\dlful damage
    and did not do something else. His explana- to property and endangering Of life. It is a
    tions would help us to reach proper decisions. matter of policy} of course, to decide whether
    or not there should be such substantive
    Hon. Salter R. -Hayden: Honourable sena- offences and whether they should be created
    tors- in the terms in which this bill creates them.
    The Hon. the Speaker: Honourable sena- They antedate the present bill, and have
    tors, if the honourable senator from Toronto been part of the law pf our land for many
    (Han. Mr. Hayden) speaks now} he will close years. As a matter of fact, the first three
    the debate. paragraphs of subsection (1) of section 365,
    which has to do with a criminal breach of
    Hon. Mr. Hayden: With respect to a num- contract and to which my friend referred, go
    ber of things which my friend the senator back to about the year 1877, and the
    from Toronto-Trinity (Han. Mr. Eoebuck) remainder of the subsection goes back} I
    has said, I am in agreement. In the two pre- think, to the consolidation which took place
    vious sessions when the bill was before us in 1906. In the present code it is known
    he played an active and vigorous part in the as section 499. The only unfortunate feature
    consideration of it; and the position h!=,! took of section 499 is that it used such language
    then with respect to certain sections was the that a prosecution under it could never have
    same as he has taken tonight. I recall that been successful. I suppose that is why
    in this very chamber he attempted at one nobody ever objects to the $ection. The
    stage to be prophetic with relation to sections wording is defective, as my friend undoubt-
    52, 365 and 372. 'But when my friend, in dis- edly knows. The section deals with breach
    cussing sections 52 and 372, states a view of contract connected with the supply of
    which, as I understand it, is certainly con-
    power, light, gas or water, and it says that
    trary to the view ~ hold) I have to indicate
    the considerations which I think should gov- everyone is guilty of an offence who:
    ern us when we come to decide in what being bound, agreeing or assuming, under any
    contract made by him with any municipal corpora-
    form these sections should finally go forward. tion or authority, or with any company. to supply
    Section 52 deals with sabotage, and section any city or any other place or any part thereof,
    with electric light or power, gas or water, wiliully
    372 with mischief. My friend, having a logi- breaks such contract . . •
    cal mind, is driven to a logical conclusion;
    and he realizes just as well as anybody else Well, by no stretch of' the imagination
    who reads thes~ two sections that when you could it ever be suggested that the man who
    provide saving clauses to sUbstantive offences works in a:n electric power plant ·01' in a gas
    462 SENATE

    plant or in a water supply plant is a person negotiation, and a legal strike takes place
    who has a contract with the city for the one which is proper under the law, I think
    supply of water, light or power, so the that the situation is tantamount to one where
    language which was used made the section a there is no legal and effective contract; and
    meaningless sort of thing for a great many if there is no legal and effective contract
    years. there cannot be a breach of contract. As i
    The first three paragraphs of subsection (1) said the other day, even if the Commons
    of section 365 have been in force since 1877. had not put the saving clause in section 365
    They· read as follows: it would still be a good defence for a man
    365, (1) Everyone ·who wilfuny breaks a con- to say, "My contract is at an end for this
    tract, knowing or having reasonable cause to purpose". Therefore I had no objection to
    believe that the probable consequences of doing so the changes made in section 36.5.
    whether alone or in combination with others: Now we come to section 372, dealing with
    will be
    (a) to endanger human life, mischief. Let us consider for a moment how
    (b) to cause serious bodily injury, destructive of any meaning the saving dause
    (c) to expose valuable property, real or per- is with reference to the offence created under
    sonal, to destruction or serious injury, this section. Subsection (1) says that every
    I think any person who has any apprecia- one commits mischief who wilfully destroys
    tion of the rules and regulations needed in or daIY!-ages property. Then subsection (2)
    order that organized society may function says:
    properly and for the greatest good of the Everyone who commits m:lscltief that causes
    grea~est number, would certainly have to actual danger to life is guilty of an indictable
    offence and is liable to imprisonment for life.
    agree that some kind of substantive offence
    involving thos'e l?:rohibitions must be part And subs~ction 5 says:
    of the law of our land if we are going to Everyone who wilfully does an act or wilfully
    have an effective weapon ,for the protection omits to do an· act that it :Is h:ls duty to do is. if
    of the security and the decent living of the tha:t act or omission 15 likelY to constitute mischief
    causing actual danger to life, or to constitute mis-
    people of the cou,ntry. chief in relation to public property or private
    Hon. Mr. Reid: Will tbe honourable sena- property. guilty of an indictable offence and is
    liable to imprisonment for five years.
    tor allow a question? Take the case of a
    man who has no contraet with the company, NOW! that' is the essence of the offence-
    and is lo.oking after a small power plant wilfully. If I wilfully do an act, or wilfully
    in a small town, with a hospital probably omit to do something which it is my duty to
    depending on the plant's operation. If he do and as a result of which it Is likely to
    walks out and leaves, the city and the hos- constitute mischief,. constitute actual danger
    pitaJ without light, is there anything in that to life or to property, that is the offence.
    section to cover his case? . Then the Commons added a saving clause,
    Hon. Mr. Hayden: Of course, my friend is the effect of which is to single out a certain
    dealing with a different offence. At the section of'the community, not only the unions
    moment I was only commenting upon sec- but any employee of a 'company, and to pro-
    tion 365, 'by way of interjection, to show vide that if an employee has a contract in
    that it is not something new" that parlia- good standing and therefore has a duty to
    ment in its consideration of the code is not his employer, and if the employee has no,
    creating a new offence. grievance but, walks off the job to discuss
    labour problems or protection with other
    In paragraphs (d) and (e) of subsection {D members of his union or to picket at another
    of section 365 the language is made to be plant which is not associated or identified in
    meaningful instead of having no meaning any way with his employer, then in those
    at all. When- moving the second reading of circumstances his walking off the job is not
    the bill I referred to what might be regarded an offence under section 372..
    as the corresponding section in the present
    law, tbut it seems to me that the general Now, how can you argue logically in sup~
    observation that I made is still sound, that port of a saving clause when the offence
    if people are bound by contract to perform consists in the wilful doing of' something
    certain services or to do certain things and or the wilful omission to do something which
    they wilfully break that contract, thereby it is a duty to do? If you take that as
    endangering hv.man life, that is properly' an being the essence of the offence, and if the
    offence. man walks off the job under the circum~
    There is an exception to section 365 which stances which I have related and abandons
    covers the case of a union having a contract the operation that he is looking after, and
    with an electric power plant or some other human life is thereby endangered, how can
    organization. If the union-has exhausted all its you say that he should be excused? I would
    rights under the contract and as required say this, that quite apart from the saving
    by law in the matter of bargaining and clause, if the employee were able to go into
    MAY 11. 1954 463
    court when faced with a charge under sec~ I have also something in particular to say
    tion 372 and to say to the court that he in relation to section 52, which defines sabo-
    had no intention of doing any damage, that tage. I think we shall agree that at this time,
    he did not realize or appreciate that his possibly more than at any other time, there
    going away from work would result in dam- is need for very stringent provisions with
    age, and if the court believed his explanation, regard to sabotage, which means the doing of
    there could' be no conviction under section acts causing damage to property, and under
    372. But why should one section of the certain circumstances endangering life, and
    community be favoured by being provided which acts are prejudicial to "the safety,
    with a defence or a possible defence to a security or defence of Canada." So far as
    charge under this section, when such a section 52 is concerned, one can do such acts
    defence is not open to anybody else? to his heart's content unless it is established
    I am not speaking against the unions. My that they are prejudicial to the safety, secur-
    honourable friend has said that these sec- ity or defence of Canada. My honourable
    tions, including No. 372, have a "labour con- friend, in speaking on this matter, did not
    notation." I say in all seriousness that they seem sure whether this section should be
    have no more a labour -connotation than they linked with-or Hhitched" to, I think was the
    have a connotation in relation to any ,person expression he used-private property rights.
    who brings himself within the scope of the Suppose it may be said that the section does
    'substantive offence by doing something which not achieve that end. What is accomplished
    is made a sUbstantive offence. As far as I can by it is to "hitch" the safety, security or
    gather, the clause is not aimed at labour. It defence of Canada to those private operations
    is true that labour representatives have seen the damaging of which would be prejudicial
    in it the possibility of application to the to the safety, security, or defence of Canada.
    unions, but so may any employed man see Let me illustrate. At the Avro plant sub-
    the possibility of its application to him, or so stantial operations for the defence of Canada
    may any employer. Those who choose to are being carried ·on, yet the enterprise comes
    disregard a clear provision 'Of the law in the within the classification of a private as
    form of a SUbstantive enactment must be pre~ opposed to a publicly-owned operation of the
    pared to take their chances. Under these cir- people of Canada. Supposing in these cir-
    cumstances I do not think it is right to create cumstances some employees or groups of
    an offence which involves the intent-the employees of the plant walked out, without
    wilful intent-to destroy property or to notice, at a time when their contract was in
    endanger life, where the duty is to do exactly good standing and they, as well as the
    the opposite, and then to permit the offender employer, had duties and obligations under
    to plead that because it was in furtherance of it, and as a result of their walk-out and
    his union views and principles to meet with neglect of duty the safety, security or defence
    his brother members, he should be excused of Canada was endangered. Would it be in
    for what otherwise, under section 372 or the interests- of Canada to insert a saving
    section 52, would be an offence. It does not clause which would excuse the defendants if
    seem to me sufficient to argue that the act they could satisfy the court affirmatively that
    was done for the purpose of meeting other they left their employment, not with any
    union members to discuss matters of mutual intention prejudicial to the safety, security
    interest, or of going on a picket line to help or defence of Canada, nor with the intention
    a .brother in another industry to ·picket his of damaging property, but solely to join in a
    employer's plant. It is perfectly proper for picket line to help out union members in
    a man to go on a picket line, but if he has a respect of some entirely different industrial
    valid contract or a duty to those for whom he operation? In my opiniQn there should be
    is working he should give thought to that no qualification of the language which creates
    duty as being, perhaps, paramount at the an offence which has as its basis an act
    moment, and if he wants to assist in picketing prejudicial to the safety, security or defence
    he can do it after hours or otherwise arrange of the country. Every person should be
    his a~tivities for that purpose. required to take his chances in relation to
    I say in all seriouness, with regard to this everything he does, and to so govern and
    offence of mischief, whether it .be called regulate his actions that he shall not create
    "mischief" or "wilful damage to: property," damage to property or to life which can be
    that it is proper, in my opinion, to have in the established, by the proof required in a court
    criminal law a provision to regulate the of law, to be prejudicial to the safety, secur-
    conduct of people in their business and their ity or defence of Canada.
    day-fa-day relations, and to ensure proper For these reasons, in my view, the saving
    respect for human rights, life, and property, clauses in sections 52 and 372 in the form
    whether that property be public or private. in which they appear have no place there
    464 SENATE

    at all. -Whether there should be any qualifi- The motion was agreed to, and the bill was
    cation or modification of the rigour :with read the second time.
    which these offences are treated, I am not at
    the moment in a position to say. But in my REFERRED TO COMMITTEE
    opinion, as to sabotage, involving wilful
    damage to property and endangering life, The Hon. the Speaker: Honourable sena-
    there should be no saving clauses. The offen- tors, when shall this bill be read the third
    ces here dealt with are of such a character time?
    that for those who are brought within the On motion of Hon. Mr. Hayden, the bill
    scope of the section by virtue of having was referred to the Standing Committee of
    committed them J no alleviation should be per- Banking and Commerce.
    mitted except in respect of the penalty they
    may endur6 for the commission of such The Senate adjourned until tomorrow at
    offences. 3 p.m.
    584 SENATE

    Hon. Mr. Hayden: I move that they be con~ The report was read by the Clerk Assistant
    curred in now. as follows:
    The Standing Committee on Banking and Com_
    Hon. Mr. Reid: What is the hurry? merce, to whom was referred the Bill (419 from
    Hon. Mr. Hayden: Honourable senators, the House of Commons) lntituled: "An Aet respect~
    these amendments are formal in one sense. lng savings banks in the province of Quebec". have
    in obedience to the order of reference of June 9,
    The first one simply means that under the 1954, examined the said bill and now beg leave to
    new Bank Act the banks would have the report the same without any amendment. ,
    option of establishing whatever method they
    preferred for the transfer of their shares. THIRD READING
    Heretofore the shares CQuid only be trans- The Hon. the Speaker: Honourable sena-
    ferred on the books of the company, but this tors, when shall this bill be read the third
    amendment would incorporate in the Bank time?
    Act the provisions in the Companies Act of
    Canada dealing with methods of transfer. The Hon. Mr. Hayden: I move the third read-
    second amendment simply strikes out one ing now.
    line in the form in Schedule L. This change The motion was agreed to, and the bill
    does not impair the security of the bank was read the third time, and passed.
    at all, and it relieves the borrower from
    possible additional expense and possible addi- CRIMINAL CODE BILL
    tional paper work in connection with loans
    on oil in or upon the groWld or otherwise. REPORT OF COMMITTEE-AMENDMENTS
    CONCURRED IN
    The motion was agreed to and the amend- Hon. Mr. Haydenl Chairman of the Stand~
    ments were concurred in. ing Committee on Banking and Commerce,
    The Hon. the Speaker: When shaH this bill, presented the report of the committee on
    as amended, be re<.ld the third time? Bill 7, an Act'respecting the criminal law.
    Hon. Mr. Hayden: Now. Hon. Mr. Macdonald\ Honourable sena-
    Han. Mr. Reid: Next sitting. tors, as there are quite a nwnber of amend-
    ments to this bi.ll it might be well to have
    the reading by the Clerk Assistant dispensed
    BANK OF CANADA BILL
    with, and to ask the Chairman of the com~
    REPORT OF COMMITTEE mittee if he will be good enough to explain
    Hon. Mr. Hayden. Chairman of the Stand- them.
    ing Committee on Banking and Commerce, FOT text of the committee's report, see
    presented the report of the commiittee on appendix to today's Report of Debates, p. 604.
    Bill 297.
    Hon. Salter A. Hayden moved concurrence
    The report was read by the Clerk Assistant in the amendments. .
    as follows:
    The Standing Committee on Banking and Com- He said: Honourable senators, the first of
    merce, to whom was referred the Bill (297 from the the amendments contained in the report has
    House of Commons) intituled: "An Act to amend to do with the question of appeals in the
    the Bank of Canada Act", have in obedience to the case of contempt in criminal proceedings. It
    order of reference of June 8, 1954, examined the
    said bill and now beg leave to report the same will be recalled- that, in the bill which we
    without any amendment. sent to the Commons on two occasions, we
    provided for the first time a right of appeal
    THIRD READING in respect of a contempt committed in the face
    The Han. ihe Speaker: Honourable sena- of the court. That right was limited to
    tors, when shall this bill be read the third appeal from a sentence, because we felt ,that
    time? in those circumstances, in order to maintain I

    the dignity of the court, there should be no


    Hon. Mr. Hayden: I move the third read- right of appeal from the judge's decision
    ing now. that contempt had been committed. The
    The motion was agreed to, and the bill was second thing we did was to provide a right
    read the third time, and passed. of appeal from conviction and sentence in
    any cases where -contempt had taken place
    QUEBEC SAVINGS BANK BILL other than in the face of the court. Honour~
    able senators will have read during the last I
    REPORT OF COMMITTEE yeal' or so reports of newspaper editors hav-
    Hon. Mr. Hayden. Chairman of the Stand- ing been hauled to court to answer citations
    ing Committee on Banking and Commerce, for contempt. It is that type of offence I
    presented the report of the committee on refer to when I speak of contempt other
    Bill 419. than in the face of a court.
    JUNE 10. 1954 585

    On the form that the bill was returned sheriff proceeds to the place where persons
    here the last time, the House of Commons are supposed to be unlawfully and riotously
    had changed the provisions governing assembled, he is to satisfy himself that a riot
    appeals and had provided for an appeal both is in fact in progress before he proceeds to
    from conviction and senten-ceJ whether the read the riot act.
    contempt was committed in the face of the The fourth amendment made by the com-
    court or otherwise; but this right I\vas ex- mittee is in connection with the seizure of
    pressed not to be absolute, but only with leave telephone equipment in a betting house. Sec-
    of the court of appeal or a judge of the court tion 171 contains an exception which pre-
    of appeal. We debated this change in this vents police officers from seizing and destroy-
    chamber and considered it again in commit- . ing telephone equipment in a betting house.
    tee; we heard representations from the But in the complementary section, section 431,
    Minister of Justice; and the report of your persons executing a warrant may seize and
    -committee is that the position which we detain materials and equipment suspected
    originally took is the sound one. We have to be used in the commission of an offence.
    therefore restored the appeal provision with The exception provided for in section 171
    respect to contempt which we originally apparently had not been carried through to
    incorporated in the bill. section 431, and in order to make the law
    . The second item is an amendment of sec- abundantly clear we have amended the bill
    tion 25 of the bill. This amendment was so as to ensure that the exception against
    inserted at the request of the Department of this seizure of telephone equipment applies
    Justice. The law as it is contains a pro- to both sections 171 and 431.
    vision, which has been in the' Code for a At the request of the department the com-
    very long time, whereunder a police officer mittee made an amendment to section 178,
    may use such force as is necessary in the dealing with pari-mutuel betting.
    apprehension or to prevent the escape of a Several amendments were proposed by the
    person who is suspected of having committed department in connection with section 400,
    an offence for which he may be arrested dealing with the printing of circulars, et
    without warrant, the only restriction being cetera, in likeness of notes. T-he amendments
    that he must not employ more violence than have to do with the kind, of offences that
    is necessary to accomplish the arrest or pre- would be involved, and they have been incor-
    vent the escape. For some reason or other porated in section 400.
    this was onHtted in the draft bill of the Another' amendment has to do with the
    Criminal Code Revision Commission, and in
    question of habeas corpus. In sections 690
    subsequent redrafts by parliament. The and 691 of the bill as it came before out
    Senate committee, which was asked to insert committee there was provision for a hearing,
    it, discussed the matter at length, and at the
    in connection with habeas corpus proceedings
    reouest of one of our members the item on the merits, and then a right of appeal.
    even stood over for a number of days. Under the present la\v a person may apply
    Finally the Minister of Justice made his for a writ of habeas corpus on the ground
    representations on it, and the committee that there is no legal basis for his detention
    decided to incorporate it in secti<?n 25. in custody. As the law now stands, if I were
    The third amendment has to do with sec- instructed· on behalf of some person who
    tion 68, dealing with the reading of pro- thought he was so illegally detained I could
    clamations in connection with riots. In the apply to any judge of the Supreme Court of
    way in which the section was drafted it. Ontario and ask him for a writ of habeas
    appeared that if a justice, mayor or sherL-'T corpHS. If he granted it the writ would be
    or the lawful deputy of a mayor or sheriff delivered to the jailer, and the jailer would
    received notice of a riot) the section was be instructed, under that writ, to. deliver
    mandatory: the mayor or official in question up the body of the man detained at a certain
    was required to proceed to the place where day, in order that the question of whether the
    the unlawful assembly was supposed to be man was or was not being held legally in
    taking place and read the riot act. It custody might be determined. If the judge
    appeared to many senators that) notwith- refused to grant me the writ, I could go to
    standing other provisions in the act, there other judges who might be available until
    was no' discretionary power, and that a'
    situation might occur where the mayor or I might find one who felt there was some
    official, after -receiving notice of an unlaw- merit in the application, or that there was an
    ful assembly, might get to the place and find issue which should be inquired into; and my
    a very peaceful gathering. Our amendment rights of appeal in that sense would fail
    provides that when the justice, mayor or only when I had exhausted the number of
    sheriff or the lawful deputy of a mayor or judges who were available.
    83280-38
    586 SENATE

    The committee gave serious consideration Before I take my seat, I waut to express
    to the amendments in the bill, and the opinion my gratitude to the members of the sUb-
    of the majority of the members-it was almost committee and of the main committee that
    a unanimous opinion-was that the present worked on this bill and helped to expedite I

    procedure should be continued) and that the the bringing of it to the present stage.
    proppsed new procedure should not be adop~ Hon. Senatol:s: Hear, hear.
    ted, particularly that providing for an appeal
    after the first refusal by a judge. Under the The motion was agreed to, and the amend-
    appeal provision, even if a judge granted the ments were concurred in.
    writ of habeas corpus, the crown would have THmD READING
    a right of appeal, in which case there would
    be a delay of seven days, tor that would be The Hon. the Speaker: Honourable senators, I

    the earliest time at which the appeal CQuid when shall this bill as amended be read the
    be heard.' On the appeal, if it was decided third time?
    that the man was illegally detained he 'Would Hon. W. Ross Macdonald: Honourable sena~
    have spent that much longer time in illegal tors, we have heard the honourable senator
    detention. We finally concluded that if any from Toronto (Han. Mr. Hayden) explain the
    judge of the Supreme Court decided there was amendments very fully. The bill has received
    something to inquire into, the inquiry should very careful consideration both from the
    go ahead and should not be interfered with committee to which the bill was referred and
    by giving the crown a right of appeal at that from this house. It now becomes necessary
    stage, when all that a judge has to determine for the House of Commons to consider our
    is: aOn the facts presented to me, is there amendments. If honourable senators are
    anything on which there should be some agreeable I will move that the bill be read
    - inquiry to determine whether or not the man the third time now, so that it may be returned
    has been illegally detained?" The judge to the House of Commons today.
    makes that decision. Han. John T. Haig: Honourable senators,
    The other amendments relate to the French I concur in what the Leader of the Govern~
    translation of the bill. Apparently some ques- ment (Hon. Mr. Macdonald) has said. This
    tion arose as to the use in certain sections of is the most important piece of legislation that
    the proper French word to describe the par- the Senate has had to deal with in recent
    ticular offence, and in some instances mem- ye?rs. A considerable amount of work was
    bers of the committee \vho are very familiar devoted to the revision of the Code in two
    with the French terminology felt that in some previous sessions, as well as in this one, and
    sections the translator had not used the when the bill becomes la'w a very real
    precise word to describe in French the par- advance in Canadian criminal jurisprudence
    ticular offence dealt with in the English will have been made. I think that through
    text. A number of amendments were passed its work on this bill the Senate has done
    to correct that situation. itself great credit. In saying so, I am not
    speaking of myself, but rather in particular
    In substance, those are all the amendments
    I need to deal with now. I wish to add· that of those four or five members who did so
    much work on the original bill. I wish to
    it is a source of satisfaction that we have the pay a special tribute to the chairman of the
    Code in its present form possibly on the last committee to which this bill was referred
    leg of its journey, so to speak, toward enact- (Han. Mr. Hayden). He rendered great
    ment. This result has been achieved after the· service.
    bill has been in committee on three different
    occasions and considerable time has been Hon. Senators: Hear, hear.
    spent in reviewing and studying its pro- Han. Mr. Haig: I pay this tribute to him
    visions, and changing them where we thought not only because of his outstanding legal
    it necessary. ability but because of the courteous way in
    Although this bill may be passed> and which he treated everyone of us, even though
    become law, I am not too. hopeful that no we did not agree with all his proposals. I
    fUrther amendments to the Code will be appreciate what he said about the possibility
    required from year to year. We may think of future amendments to the Code. We can-
    that certain sections are perfect, but in actual not expect any legislation to be perfect, and
    from time to time after this law has been
    'practice, when one runs up against a particu- tested in the courts some amendments will I
    lar case and it is necessary to apply the law, no doubt be found necessary. While I am a
    defects or weaknesses in drafting are often lawyer I have not had a great deal of experi-
    revealed, and it is found that a provision has ence in criminal practice and am not an I
    not been sufficiently expended or narrowed. authority on the subject. However, I can
    JUNE 10, 1954 587

    assure the house that in the consideration of ADJOURNMENT


    this bill in committee every attempt was Hon. Mr. Macdonald: Honourable senators,
    made to give the benefit of any doubt to an I move that when this house rises today it
    accused person and to ensure that an innocent stand adjourned until Tuesday next at 3 p.m.
    person would not b~ deprived of his free- I would remind honourable senators that,
    dom. in accordance with the notice read by His
    Historically speaking, this has been an Honour the Speaker, Royal Assent will take
    interesting piece of legislation. The original place at 5.45 this afternoon, and the whips are
    bill that came to us was drafted by the anxious to have as many senators in attend-
    Criminal Code Revision Commission, and ance as possible.
    while I do not direct any criticism at the
    members of the commission it can be said
    they were people who had been engaged more FEMALE EMPLOYEES IN CIVIL SERVICE
    or less on the crown's side of the law. When INQUIRY AND ANSWER
    that early bill came before the subcommittee Hon. Muriel Mea. Fergusson inquired of
    of our Committee on Banking and Commerce the government:-
    it was considered by men who for the most 1. What was the number of permanent and tem-
    part had been on the side of the defence. porary female employees in the Federal Civil Ser-
    Obviously, after years of experience along a vice, as of October 31, 1953?
    certain line, one forms his own ideas of 2. How many of these employed women are
    single?
    things.
    Speaking for the members of the committee Hon. Mr. Macdonald: The answer to the
    which passed upon the bill now before us, I first question ·asked by the honourable senator
    can say that the bill is the embodiment of is as follows:
    British justice. I feel sure that it represents 1. As of October 31, 1953, there were in the gov-
    a great advance in criminal law, and that in ernment service of Canada 30,389 women of whom
    the years to come senators will stand up in 23,149 were temporary and 7,240 permanent
    employees.
    this house and pay tribute to the men and
    women of the Senate of 1951-54 for the The second question asked by the honour-
    service they rendered in helping the Parlia- able senator is not as easily answered. I
    ment of Canada to enact a reasonably sound regret to say that I have been unable to
    criminal code. obtain the information requested.
    Hon. Senators: Hear, hear. Hon. Mr. Howard: We want to know.
    The motion was agreed 'to, and the bill Hon. Mrs. Fergusson: Honourable senators,
    as amended was read the third time, and perhaps I worded my second question awk-
    pass-eel. wardly, but I thought that the Civil Service
    kept a record of the status of their employees.
    CANADIAN NATIONAL RAILWAYS BILL I seem to recall from my own experience
    CONSTRUCTION OF LINES IN QUEBEC AND that employees are asked about their marital
    ONTARIO-REPORT OF COMMITTEE status, and I wonder if the Civil Service dpes
    not have some record which would provide
    Hon. A. K. Hugessen. Chairman of the that information.
    Standing Committee on Transport and Com-
    munications, presented the report of the HOll. Mr. Macdonald: I shall be glad to
    committee on Bill 442. make a further inquiry to ascertain whether
    it is possible to get the information which the
    The report was read by the Clerk Assistant 'honourable senator seeks. I am glad she did
    as follows: not ask me the ages of the female employees,
    The Standing Committee on Transport and Com-
    m\.mications, to whom was referred the Bill (442 for that information might be 'Still more
    from the House of Commons) intituled: "An Act difficult to obtain.
    respecting the construction of lines of railway by
    Canadian National Railway Company from St.
    FeUcien to Chibougamau and from Chibougamau CRIMINAL CODE (RACE MEETINGS) BILL
    to BeattyvIlle, all in the province of Quebec, and THIRD READING
    from Hillsport on the matn line of the Canadian
    National Railways to Manitouwadge Lake, both in On the Order:
    the province of Ontario", have in obedience to the Third reading of Bill (Q-15), intituled. "An Act
    order of reference of June 3, 1954. examined the to amend the Criminal Code (Race Meetings).-
    said bill, and now beg leave to report the same (Hon. Senator Ma.cdonald).
    without any amendment.
    Hon. Mr. Macdonald: Honourable senators
    The Hon. :the Speaker: Honourable sena- will recall that this bill received second
    tors, when shall this bill be read the third reading yesterday afternoon. I was under
    time? the impression at that time that the Banking
    Hon. Mr, Aseltine: Next sitting. and Commerce Committee's report on Bill 7

    83280-38,
    604 SENATE

    APPENDIX
    (See page 584.)
    The Standing Committee on Banking and 4. Page 57-, lines 43 to 49: stri1te out sub~
    Commerce, to whom was referred the Bill clause (6) and substitute therefor the fol~
    (7 from the House of Commons) intituled~ HAn lowing:
    Act respecting the Criminal Law", have in H(6.) Nothing in this section or in section
    obedience to the order of reference of 11th 431 authorizes the seizure, forfeiture or
    May, 1954, examined the said bill and now destruction of telephone, telegraph or other
    beg leave to report the English version of the communication facilities or equipment that
    bill with the following amendments: may be evidence of or that may have been
    1. Page 10, lines 1 to 9: strike out clause used in the commission of an offence under
    9 and substitute therefor the following: section 176, 177, 179 or 182 and that is o\vned
    "9. (1) Where a court, judge, justice, or by a person engaged in providing telephone,
    magistrate summarily convicts a person for telegraph 'or other communication service to
    a contempt of court committed in the face of the public or forming part of the telephone, I

    the cQurt and imposes punishment in respect telegraph or other communication service or
    thereof, that person may appeal against the sYGtem of such a person."
    punishment imposed. 5. Page 61: immediately after line 38 insert
    the following as subclause (2) and re-number
    (2) "Vhere a court or judge summarily con~ the subsequent subclauses accordingly:
    viets a person for a contempt of court not "(2) Subsection (1) does not apply in respect
    committed in the face of the court and pun- of a race meeting conducted by an associa-
    ishment is imposed in respect thereof, that tion mentioned in subparagraph (i) of para-
    person may appeal graph (c) of that subsection in a province
    (a) from the conviction, or other than a province in which the associa-
    (b) against the punishment imposed. tion, before the 1st day of May, 1954, con-
    (3) An appeal under this section lies to ducted a race meeting with pari-mutuel
    the court of appeal of the province in which betting under the supervision of"' an officer
    the proceedings take place, and, for the pur- appointed by the Minister of Agriculture."
    poses of this section, the provisions of Part 6. Page 62, line 19: strike out "(2) and
    XVIII apply, mutatis mutandis." (3)" and substitute therefor "(3) and (4)".
    2. Page 13, lines 8 to 14: strike Qut sub- 7. Page 134, line 14: insert after H400."
    clause (3) of clause 25· and sUbstitute therefor 11(1)".
    the following: 8. Page 134; immediately after line 22,
    "(3) Subject to sUbsection (4), -a person is insert the following as sub clauses (2) and
    (3):-
    not justified for the purposes of subsection
    H(2) Everyone who publishes or prints
    (1) in using force that is intended or is likely
    anything in the likeness or appearance of
    to caUse death or grievous bodily harm unless (a) all or part of a current bank note or
    he believes on reasonable and probable current paper money, or
    grounds that it is necessary for the purpose (b) all or part of any obligation or security
    of preserving himself or anyone under his of a government or a bank,
    protection from death or grievous bodily is guilty of an offence punishable on summary
    harm. conviction.
    (4) A peace officer who is proceeding law- (3) No person shall be convicted of an
    fully to arrest, with or without warrant, any offence under subsection (2) where it is
    person for an offence for which that person established that, in publishing or printing
    may be arrested without warrant, and every anything to which that SUbsection applies,
    one lawfully assisting the peace officer, is (a) no photography was used at any stage
    justified, if the person to be arrested takes for the purpose of publishing or print-
    flight to avoid arrest, in using as much force ing it, except in connection with pro-
    as is necessary to prevent the escape by flight, cesses necessarily involved in trans-
    unless the escape can be prevented by reason- ferring a finished drawing or sketch to
    able means in a less violent manner." a printed surface,
    (b) except for the word 'Canada', nothing
    3. Page 24, l1ne 42: after "do", insert the having the appearance of a word, letter
    words "if he is satisfied that a riot is in or numeral was a complete word, letter
    progress," or numeral,
    JUNE 10. 1954 605

    (c) no representation of a human face or 12. Page 148, lines 26 and 27: Delete
    flgure was more than a general indica- "prevoit expressement Ie contraire" and sub-
    j

    tion of features, without detail, stitute therefor ICy pourvoit expressement de


    (d) no more than one colour was used, fa~on differente".
    and 13. Page 149, lines 1 and 2: Delete "prevoit
    (e) nothing in the likeness or appearance expressement Ie contraire" 1 and substitute
    of the back of a current bank note or therefor "y pourvoit expressement de fa~on
    current paper money was published dUferente".
    or printed in any form."
    9. Page 238, lines 10 to 18: strike out clause 14. Page 153, lines 10 and 11: Delete
    890 and substitute therefor the following:- "prevoit expressement Ie contraire", and
    . "690. Nothing in this Act limits or affects substitute therefor "y pourvoit expressement
    any provision of the Supreme Court Act that de fat;on difI-erente". '
    relates to writs of habeas corpu-s arising out 15. Page 156, line 2: D~lete Hpenale", and
    of criminal matters." substitute therefor Hcriminelle".
    10. Page 238, lines 19 to 32: strike out 16. Page 231, Iin'es 45 to 48: Delete clause
    clause 691 and sUbstitute therefor the fo1- 624 0), and SUbstitute therefor:
    lowing:- "624.(1) Une sentence commence au moment
    "691. (1) An appeal lies to the court of Ott elle est imposee, sauf lorsqu'une disposi-
    appeal from a decision granting or refusing tion applicable y pourvoit de faQon difierente
    the relief sought in proceedings by way of ou que 1a cour en ordonne autrement".
    mandamus1 certiorari or prohibition.
    (2) The provisions of Part XVIII apply, 17. Page 236, line 17: Delete "Sauf disposi-
    'mutatis mutandis1 to appeals under this tions contraireslJ , and substitute therefor
    section." "S&uf lorsqu'il y est autrement pourvu".
    Your committee beg leave to report the 18. Page 236, line 44: Delete "sau! disposi-
    French version of the bill with the following tions contraireslJ , and substitute therefor
    amendments: . "sauf lorsqu'il y est autrement pourvul l •
    1. In the title: Delete "penal ll, and sub~ 19. Page 259, line 1, Delete "Sauf si la loi
    sE tute therefor- "criminel". prevoit Ie contraire", and substitute therefor
    2. Page I, line 5: Number from (1) to "Sauf s1 la 101 y paurvoit dHferemment".
    (4.4), inclusively, the 44 definitions prescribed 20. Page 268, line 34: Delete "contraires",
    in clause 2, a-ccording to their French alpha- and substitute therefor 'Idifferentes".
    betical order.
    3. Page 7, line 19: Delete I'tout", and sub- 21. Page 270, line 19: Delete Hconsentent
    stitute therefor "une debenture,". au contraire", and substitu'te therefor "en
    4. Page 8, line 7: Delete "(32)", and sub- conviennent autrement".
    stitute therefor "(7)". 22. Page 275, lines 40 and 41: Delete
    5. Page 8, lines 15, 20 and 25: Delete "(42)", "decision contestee", and substitute therefor
    and substitute therefor 11(41)". IIdate a laquelle a ete rendue la decision mise
    6. Page 8, line 21: Delete "de l'immeuble", en question".
    and substitute therefor "des biens-fonds". 23. Page 283, lines 4 and 17: Delete
    7. Page 9, line 25: Delete "penal", and ilpenal", and substitute therefor "criminel".
    SUbstitute therefor j'criminel". 24. Page 296, Form 14: Last line of the last
    8. Page 12, line 24.: Delete' Hprovoquee", paragraph: Delete "contraire" and substitute
    and substitute therefor jjinciteeJJ • therefor Hdifferent".
    9. Page 37, line 33: Delete upenal", and 25. Page 299, Form 17: Last line of the
    substitute therefor "criminel". last paragraph: Delete I'qu'on l'en sorte", and
    10. Page 96, line 15: Immediately after the
    substitute therefor Hqu'll soit livre en d'autres
    word I'billet", insert "une debenture".
    11. Page 148, lines 1 and 2: Delete "prevoit mains".
    expressement Ie contraire", and SUbstitute 26. Page 302, Form 20: Second last line of
    therefor "y pourvoit expressement de faQon thE: last paragraph: Delete "qu'on l'en sorte",
    difi'erente" . and substitute ther:efor "qu'il soit libere".
    JUNE 16, 1954 639

    THE SENATE The report is as follows:


    The Special Joint Committee of the Senate and
    the House of Commons on Capital and Corporal
    Punishment and Lotteries begs leave to present the
    following as its third report.
    Wednesday, June 16, 1954 On January 12, 1954, the House of Commons
    passed the following resolution:
    The Senate met at 3 p.m" the Speaker in That a Joint Committee of both Houses of Parlia-
    the Chair. ment be appointed to inquire into and report upon
    the questions whether the criminal law of Canada
    Prayers. relating to (a) capital punishment, (b) corporal
    Routine proceedings. pUnishment or (c) lotteries should be amended
    in any respect and, if so, in what manq.er and to
    what extent;
    CRIMINAL CODE BILL That 17 members of the House of Commons. to
    be designated at a later date. be members of the
    AMENDMENTS CONCURRED IN BY COMMONS Joint Committee on the part of this house and that
    Standing Order 65 of the House of Commons be
    A message was received from the House of suspended in relation thereto;
    Commons returning Bill 7, an Act respecting That the committee have power to appoint, from
    the criminal law, and acquainting the Senate among its members, such subcommittees as may be
    that they have agreed to the amendments deemed advisable or necessary; to call for persons,
    papers and records; to :sit While the house is sitting
    made by the Senate to this bill) without and to report from time to time;
    amendment. That the committee have power to print such
    papers and evidence from day to day as may be
    ordered by the committee for the use of the com~
    PRIVATE BILL mittee and of parliament, and that Standing Order
    CANADIAN SLOVAK LEAGUE-COMMONS 64 of the House of Commons be suspended in
    AMENDMENT relation thereto;
    And that a message be sent to the Senate request-
    A message was received from the House of ing that house to unite with this house for the
    Commons returning Bill N-15, an Act to above purpose and to select. if the Senate deems
    incorporate Canadian Slovak League, and advisable, some of its members to act on the pro-
    acquainting the Senate that they have passed posed Joint Committee.
    The following members of the House of Commons
    this bill with one amendment to which they were subsequently- appOinted to the Joint
    desire the concurrence of the Senate. Committee;
    Me:;lsrs. Boisvert, Brown (Brantford). Brown
    The amendment was read by the Clerk (Essex West), Cameron (High Park), Decore,
    Assistant as follows: Dupuis, Fairey, Fulton, Garson, Lusby Mitchell
    Page 2, lines 41, 42 and 43: (London), Montgomery, Murphy (Westmorland),
    Strike out the following: Shaw, Thatcher. Valois and Winch.
    . "Only persons deemed by the Society to be loyal On February 10, 1954, the following resolution
    to the free institutions of Canada and to the was adopted in the Senate:
    Christian and democratic traditions of the Slovak That the Senate do unite with the House of
    nation," Commons in the appointment of a Joint Committee
    and insert: of both Houses of Parliament to inquire into and
    "Only persons deemed by the Society to be of report upon the questions whether the criminal
    Slovak origin and loyal to the free institutions of law of Canada relating to (a) capital punishment,
    Canada and Christian and democratic traditions," (b) corporal punishment or (c) lotteries, should be
    amended in any respect and. if so, in what manner
    The Hon. the Speaker: Honourable sena- and to what extent:
    tors, when shall the amendment be taken into That the following senators be appointed on
    consideration? behalf of the Senate on the said Joint Committee,
    namely. the Honourable Senators Aseltine, Beau~
    Hon. Mr. Macdonald: Next sitting. regard, Bouffard, Farris, Ferguson, Hayden. Hodges,
    McDonald, Roebuck and Veniot.
    That the committee have power to appoint, from
    CRIMINAL CODE among its members, such subcommittees as may be
    deemed advisable or necessary and to sit while the
    REPORT OF JOINT COMMITTEE ON CERTAIN House is sitting,
    QUESTIONS OF CRIMmAL LAW That the committee have power to print such
    papers and> evidence from day to day as may be
    Hon. Mr. Hayden, Joint Chairman of the ordered by the committee for the use of the com-
    Special Joint Committee of the Senate and mittee and of parliament,
    House of Commons on Capital and Corporal That the committee have power to send for per~
    sons, papers and records, and to report to the
    Punishment and Lotteries, presented the third Senate from time to time. That a message be
    report of the committee. sent to the House of Commons to inform that house
    accordingly.
    The Clerk Assistant (reading): On March 2, 19-54, both houses of parliament
    The Special Joint Committee of the Senate and authorized the committee to retain the services of
    the House of Commons- counsel.
    The original membership of the committee was
    Hon. Mr. Macdonald: Dispense. changed on February 15 by the SUbstitution of Mrs.
    130 'SENATE ~

    'HI did not understand any item I inquired Hon., Mr. Macdonald. I think it is a ques-
    -and got the information. Of course-{ I was tion 'that should be considered, by the Com_
    very disappointed that the Chairman of the mittee on Divorce.
    Committee on Finance, the honourable sena- . .Wh.e~1:ler at. th~ n~xt sess:ion parliament
    tor from Churchill (Hon; Mr. Crerar), did should meet for a short time before Phrlstmas
    not set up his. committee-. to' study. these and resume late i!l. J.a~u~ry" or m~et early
    estimates, and I would like him to tell us in January and continue -until the bushiess
    why. The committee did· not meet last is completed, is' a matter of opinion. T- am
    session for the" reairin that parliament- com- .not in. a' position to say which is the more
    pleted· its ,vork- at ail earlier date' than- usual 'acceptable procedure,. but -I shaill (!e~tainly
    '50 as to allow many honourable senators and bring my friend's views in the matter to the
    "members of the House ot" Commons to··attend ,attention.-'of the ·government.
    the' :Coronation . of ," our beautiful yo'Ung The :motion vias agreed' to, and the bin
    'Queen. ·But during a number" of preceding was 'r~a4 ih_e s~con~ .t~me.
    'sessions' the' 'committee ·did functioIi~ and' in
    "my cmfnion: ft greatly' facilitated a thorough •. THmD READING
    -study ot the detailed- estimates by this branch . . Tne Hon •. :I:l':~ Speakej::. Honourable senato~s,
    ,of parliamEmt. when' shall this bill' be. read the third time.!
    :ijon. Senators; Hear, hear. Hon. Mr.•." MacdQ~ald.: I move the third
    i Hon. Mr •. Asel1ineCI. think I a111 .in order reading(,now.·
    in' ·asking· the. honourable senator.' from The"' motion' was agreed to,' and th~' bill
    Churchill (Hon. Mr. Crerar) to .. tell US'. why :;,vas rea:U tlie third !fme, a~d passed." .
    .he. 4id ,not 'set J.lp··the F.inan.c~ committee this
    session· and provide, us with. t.~e .same. oppor~ Hon. Mr. Ma.cdonal~d:; Honou;~bie ~enator'sJ
    tunity_ we had .in previous·y~ars to ..s:tudy the ai:,- indicated -by' the notice read by' His Honour
    esUma;-tes .in advanc~ .of their. -presentation the Speaker; the De"pu"ty Of' His ~x-c'ellency
    .to"this house. An -ann~al budge~ oi apprpxi- ,vITI - arrive" '- at this - cpamber momentarily.'
    mately, five billiop. dollars. is by_ no " means 'Pending' hiff ardvaf, . I move -that the house
    "peanuts". . Although honquraple. senators 'adjourn during pleasur~,. . -, -,
    have had--the estimates before them for some 'rhe Senate adjou,ned during, pleasure.
    time, we would have- been in a mu-ch better . _ . '
    position to. consider tq.em ·.from th~ stand- PROROGATION QF PARLIAMENT,
    :point of the publi~ interest if we had had an THE ROYAL ASSENT-SPEECH·FROM ..
    oPP9r:tunity to reView- them item by item jn . T~ TH:aON~
    ,committee.
    . The 'Honourable Patrick Kerwin;'. the: De·
    , Honourable senators, my supporters to my ptity of His Excellency the Gover~or~ General,
    right and to my left- having come' and being seated at the foot
    Hon. Se'nalors: Hear, hear. of the Throne, and the House of Commons
    'Hon. Mr. Asel1inet -suggest that I say having been sut:nmoned, and being come w~th
    nothing further at this' .time .. their' Speaker, the Honourable the Depu_ty
    of the Governor General was pleased to give
    Hon. Mr. Macdonald: Honourable. senators, th~'Royal Ass",nt te;' the' following bills: ' '
    we have all enjoyea the remar:k~ of the hon-
    An Act for the relief of -FranciS Walsh.. .-_
    :ourable acting' Leader of the Opposition An Act for the relief of Hi1~a Atule park.e
    (Hon. Mr. Aseltine). Marshall. .
    r list~ned- \~ith .interest to his' expression Sacchitelle.
    An -Act for the 'relief of Claude Raphael
    .
    .of' 'disapproval' of the 'proc~dur~ and the An Act for the relief of Isabel .Mary Peebles
    ,results that followed in the handling of a .Brown Macartney-FUgate.
    'cert"ain divorce 1:iiil in the other housel and An Act for the. relief of. Wilfrid Lavoie.
    the results' that followed. . Any suggestion - An Act for the relief of Joseph Edgar Emi1i~n

    divorce bills' for the purpose of preventing "La:~r~~t_ fat" the relief of Joseph Vict~~ Geraid
    'as to change of -procedure in the handling 'of
    Fontaine. . _: ','
    a recu~ren:ce of what happened til this An Act for the relief of Jeanne Robert Hotte.'
    in'stance snould; I think, be made after a An Act for the relief of Heneault Champagne •
    -consideration of the matter by our committee. .- . "An Act f6r the relief oJ! Leopold Ruel.·
    . An Act to provide Diplomatic and' consular
    Hon. M~. AseUin.e: I brought 'the q1,lesti~n immunities for CO'mmonwealth representatives tp
    'before· the- hQUse-, at this time in the 11012e ·_Canad·a.. . - .
    ,that ,some thought might be given to the ..' An Act respecting the. construction of lines of
    railway' by Canadian. National Railway COrJ!.PaIlY
    problem between now' and when we next -ironi" St.·Feliclim to Chlbougamau and from ChlbO~.
    ,meet. gamau to Beattyville. alL in the _province of Queb e ,
    JUNE 26, 1954 :131

    and from Hillspol't..on the main Une of the Cana- . We ,aU rejoiced at the -recent decision of th9
    dian National Railways to.Manitouwadge Lake, both ,Supreme Court of the United States w.hi~h removed
    in the provPice. of Oritario, .. tlie last serious legal obstacle. to t!J.e development
    ""An' Act' respecting "the criminal law. of the .St. Lawrence project arid Which how, clears
    ihe W!lY for actual construction of b'oth t~e naviga~
    An Act to amend the C;ustoms Tariff. . tion facilities and the--power installations.
    An Act to amend -the National Harbours Board The.Pipe Lines ·Act w-as amended to -give juris ..
    A~,~··; " :. :-:' . - _. _ _ .' . ·diction to the Board of Transport Commissioners
    ,- - An Act to amend the Criminal Code (Race ·over aU companies, authorized to construct or oper-
    l\'Ieetlngs)'. .. . ate interprovincial or internation~l oil or gas pipe
    An Act respecting banks and banking. lines and most of the difficulties in the way of the
    amend
    An' Act -to "the Itlcome Tax' Act.
    building of a pipe line to -transport natural gas
    from Alberta to Ontario and Quebec have been
    An Act to authorize the provision of moneys to overcome.
    meet certain capital expenditures of the Canadian You enacted a measure to authorize the Canadian
    National Railways System during the calendar year National _Railway Company to extend its lines in
    1954, and to authorize the guarantee by Her Majesty Northern Quebec and Northern Ontario.
    of certain securities to be issued by the Canadian The National Housing Act was revIsed and pro-
    National Railway Company. vision made to increase and broaden the supply of
    An Act to incorporate Canadian Slovak League. mortgage money so that mOre people with moder~
    An Act to provide for allowances for disabled ate incomes would be able to find facilities to
    persons. assist them in building their own homes,
    An Act to amend the Pipe Lines Act. As required by law you made the decennial
    An Act to repeal the National Physical Fitness revision of the Bank Act at the present session and
    Act. extended the charters of the eleven chartered banks
    for a period of ten years. Among the amendments
    An Act to amend the Judges Act. made were those which permit a bank to make
    An Act respecting benefits for members of the loans on the security of insured mortgages and to
    Canadian forces. make .small loans on the security of household
    An Act to amend the Excise Tax Act. goods and chattels. The Quebec Savings Banks
    An Act respecting extra-provincial motor vehicle Act and the Bank of Canada Act were also revised.
    transport. In further recognition of the services of Canada's
    An Act to amend the Pension Act. veterans of two World Wars and of Korea you have
    made amendments to the War Service Grants Act:
    An Act to amend the Atomic Energy Control Act. the Veterans' Land Act; and the Children of War
    An Act to amend the Veterans' Land Act. Dead (Education Assistance) Act; the Veterans
    An Act to amend the Public Service Superannua- Benefit Act; and the Pension Act.
    tion Act. You enacted a measure to provide for a federal
    An Act for granting to Her Majesty certain contribution to the payment in co~operation with
    sums of money for the public service of the finan- the provincial governments of pensions to disabled
    cial year ending the 31st March, 1955. persons in need over the age of eighteen years.
    This legislation is a further instalment In the long.
    After which the Honourable the Deputy range social securlty program of the government.
    of the Governor General was pleased to close During this session you completed the revision of
    the First Session of the Twenty-Second Par- the Criminal Code.
    liament with the following speech: To meet the situation created by the decision of
    the courts that extra~provlnclal highway transport
    Honourable Members of the Senate: was under the jurisdiction of this parliament. you
    Members of the House of Commons: enacted a measure to provIde for the regulation in
    agreement with the provincial authorities of biter·
    As I bring the present session to a close. the provincial and international highway transport by
    politi~al tension throughout the world is a grim provincial agencies established to regulate highway
    reminder that the first concern of the government transport within the several provinces.
    must 15e the maintenance of the necessary strength
    to deter aggression while we continue to strive for Other measures which you enacted included: the
    the establishment of peace in the wodd. Ontario-Manitoba Boundary Act. 1953; the United
    Kingdom Financial _Agreement Act. 1953; an Act
    Our country Is meeting every commitment we respecting the National Battlefields at Quebec; the
    have made for our national defence and for inter- Northwest Atlantic Fisheries Convention Act; the
    national projects for relief, rehabilitation, technical
    assistance and the economic advancement of other Export and Import Pennits Act; Fire Losses
    peoples materially less fortunate than OUr own. Replacement Account Act; the Canadian Forces
    Our external trade continues at a high level. Act, 1954; an Act respecting inventions by public
    Although there is still in Western Canada a huge servants; and an Act to provide diplomatic and
    volume of wheat resulting from the three succes- consular immunities for Commonwealth representa-
    sive record crops, our grain exports continue to tives in Canada.
    exceed the ten~year average. Amendments have been made to the Animal Con-
    You have approved a trade agreement with Japan tagious Diseases Act; the Explosives Act; the Tele M

    designed to assist in developing our growIng trade graphs Act; the National Parks Act: the Customs
    with that country. Trade agreements have also Act; the Acts respecting the Northwest Territories;
    been conclUded, for the first time, wIth Spain and the Senate and House of Commons Act; the Salaries
    Portugal which, with improved arrangements wIth
    Italy and Brazil, shOUld assist us in the recovery of Act; the Members of Parliament Retiring Allow-
    historic markets in those countries. ances Act; the Patent Act; the Post Office Act: the
    In recognition of the growIng hnportance of our Export Credits Insurance Act: the Emergency Gold
    northern territories, you enacted legislation estab- Mining Assistance Act: the Deparbnent of Trans-
    lishing the Department of Northern Affairs and port Act; the Radio Act; the Public Service Super-
    National Resources. annuation Act; the Judges Act; the Royal Canadian
    PREFIX TO STATUTES, 1953-54

    ACTS PROCLAIMED IN FORCE

    LIST OF PROCLAMATIONS FROM JULY, 1953,


    TO SEPTEMBER, 1954

    MISCELLANEOUS PROCLAMATIONS

    BD~fOND CLOUTIER, C,M,G., O.A., D.S.P.


    t:UEI-;N'R PRINTER AND CONTROLLER OF RTATIONERY
    OTTAWA, lS5~
    PROCLAMATIONS OF CANADA, JULY, 1953, TO SEPTEMBER, 1954

    DATE IN CANADA
    FORCE GAzBrrE

    Acts proclaimed-
    Bank Act-Chap. 48, Statutes, 1953-5-1-proclaimed in force 1 July, 1954 VoL 88, p. 2312,
    Extra, June 30, 105!.
    Bank of Canada Act-amendmcnt.-Chap. 33, Statutes,
    1953-54-proclaimed in jorce ............ , .. " _ .. , . 1 July, 1954 Vol. 88, p. 2311,
    Extra, June 3~, 1954.
    Canada-France Income Tax Convention Act, 1951-Chap.
    40 Statutes, '951 (First Session)-proclaimed in force. 2 July, 1953 Vol. 87, 2OOS.
    Canad~-France Juccession Duty ComTention Act, Hl51-
    Chap. 41, Hatutes, 1951 (First Session)-prodaimed in
    force ........ ,. , .. " ............ , ............. , .. , .... . 2 July, 1953 Vol. 87, p. 2008.
    Canada Shipping Act-Chap. 29, R.S.C" 19ii2-Section 734
    (with exception of para. (b) of section 329, section 373
    and seetton 374)-proelaimed in force .............. . 15 Sept., 1953 Vol. 87, p. 295.5,
    Extra, Oct. 2, 1953.
    Canada Shipping Act-Chap. 20, Statutcs, 1U52-53-Section
    7 declRred in force. . ............... , ... , ............ . 1 Jan., 19S! Vol. 87, p. 3114.
    Criminal Code-Chap. 51, Statutes, ]953-5!-proclaillled in
    fu=.~........................ .. -. ] April, 1955 Va!. 88, p. 3297,
    Extra. Sept. 20, 1954.
    Export and Import Permits Act-Chap. 27, Statutes,
    1953-54-proclainlcd in force ........ , ................. , 1 June, 19M Vol. 88, P. 1740.
    Food and Drugs Act-Chap. 38, Statutes, 1952-53-pro-
    claimed in force ... , .. , ...... ,." .................... " 1 July, 1954 Vol. 88, p. 2312,
    Extra, June 30, 1954.
    Government Companies Operation .\ct-Chap. 24. Statutes,
    194fi-----.-applicable to Eldorado Aviation Limited, .. , .... 6 July, 1953 Vol. 87, p. 2314.
    Immigration Act-Chap. 325, R.S.C., 1952-proclaimcd in
    force, ........................ " , .... , ...... , ... , ... . 15 Sept., 11.153 Vol. 87, p. 2956,
    Extra Oct. 2, 1953.
    Indian Act-Chap. 149, R.S.C., 1952-Subsection (2) of
    section 4 not to apply to Mohawks of Ray of Quinto ... , 26 Nov., 1953 Vol. 88, p. 187.
    Section 05-in force in Prov. of Ontario. , ............ . 1 July, 1954 Vol. 88, p. 2311.
    Extra, JUlie 25. 1954.
    International Rapids DoveiopmentAct-Chap.157, R.S.C.,
    1952-proclaimed in force ................... ' . .. ....... 15 Sept., 1953 Vol. 87, p. 2957,
    Ext.ra, Oct. 2. 1953.
    Juvenile Delinquents Act-Chap 160, R.S.C., 1952-in force
    in-
    County of Elgin, PraY. of Ontario ............. " .. 19 Mar., 1954 Vol. 88, p. 1306.
    County of Guysborough, Provo of Nova Scotia ... , 8 Apr., 1954 Vol. 88, p. 14G7.
    Dhtrict of Parry Sound, Provo of Ontario ... , .... . 3 July, 1954 Vol. 88, p. 2238.
    Motor Vehicle Transport Act-Chap. 59, Statute,s, 1953-54
    -proclaimed in force in-
    Provinces of Nova Scotia, Manitoba, British Co-
    lumbia, Prince Edward Island, Saskatchewan
    and .J\Jberta ... , .. , ............. , ...... ,., .. ,. 1 Aug., 19.54 Vol. 88, p. 2662.
    Province of Ontario ..... , .... , ............ , , ..... . 15 Sept., 195! Vol. 88, p. 2727.
    National Housing Act, 1954-Chull. 23, Statut('S, 1953-54-
    Parts I. II, III. IV, V, VI and VII proclaimed in force
    throughout Canada, but the type of loan that may be
    made under Part IV of the said Act throughout Cnnada
    (except in the Municipal District of Yellow10life. North-
    west Territories) shall be limited to home extension
    loans ............... , ...... , ........ , ........... '" ... 22 Mar., 1954 Vol. 88, p. 1192,
    Extra, Mar. 19. 1954.
    Navigable Waters Protection Act-Chap. 193. R.S.C.,
    1952-
    Marmion I,ako, Rainy River District, Provo of
    Ont., declared oxemptfrom operation of sections
    18, 19 and 20 .................................. 13 lIay, 1951 Vol. 88, p. 21MI.
    North Pacific Halibut- Fishing Convention A('t-Chap. 4~,
    Stat-ute8, 1952·53-procJllimeo in force................. 1 Nov .• 1953 Vol. 87, p. 3431.
    Northwest Territories-amendment-Chap. 8, Statutes
    1953-M-proclaimed in force, .. , ..... , ........•....... .' 30 June, 1954 Vol. 88, p. 2313,
    Extra, June 30, 1954.

    PART I-B v
    'IlrtlI

    QO~OJil'JOIiaiI Ot1'Ao." I.
    ,1III'<lo... .. . . 11
    ........_,.
    lefora
    10) If
    )Emy is
    "tlol01
    1010Utl,
    tituting
    I
    d. ~4th I:
    i
    I
    ,i I'
    !
    !

    r&.ee ot
    ad nor
    , Iload
    I F~,t/>,
    rolli"ol
    lorve In
    to 'each
    ihl

    TINII!

    ,'I
    ,lands
    ontb 01
    ~t~1;( 01
    .~poar,
    ",
    ld ,0Q\l-
    h. _

    ;.!~1;
    IMh' 01 .
    heteb),'"
    'ouland .,
    thl>da7. '
    Ua;liln '
    Otta\nl'
    t<> 'and" .
    'I Be!I.Pl •
    "fI, r
    1se"()ur
    'ilt'Seal "
    <TNiiia!
    mSdllor.
    0/' the
    r.1 and
    "

    Iwonw-
    ord~ .. '
    .n4:"
    CHIt'"
    ":'1'.
    "
    , 111\
    REVISED STATUTES STATUTS REVISES
    OF CANADA DU CANADA
    1970 1970

    Proclaimed and Published under Proclam~ et publi~ en conformite


    the authority of chapter 48 du chapitre 48
    of the Statutes of Canada, 1964-55 des Statuts du Canada de. 1964-55

    VOLUME II VOLUME II

    @ @
    QUEEN'S PRINTER FOR CANADA IMPRIMEUR DE LA REINE POUR LE CANADA
    OTTAWA, 1970 OTTAWA, 19'10
    CHAPTER C-34 CHAPITRE C-34
    An Act respecting the Criminal Law Loi concernant Ie droit criminel

    SHORT TITLE TITRE ABREGll


    Short title 1. This Act may be cited as the Criminal I. La presente loi peut ~tre citee sous Ie Titre .bt!,!
    Code. 1953-54, c. 51, s. 1. titre: Code criminel. 1953-54, c. 51, art. 1.

    INTERPRETATION INTERPRETATION
    Definitions 2. In this Act 2. Dans la presente loi Definitions
    "Act" "Act" includes «aete d'accusation» comprend «aete
    .Io~ . d'actusalion~
    (a) an Act of the Parliament of Canada, a) une denonciation, une declaration d'un Uindidmenf'
    (b) an Act of the legislature of the former acte d'accusation emise par Ie grand jury et
    Province of Canada, un chef d'accusation y inclus,
    (c) an Act of the legislature of a province, b) une dMense, une replique ou autre piE,"e
    and 1 de plaidoirie, et
    (d) an Act or ordinance of the legislature c) tout proces-verbal ou dossier;
    of a province, territory or place in force at «aete testamentaire» comprend tout testa- «acte ,
    the time that province, territory or place · '11 ,. d' ., testamentalre_
    ment, co dleI e ou autre ~crlt ou ISposlhon "teatamentary.. ."
    became a province of Canada; testamentaire, soit du vivant du testateur
    HAttorney "Attorney General" means the Attorney dont i! est cense exprimer les dernieres
    General"
    «procureUf. . General or Solicitor General of a province volontes, soit apres sa mort, qu'i! ait trait It
    ,JO

    in which proceedings to which this Act des biens meubles ou immeubles, ou des a
    applies are taken and, with respect to . biens des deux categories;
    «agent de la paix» comprend _agent de la
    (a) the Northwest Territories and the Yukon paix~
    Territory, and a) un maire, prMet, reeve, sMrif, sMrif "peace. , ."
    (b) proceedings instituted at the instance of adjoint, officier du sMrif et juge de paix,
    the Government of Canada and conducted b) un directeur, sous-directeur instructeur
    J J

    by or on behalf of that Government in gardien, geolier, garde et tout autre fonc-


    respect of a violation oi or conspiracy to tionnaire ou employe permanent d'une
    violate any Act of the Parliament of prison,
    Canada or a regulation made thereunder c) un officier de police, un agent de police,
    other than this Act, huissier, constable, ou autre personne
    means the Attorney General of Canada employee It la preservation et au maintien
    and, except for the purposes of subsections de la paix publique ou It la signification ou
    505(4) and 507(3), includes the lawful deputy al'execution des actes judiciaires au civil,
    of the said Attorney General, Solicitor d) un fonctionnaire ou une personne posse-
    General and Attorney General of Canada; dant les pouvoirs d'un prepose des douanes
    "bank.note" "bank-note" includes any negotiable instru- au de I'accise lorsqu'il exerce une fonction
    .biltet. .. lI "

    1505
    Part VI Criminal Code Chap. C·34 99
    another female person, J) <\tant du sexe masculin, vit entierement
    is guilty 01 an indictable alienee and is liable ou en partie des produits de la prostitution;
    to imprisonment for ten years. au
    k) etant du sexe feminin, vit entierement
    au en partie des produits de la prostitution
    d'une autre personne du sexe feminin.
    Presumption (2) Evidence that a male person lives with (2) La preuve qu'une personne du sexe Prewmptioll
    or is habitually in the company of prostitutes, masculin vit au se trouve habituellement en
    or lives in a common bawdy·house or house compagnie de prostituees, au vit dans une
    01 assignation is, in the absence of any maison de debauche ou une maison de rendez·
    evidence to the contrary, proof that he lives vous, constitue, en l'absence de toute preuve
    on the avails of prostitution. contraire, une preuve qu'eHe vit des produits
    de la prostitution.
    Conobo<a,i" (3) No person shall be convicted of an (3) Nul ne doit etre declare coup able d'une Conobo,,,i,,
    offence under subsection (1), other than an infraction visee au paragraphe (1), autre
    offence under paragraph 0) of that subsection, qu'une infraction prevue par l'alinea J) de ce
    upon the .evidence of only one witness unless paragraphe, sur la deposition d'un seul
    the evidence of that witness is corroborated temoin, a moins que la deposition de ce
    in a material particular by evidence that temoin ne soit corroboree sous quelque rapport
    implicates the accused. essen tiel par une preuve qui implique l'accuse.
    Limitation (4) No proceedings for an offence under (4) Nulle procedure a I'egard d'une infrac· P"""p,io,
    this section shall be commenced more than tion visee au present article ne doit etre
    one year after the time when the offence is a
    intentee plus d'un an compter de la date ou
    alleged to have been committed. 1953·54, c. l'infraction a ete commise, d'aP,res l'allegation.
    51, s. 184; 1968·69, c. 38, s. 92. 1953·54, c. 51, art. 184; 1968·69, c. 38, art. 92.

    PART VI PARTIE VI
    OFFENCES AGAINST THE PERSON INFRACTIONS CONTRE LA PERSONNE
    AND REPUTATION ET LA REPUTATION
    Interpretation Interpretation
    Definitions 196. In this Part 196. Dans la presente Partie Definitions
    "abandon" "abandon" or "expose" includes «abandonner» ou «exposer» comprend "abandonner_
    uexpose" _exposer.
    (a) a wilful omission to take charge of a a) l'omission volontaire, par une personne
    child by a person who is under a legal duty legalement tenue de Ie faire, de prendre
    to do so, and so in d'un enfant, et .
    (b) dealing with a child in a manner that is b) traiter un enfant d'une fa~on pouvant
    likely to leave that child exposed to risk I'exposer It des dangers contre lesquels il
    without protection; n'est pas protege j
    "child" includes an adopted child and an «enfant» comprend. un enfant adopt if et un
    illegitimate child; enfant illegitime;
    Ul orm of "form of marriage" includes a ceremony of «formalite de mariage» comprend une cere~ ~fotma.Hte de
    marriage" mariage»
    marriage that is recognized as valid monie de mariage qui est reconnue valide
    (a) by the law of the place where it was a) par la loi du lieu au Ie mariage a Me
    celebrated, or celebre, ou
    (b) by the law 01 the place where an accused b) par la loi du lieu au un accuse subit son
    is tried, notwithstanding that it is not proces) meme si Ie mariage n'est pas reconnu
    recognized as valid by the law of the place valide par la loi du lieu au il a Me celebre;
    where it was celebrated; «tuteur») comprend une personne qui a, en "tuteur_
    Ilguardian" "guardian" includes a person who has in law droit au de fait, la garde ou Ie controle
    "

    1603
    126 Chap. C·34 Code criminel Part.ie VI
    Hvenereal disease" means syphilis, gonorrhea «maladie venerienne» signifie la syphilis, la
    or soft chancre. 1953-54, c. 51, s. 239. gonorrhee au Ie chancre mou. 1953-54, c. 51,
    art. 239.

    Offences Against Conjugal Rights Infractions aux droits conjugaux


    Bigamy 254. (1) Everyone commits bigamy who 254. (1) Com met la bigamie, quiconque, Big.mi,
    (a) in Canada, a) aU Canada,
    (i) being married, goes through a form of (i) etant marie, passe par une lormalite
    marriage with another person, de mariage avec une autre personne,
    (ii) knowing that another person is mar- (ii) sachant qu'une autre personne est
    ried, goes through a form of marriage mariee, passe par une formalite de
    with that person, or mariage avec ceUe personne, DU
    (iii) on the same day or simultaneously, (iii) Ie me me jour au simultanement,
    goes through a form of marriage with passe par une formalite de mariage avec
    more than one person; or . plus d'une persanne; au
    (b) being a Canadian citizen resident in b) Mant un citoyen canadien residant au
    Canada leaves Canada with intent to do Canada, quitte ce pays avec l'intention
    anything mentioned in subparagraphs (o)(i) d'accomplir une chose mentionnee auxsous·
    to (iii) and, pursuant thereto, does outside alineas a)(i) It (iii) et, selon cette intention,
    Canada anything mentioned in those accomplit hors du Canada une chose
    subparagraphs in circumstances mentioned menlionnee auxdits sous-alineas dans des
    therein. circonstances y designees.
    Matters of (2) No person commits bigamy by going (2) Nulle personne ne commet la bigamie DIl""
    defence
    through a form of marriage if en passant par une formalite de mariage,
    (a) that person in good faith and on a) si elle croit de bonne foi, et pour des
    reasonable grounds believes that his spouse motifs raisonnables, que son conjoint est
    is dead, decede;
    (b) the spouse of that person has been b) si Ie conjoint de cette personne a Ole
    continuously absent from him for seven continOment absent pendant les sept annees
    years immediately preceding the time when qui ant precede Ie jour au elle passe par la
    he goes through the form of marriage, formalite de mariage, amains qU'elle n'ait
    unless he knew that his spouse was alive at su que son conjoint etait vivant It un
    any time during those seven years, moment quelconque de ces sept annees;
    (c) that person has been divorced from the c) si cette personne a He par divorce liberee
    bond of the first marriage, or des liens du premier mariage; au
    (d) the former marriage has been declared d) si Ie mariage anterieur a ettl declare nul
    void by a court of competent jurisdiction. par une cour competente.
    Incompetency (3) Where a person is alleged to have (3) Lorsqu'il est allegue qu'une personne a L'inh.bili,h,
    no defenre
    committed bigamy, it is not a defence that commlS. Ia b'19amle,
    . Ie I'
    aIt que Ies parties
    . constltuepasun
    moyen de
    the parties would, if unmarried, have been auraient, dans Ie cas de celibataires, eM dHense
    incompetent to contract marriage under the inhabiles It contracter mariage d'.pres la loi
    law of the place where the offence is alleged de I'endroit au il est allegue que PinfracHon
    to have been committed. a eie com mise, ne constitue pas une defense.
    Validity (4) Every marriage or form of marriage (4) Aux lins du present article, chaque P,1~!"p'ion d,
    presumed
    shall, for the purpose of this section, be mariage au formalite de mariage est censee vahdlte
    deemed to be valid unless the accused a
    valide mains que Ie prevenu n'en 'demontre
    establishes that it was invalid. Pinvalidite.
    Act or omission (5) No act or omission on the part of an (5) Aucun acte ou omission de Ia part dJun L'a~t~ ou ,
    by accused
    accused who is charged with bigamy invali- ,
    prevenu .. I" d b' , t' I'd
    qUI est mcu pt::: e 19amle n mva 1 e
    omlsslondun
    accuse
    dates a marriage or form 01 marriage that is un mariage au une lormalite de mariage
    "
    1630
    Part VI Criminal Code Chap. C-34 127
    otherwise valid. 1953-54, c. 51, s. 240. autrement valide. 1953-54, c. 51, art.. 240.
    Punishment 255. (I) Everyone who commits bigamy 255. (I) Est coupable d'un acte criminel et p,;"
    is guilty 01 an indictable offence and is liable passible d'un emprisonnement de cinq ans,
    to imprisonment for five years. quiconque commet Ia bigamie.
    Certificate of (2) For the purposes 01 this section a (2) Aux fins du present article, un cert.ificat Cert,ifi!.'!1 de
    marriage de mariage emis SOllS l'autorite de la loi fait
    certificate of marriage issued under the manage
    authority of law is evidence of the marriage preuve du mariage ou de Ia formalite de
    or form of marriage to which it relates without mariage It quoi il a trait, sans preuve de Ia
    proof of the signature or official character of signature ou du caractere officiel de Ia
    the person by whom it purport. to be signed. personne qui semble I'avoir signe. 1953-54, c.
    1953-54, c. 51, s. 241; 1968-69, c. 38, s. 92. 51, art.. 241; 1968-69, c. 38, art. 92.
    Procuring 256. (I) Every male person who 256. (1) Taute personne du sexe masculin ~fariage feint
    feigned
    marriage (a) procures, or qui
    (b) knowingly aids in procuring, a) obtient, au
    a feigned marriage between himself and a b) sciemment aide It obtenir
    female person is guilty of an indictable un mariage feint entre Iui-m~me et une
    offence and is liable to imprisonment for five personne du sexe feminin, est coupable d'un.
    years. acte criminel et passible d'un emprisonnement
    de cinq ans.
    Corroboration (2) No person shall be convicted of an (2) Nul ne doit etre declare coup able d'une C.."ho,,,;,"
    offence under this section upon the evidence infraction visee par Ie present article sur Ia
    01 only one witness unless the evidence of deposition d'un seul temoin, It moins que Ia
    that witness is corroborated in a material deposition de ce temoin ne soit corroboree
    particular by evidence that implicates the SallS un rapport essentiel par une preuve qui
    accused. 1953-54, c. 51, s. 242. implique Ie prevenu. 1953-54, c. 51, art. 242.
    Polygamy 257. (I) Everyone who 257. (I) Est coupable d'un acte criminel et. Poly,.m;,
    (a) pract.ises or enters into or in any manner passible d'un emprisonnement de cinq ans,
    agrees or consents to practise or enter into quiconque
    (i) any form of polygamy, or a) pratique ou contracte, ou d'une fa~on
    (ii) any kind 01 conjugal union with more quelconque aceepte au convient de pratiquer
    than one person at the same time, au de contracter,
    whether or not it is by law recognized as a (i) Ia polygamie so us une forme quelcon-
    binding form of marriage; or . que,ou
    (b) celebrates, assists or is a party to a rite, (ii) une sorte d'union conjugale avec plus
    ceremony contract or consent that purport.s
    I
    d'une personne it la fois,
    to sanction a relationship mentioned in qu'elle soit ou non reeonnue par la loi
    subparagraph (a)(i) or (ii), comme une formalite de mariage qui lie;
    is guilty of an indictable offence and is liable au
    to imprisonment for five years. b) celebre un rite, une ceremonie, un contrat
    ou un consentement tendant it sanctionner
    un lien dont fait mention Ie sous-alinea
    a)(i) au (ii), oU y aide ou participe.
    Evidence in case (2) Where an accused is charged with an (2) Lorsqu'un prevenu est inculpe d'une PreuvH~ cas de
    . f ractIon
    . VISee
    , 1. au prt::sent • I
    e, I'1'
    of polygamy 1. poiygamle
    offence under this section, no averment or m art.Ie n est pas
    proof 01 the method by which the alleged neeessaire d'affirmer aU de prouve.r, dans
    relationship was entered into, agreed to or I'acte d'accusation ou lars du proces du
    consented to is necessary in the indictment or prevenu, Ie mode par lequel Ie lien allegue a
    upon the trial of the accused, nor is it fie contracte, accepte au convenu. II n'est pas
    necessary upon the trial to prove that the necessaire non plus, au proees, de prouver que

    1631
    128 Chap. C·34 Code criminel Partie VI
    persons who are alleged to have entered into les personnes ayant, d'apres I'allegation,
    the relationship had or intended to have contracte Ie lien ont eu, ou avaient I'intention
    sexual intercourse. 1953-54, c. 51, s. 243. d'avoir, des rapports sexuels. 1953-54, c. 51,
    art. 243.

    Unlawful Solemnization 0/ Marriage Celibration illicite du mariage


    Pretending to 258. Everyone who 258. Est coupable d'un acte criminel et C.!lbration d"
    solEmnize
    marriage (a) solemnizes or pretends to solemnize a paSSl'bl e d' un emprlsonnemen
    . t d e d eux ans, autotisation
    matlsge eans

    marriage without lawful authority, the quiconque


    proof of which lies upon him, or a) celebre ou pret<md celebrer un mariage
    (b) procures a person to solemnize a mar· sans autorisation legale, dont la preuve lui
    riage knowing that he is not lawfully incombe, au
    authorized to solemnize the marriage, b) amene une personne It celebrer un
    is guilty of an indictable oHence and is liable mariage, sachant que cett" personne n'est
    to imprisonment for two years. 1953·54, c. 51, pas legalement autorisee 11 Ie celebrer. 1953-
    s.244. 54, c. 51, art. 244.
    Marriage 259. Every one who, being lawfully author. 259. Est coupable d'un acte criminel et Mariag.
    contrary to Jaw
    ized to solemnize marriage, knowingly and passible d'un emprisonnement de deux ans, wnttsire A 18 loi
    wilfully solemnizes a marriage in violation of quiconque, etant legalement autorise .. cele-
    the laws of the province in which the marriage brer Ie mariage, celebre sciemment et volon-
    is solemnized is guilty of an indictable oHence tairement un mariage en violation des lois de
    and is liable to imprisonment for two years. la province ou il est celebre. 1953-54, c. 51,
    1953-54, c. 51, s. 245. art. 245.

    Blasphemous Libel Libelle blaspMmatoire


    OIC,no< 260. (1) Everyone who publishes a bias· 260. (1) Est coupable d'un acte criminel et Int.",ion
    phemous libel is guilty of an indictable passible d'un emprisonnement de deux ans,
    oUence and is liable to imprisonment for two quiconque publie un Iibelle blasphematoire.
    years.
    Q""tion oC C", (2) It is a question of fact whether or not (2) La quest.ion de savoir si une matiere Question de lait
    any matter that is published is a blasphemous publiee constitue ou non un libelle blasphe-
    libel. matoire est une question de fait.
    S"ing (3) No person shall be convicted of an (3) Nul ne peut etre declare coupahle d'une R."rv.
    oUence under this section for expressing in infraction tombant sous Ie coup du present
    good faith and in decent language, or article pour avoir exprime de bonne foi et
    attempting to establish by argument used in dans un langage convenable, ou cherche It
    good faith and conveyed in decent language, etablir par des arguments employes de bonne
    an opinion upon a religious subject. 1953-54, foi et communiques dans un langage conve-
    c. 51, s. 246. nable, une opinion sur. un sujet religieux.
    1953-54, c. 51, art. 246.

    De/amatory Libel Libelle di//amatoire


    U!iewspaperU 261. In sections 262 to 281, "newspaper" 261. Aux articles 262 It 281, I'expression .J,mnal.
    means any paper, magazine or periodical «journal» signifie tout journal, magazine ou
    containing public news, intelligence or reports periodique contenant des nouvelles, rensei-
    of events, or any remarks or observations gnements ou comptes r,mdus d'evenements
    thereon, printed for sale and published d'interet public, ou des remarques ou obser-
    periodically or in parts or numbers, at a
    vations leur sujet, imprime pour la vente et
    intervals not exceeding thirty-one days pub lie periodiquement ou en parties ou
    between the publication of any two such numeros, It des intervalles d'au plus trente et

    1632
    REVISED STATUTES LOIS REVISEES
    OF· CANADA, 1985 DU CANADA (1985)

    Prepared under the authority Revision realisee sous Ie regime de la


    of the Statute Revision Act Loi sur la revision des lois

    VOLUME III VOLUME III

    "
    QUEEN'S PRINTER FOR CANADA
    ©
    IMPRIMEUR DE LA REINE POUR U! CANADA
    OITAWA,I985 OTTAWA,1985
    CHAPTER C-46 . CHAPITRE C-46
    An Act respecting the Criminal Law Loi concernant Ie droit criminel

    SHORT TlTLE TITRE ABREOE

    Short title 1. This Act may be cited as the Criminal 1. Code crimine!. S.R., ch. C-34, art. I. Titre abrege
    Code. R.S., c. C-34, s. I.

    INTERPRETATION DEFINITIONS ET INTERPRETATION

    Definitions 2. In this Act, 2. Les definitions qui suivent s'appliquent a Definitions


    "Act" "Act" includes la presente loi.
    .Ioi~
    (a) an Act of Parliament, «acte d'accusation» Sont assimiles a un acte facte d'accusa·
    tion.
    (b) an Act of the legislature of the former d'accusation: "Indlclmellt"
    Province of Canada, I , a) une denonciation, une declaration d'un
    (c) an Act of the legislature of a province, acte d'accusation emise par Ie grand jury
    and et un chef d'accusation y inclus;
    (d) an Act or ordinance of the legislature b) une dOfense, une replique ou autre
    of a province, territory or place in force .at piece de plaidoirie;
    the time that province, territory or place c) tout proces-verbal ou dossier.
    became a province of Canada; «acte testamenta ire» Tout testament, codicille oacte testamen·
    tair~
    "Attorney "Attorney General" means the Attorney Gen- . ou autre 6crit ou disposition testamentaire, "Iestamen*
    General" soit du vivant du testateur dont il est cense tary,,,"
    .procureur.". eral or Solicitor General of a province in
    which proceedings to which this Act applies exprimer les dernieres volontes, soit apres son
    are taken and, with respect to deces, qu'il ait trait a des biens meubles ou
    (a) the Yukon Territory and the North- immeubles, ou a des biens des deux
    west Territories, and categories.
    _agent de la
    (b) proceedings instituted at the instance .agent de la paix> paix.
    of the Government of Canada and con- a) Tout maire, president de conseil de "peace","
    ducted by or on behalf of that Government comte, prOfet, sherif, sherif adjoint, offi-
    in respect of a contravention of or conspir- cier du sherif et juge de paix;
    acy to contravene any Act of Parliament b) tout directeur, sous-directeur, instruc-
    or a regulation made thereunder other teur, gardien, gealier, garde et tout autre
    than this Act, fonctionnaire ou employe permanent d'une
    means the Attorney General of Canada and, prison;
    except for the purposes of subsections 575(4) c) tout officier de police, agent de police,
    and 577(3), includes the lawful deputy of the huissier ou autre personne employee a la
    said Attorney General, Solicitor General and preservation et au maintien de la paix
    Attorney General of Canada; publique ou a la signification ou a I'execu-
    tion des actes judiciaires au civil;
    Partie VIII Code crimine! Chap. C-46 147
    punissable sur declaration de culpabilite par
    procedure sommaire. 1972, ch. 13, art. IS.

    PART VIII PARTIE VIII


    OFFENCES AGAINST THE PERSON INFRACTIONS CONTRE LA PERSONNE
    AND REPUTATION ET LA REPUTATION
    Interpretation Definitions
    Definitions 214. In this Part, 214. Les definitions qui suivent s'appliquent Definitions
    "abandon" or H
    "abandon" or "expose includes a la presente partie.
    "expose" . «abandonner» ou «exposer» S'entend notam- ~abandonner.
    ~Qbandonl/eh." (a) a wilful omission to take charge of a ou .exposer~
    child by a person who is under a legal duty men t : "abandon"".
    to do so, and . a) de I'omission volontaire, par une per-
    (b) dealing with a child in a manner that sonne legalement tenue de Ie faire, de
    is likely to leave that child exposed to risk prendre sain d'uo enfant;
    without protection; b) du fait de traiter un enfant d'une fa<;on
    "child" "child" includes an adopted child and an a
    pouvant I'exposer des dangers contre les-
    .enfant.
    illegitimate child; quels iI n'est pas protege.
    "form of "form of marriage" includes a ceremony of «enfant» S'entend notamment d'un enfant kenfant~
    "child"
    marriage"
    marriage that is recognized as valid adoptif et d'un enfant iIIegitime.
    iformalite ....
    (a) by the law of the place where it was «forma lite de mariage. S'entend notamment kformalit~ de
    matiage.
    celebrated, or . d'une ceremonie de rnariage recannue ''form ...''
    (b) by the law of the place where an valide:
    accused is tried, notwithstanding thadt is a) soit par la loi du lieu oil Ie mariage a
    not recognized as valid by the law of the ete celebre;
    place where it was celebrated; b) soit par la loi du lieu ou un accuse subit
    "guardian" "guardian" includes a person who has in law or son proces, merne si Ie mariage n'est pas
    Ituteur.
    in fact the custody or control of a child. R.S., reconnu valide par la loi du lieu ou iI a ete
    c. C-34, s. 196. celebre.
    .tuteur~
    ,tuteur. S'entend notamment de la personne "guardian" .
    qui a, en droit ou de fait, la garde ou Ie
    controle d'un enfant. S.R., ch. C-34, art. 196.

    Duties Tending to Preservation of Life Devoirs tendant ilia conservation de la vie


    Duly of persons 215. (I) Everyone is under a legal duty 215. (I) Toute personne est legalement Devoir de
    to provide fournir les
    necessaries (a) as a parent, foster parent, guardian or tenue: chrues
    head of a family, to provide necessaries of a) en qualite de pere ou mere, de parent necessaires a
    I'existence
    life for a child under the age of sixteen years; nourricier, de tuteur ou de chef de famille, de
    (b) as a married person, to provide necessar- fournir les chases necessaires a l'existence
    ies of life to his spouse; and d'un enfant de moins de seize ans;
    (c) to provide necessaries of life to a person b) a titre de personne mariee, de fournir les
    under his charge if that person choses necessaires a l'existence de son
    (i) is unable, by reason of detention, age, conjoint;
    illness, insanity or other cause, to with- c) de fournir Ies choses necessaires a I'exis-
    draw himself from that charge, and tence d'une personne a sa charge, si cette
    (ii) is unable to provide himself with personne est incapable, a la fois :
    necessaries of life. (i) par suite de detention, d'age, de mala-
    die, d'alienation menta Ie Oll pour une autre
    cause, de se saustraire acette charge,
    180 Chap. C-46 Criminal COde Part VIII
    female person. R.S., c. C-34, s. 251; 1974-75- d'une personne du sexe feminin. S.R., ch. C-34,
    76, c. 93, s. 22.1. art. 251; 1974-75-76, ch. 93, art. 22.1.
    Supplying 288. Everyone who unlawfully supplies or 288. Est coupable d'un acte criminel ct pas· Fournir des
    noxious things substances
    procures a drug or other noxious thing or an sible d'un emprisonnement maximal de deux deieleres
    instrument or thing, knowing that it is intended ans quiconque illegalement fournit ou procure
    to be used or employed to procure the miscar- une drogue ou autre substance deletere, ou un
    riage of a female person, whether or not she is instrument ou une chose, sachant qu'ils sont
    pregnant, is guilty of an indictable offence and a
    destines etre employes ou utilises pour obtenir
    liable to imprisonment for a term not exceeding l'avortement d'une personne du sexe feminin,
    two years. R.S., c. C-34, s. 252. que celle~ci soit enceinte ou non. S.R., ch,
    C-34, art. 252.
    Venereal Diseases A1aladles veneriennes
    Venereal 289. (l) Everyone who, having venereal dis- 289. (I) Est coupable d'une infraction punis- Maiadie
    disease venerienne
    ease in a communkable form. communicates it sable sur declaration de culpabilite par proce-
    to another person is guilty of an offence punish- dure somma ire quiconque, etant atteint d'une
    able on summary conviction. mala die venerienne transmissible, la communi~
    que aune autre personne.
    Defence (2) No person shall be convicted of an (2) Nul ne peut etre declare coupable d'une Defense
    offence under this section where he proves that infraction visee au present article s'il prouve
    he believed on reasonable grounds that he did qu'il avait des motifs raisonnables de croire
    not have venereal disease in a communicable qu'il n'etait pas atteint d'une maladie vene-
    form at the time the offence is alleged to have rienne transmissible a l'6poque ou J'infraction
    been committed. aurait ete commise.
    Corroboration (3) No person shall be convicted of an (3) Nul ne peut etre declare coupable d'une Corroboration
    offence under this section on the evidence of infraction visee au present article sur la depo~i­
    only one witness, unless the evidence of that tion d'un seul temoin, a mains que la deposition
    witness is corroborated in a material particular de ce t6moin ne soit corroboree sous un rapport
    by evidence that implicates the accused. essentiel par une preuve qui implique Ie
    prevenu.
    Derinition of (4) For the purposes of this section, "vene- (4) Pour I'application du present article, DUinition de
    "venereal .maladie
    disease" real disease" means syphilis, gonorrhea or soft «maladie venerienne» designe la syphilis, la venerienne.
    chancre. R.S., c. C-34, s. 253. gonorrhee ou Ie chancre mou. S.R., ch. C-34,
    art. 253.
    Offences Against Conjugal Righis Infractions aux droits conjugaux
    Bigamy 290. (l) Everyone commits bigamy who 290. (I) Com met Ia bigamie quiconque, B;gam;e
    (a) in Canada, selon Ie cas:
    (i) being married, goes through a form of a) au Canada:
    marriage with another person, (i) etant marie, passe par une forma lite de
    (ii) knowing that another person is mar- mariage avec une autre personne,
    ried, goes through a form of marriage with (ii) sachant qu'une autre personne est
    that person, or mariee, passe par une formalite de
    (iii) on the same day or simultaneously, mariage avec cette personne,
    goes through a form of marriage with (iii) Ie meme jour ou simultanement,
    more than one person; or passe par une formalite de mariage avec
    (b) being a Canadian citizen resident in plus d'une personne;
    Canada leaves Canada with intent to do b) etant un citoyen canadien residant au
    anything mentioned in subparagraphs (a)(i) Canada, quitte ce pays avec !'intention d'ac-
    to (iii) and, pursuant thereto, does outside complir une chose mentionnee a j'un des
    Canada anything mentioned in those sub- sous-alineas a) (i) a (iii) et, selon cette inten-
    Partie VIII Code criminel Chap. C-46 181
    paragraphs in circumstances mentioned tion, accomplit a l'etranger une chose men-
    therein. tionnee a J'lln de ces sous-alineas dans des
    circonstances y designees.
    Maucrs of (2) No person commits bigamy by going (2) N ulle personne ne commet la bigamie en Defense
    defence
    through a form of marriage if passant par une forma lite de mariage :
    (a) that person in good faith and on reason· a) si elle croit de bonne foi, et pour des
    able grounds believes that his spouse is dead; motifs raisonnables, que son conjoint est
    (b) the spouse of that person has been con- decede;
    tinuously absent from him for seven years b) si Ie conjoint de cette personne a ete
    immediately preceding the time when he continument absent pendant les sept annees
    goes through the form of marriage, unless he qui ont precede Ie jour ou elle passe par la
    knew that his spouse was alive at any time formalit6 de mariage, amains qu'elle n'ait su
    . during those seven years; que son conjoint etait vivant a un moment
    (c) that person has been divorced from the queJconque de ces sept annees;
    bond of the first marriage; or c) si cette personne a ete par divorce Iiberee
    (d) the former marriage has been declared des liens du premier mariage;
    void by a court of competent jurisdiction. d) si Ie rnariage anterieur a ete declare nul
    par un tribunal competent.
    Incompetency (3) Where a person is alleged to have com- (3) Lorsqu'i1 est a!legue qu'une personne a L'inhabilite ne
    no defence conslitue pas un
    mitted bigamy, it is not a defence that the commis la bigamie, Ie fait que les parties moyen de
    parties would, if unmarried, have been auraient, dans Ie cas de celibataires, ete inhabi- defense
    incompetent to contract marriage under the les a contracter mariage d'apres la loi de I'en-
    law of the place where the offence is alleged to droit ou I'infraction aurait et6 commise, ne
    have been committed. constitue pas line defense.
    Validity (4) Every marriage or form of marriage Presomption de
    (4) Pour I'application du present article, yaHdite
    presumed
    shall, for the purpose of this section, be deemed chaque mariage ou formalite de mariage est
    to be valid unless the accused establishes that it cense valide a mains que Ie prevenu n'en
    was invalid. demontre I'invalidite.
    Act or omission (5) No act or omission on the part of an (5) Aucun acte ou omission de la part d'un L'acte ou
    by accused omission d'un
    accused who is charged with bigamy invalidates prevenu qui est inculpe de bigamie n'invalide accuse
    a marriage or form of marriage that is other- un mariage au one formaIite de mariage autre-
    wise valid. R.S., c. C-34, s. 254. ment valide. S.R., ch. C-34, art. 254.
    Punishment 291. (1) Everyone who commits bigamy is 291. (I j Est coupable d'un acte criminel et Peine
    guilty of an indictable offence and liable to passible d'un emprisonnement maximal de cinq
    imprisonment for a term not exceeding five ans quiconque com met la bigamie.
    years.
    Certificate of (2) For the purposes of this section, a certifi- (2) Pour I'application du present article, un Ccrtificat de
    marriage matisge
    cate of marriage issued under the authority of certificat de rnariage emis l'autorite de la
    SOllS
    law is evidence of the marriage or form of loi fait preuve du mariage ou de la formalite de
    marriage to which it relates without proof of mariage auqueI iI a trait, sans preuve de la
    the signature or official character of the person signature ou de la qualite officielle de la per-
    by whom it purports to be signed. R.S., c. C-34, sonne qui semble I'avoir signe. S.R., ch. C-34,
    s.255. art. 255.
    Procuring 292. (I) Every person who procures or 292. (I) Quiconque obtient ou sciemment Mariage feint
    feigned
    marriage knowingly aids in procuring a feigned marriage aide a obtenir un mariage feint entre lui-merne
    between himself and another person is guilty of et une autre personne est coupable d'un acte
    an indictable offence and liable to imprison- criminel et passible d'un emprisonnement
    ment for a term not exceeding five years. maximal de cinq ans.
    , Corroboration (2) No person shall be convicted of an (2) Nul ne peut etre declare coupable d'une Corroboration
    offence under this section on the evidence of infraction visee au present article sur la deposi-

    •
    182 Chap. C-46 Criminal Code Part VlII
    only one witness unless the evidence of that tioD d'un seul temoin, amains que la deposition
    witness is corroborated in a material particular de ce temoin De soit corroboree SOllS un rapport
    by evidence that implicates the accused. R.S., essen tiel par une preuve qui implique Ie pre-
    c. C-34, s. 256; 1980-81-82-83, c. 125, s. 21. venu. S.R., ch. C-34, art. 256; 1980-81-82-83,
    ch. 125, art. 21.
    Polygamy 293. (I) Everyone who 293. (I) Est coupable d'un acte criminel et Polygamic
    (a) practises or enters into or in any manner passible d'un emprisonnement maximal de cinq
    agrees or consents to practise or enter into ans quiconque, selon Ie cas:
    (i) any form of polygamy, or a) pratique ou contracte, ou d'une fa~on
    (ii) any kind of conjugal union with more quelconque accepte au convient de pratiquer
    than One person at the same time, ou de contracter :
    whether or not it is by law recognized as a (i) soit la polygamie sous une forme
    binding form of marriage, or quelconque,
    (b) celebrates, assists or is a party to a rite, (ii) soit une sorte d'union conjugale avec
    ceremony, contract or consent that purports plus d'une personne ii. la fois,
    to sanction a relationship mentioned in sub- qu'eHe sait ou non reconnue par la loi comme
    paragraph (a)(i) or (ii), une formalite de mariage qui lie;
    is guilty of an indictable offence and liable to b) ceh~bre un rite, line cen!ffionie, un contrat
    imprisonment for a term not exceeding five au un consentement tendant asanctionner un
    years. lien mentionne aux sous-alineas a)(i) ou (ii),
    ou y aide ou participe.
    Evidence in (2) Where an accused is charged with an (2) Lorsqu'un prevenu est inculpe d'une Preuve en cas
    case of de polygamic
    polygamy offence under this section, no averment or proof infraction visee au present article, il n'est pas
    of the method by which the alleged relationship necessaire d'affirmer au de prouver, dans I'acte
    was entered into, agreed to or consented to is d'accusation ou lors du proces du prevenu, Ie
    necessary in the indictment or on the lrial of mode par lequelle lien presume a ete contracte,
    the accused, nor is it necessary on the trial to accepte Oll conveou. II fl'est pas necessaire non
    prove that the persons who are alleged to have plus, au praces, de prouver que Ies personnes
    entered into the relationship had or intended to qui auraient contracte Ie lien ont eu, ou avaient
    have sexual intercourse. R.S., c. C-34, s. 257. l'intention d'avoir, des rapports sexuels. S.R ..
    ch. C-34, art. 257.

    Unlawflll Solemnization of Marriage Celebration illicite du mariage


    Pretending to 294. Everyone who 294. Est coupable d'un acte criminel et pas- Celebration du
    solemnize mariage sans
    marriage (a) solemnizes or pretends to 'solemnize a sible d'un emprisonnement maximal de deux autorisation
    marriage without lawful authority, the proof ans quiconque, selon Ie cas:
    of which lies on him, or a) celebre ou pretend celebrer uri mariage
    (b) procures a person to solemnize a mar- sans autorisation legale, dont la preuve lui
    riage knowing that he is not lawfully author- incombe;
    ized to solemnize the marriage, b) amene une personne ii. celebrer un
    is guilty of an indictable offence and liable to mariage, sachant que cette persoime n'est pas
    imprisonment for a term not exceeding two legalement autorisee ii. Ie celebrer. S.R., ch.
    years. R.S., c. C-34, s. 258. C-34, art. 258.

    Marriage 295. Everyone who, being lawfully author- 295. Est ,oupable d'un acte criminel et pas- Mariage
    contrary to law contraire ala
    ized to s.olemnize marriage, knowingly and wil~ sible d'un emprisonnement maximal de deux loi
    fully solemnizes a marriage in contravention of ans quiconque, ctant lcgalement aut~rise a
    the laws of the province in which the marriage celebrer Ie mariage, cch~bre sciemment et
    is solemnized is guilty of an indictable offence volontairement un mariage en .violation des lois
    and liable to imprisonment for a term not de la province ouil est celebre. S.R., ch. C-34,
    exceeding two years. R.S., c. C-34, s. 259. art. 259.
    CANADA

    CONSOLIDATION CODIFICATION

    Criminal Code Code criminel

    CHAPTER C-46 CHAPITRE C-46

    Current to March 19,2010 Ajour au 19 mars 2010

    Published by the Minister of Justice at the following address: Publie par Ie ministre de la Justice it l'adresse suivante :
    http://laws-lois.justice. gc.ca http://laws-lois.j ustice.gc.c a
    OFFICIAL STATUS CARACTERE OFFICIEL
    OF CONSOLIDATIONS DES CODIFICATIONS

    Subsections 31(1) and (2) of the Legislation Les paragraphes 31(1) et (2) de la Loi sur fa
    Revision and Consolidation Act, in force on revision et fa codification des textes Jegislatijs,
    June I, 2009, provide as follows: en vigueur Ie ler juin 2009, prevoient ce qui
    suit:
    Published 31. (1) Every copy of a consolidated statute or 31. (1) Tout exemplaire d'une loi codifiee au Codifications
    consolidation is consolidated regulation published by the Minister d'un reglement cadifie, publie par Ie ministre en yer- comme element
    evidence under this Act in either print or electronic fonn is tu de Ia presente loi sur support papier au Slir support de preuve
    evidence of that statute or regulation and of its con- electronique, fait foi de cette loi au de ce reglement
    tents and every copy purporting to be published by et de son contenu, Tout exemplaire donne comme
    the Minister is deemed to be so published, unless the publie par Ie ministre est repute ayoir ete ainsi pu-
    contrary is shown. blie, saufpreuve contraire,
    Inconsistencies (2) In the event of an inconsistency between a (2) Les dispositions de la loi d'origine avec ses Incompatibilit6
    in Acts consolidated statute published by the Minister under modifications subsequentes par Ie greffier des Parle.. -lois
    this Act and the original statute or a subsequent ments en vertu de la Loi sur la publication des lois
    amendment as certified by the Clerk of the Parlia- remportent sur les dispositions incompatibles de la
    ments "under the Publication a/Statutes Act, the orig- loi codifiee publiee par Ie ministre en vertu de la pre-
    inal statute or amendment prevails to the extent of sente loi.
    the inconsistency,
    CHAPTER C-46 CHAPITRE C-46

    An Act respecting the Criminal Law Loi concernant Ie droit criminel

    SHORT TITLE TITRE ABREGE


    Short title 1. This Act may be cited as the Criminal 1. Code criminel. Titre abrege
    Code. S.R., ch. C-34, art. I.
    RS., c. C·34, s. L

    INTERPRETATION DEFINITIONS ET INTERPRETATION


    Definitions 2. In this Act, 2. Les definitions qui suivellt s'appliquent a Definitions
    la presente loi.
    "Act" "Aer' includes
    ({ loi» « acte d'accusation» Sont assimiles it un acte «( aete
    (a) an Act of Parliament, d'aeeusation }}
    d'accusation: "i/1diclmelll"
    (b) an Act of the legislature of the former
    a) une denonciation ou un chef d'accusation
    Province of Canada,
    qui y est indus;
    (c) an Act of the legislature of a province,
    b) une defense, une replique ou autre piece
    and
    de plaidoirie;
    (d) an Act or ordinance of the legislature of
    c) tout proces-verbal au dossier.
    a province, territory or place in force at the
    time that province, territory or place became « acte de gangsterisme» [Abrogoe, 2001, ch.
    a province of Canada; 32, art. I]
    "associated "associated personnel" means persons who are « acte testamentaire» Tout testament, codicille « aete
    personnel" testamentaire »
    au autre ecrit au disposition testamentaire, soit
    1( persollnel (a) assigned by a government or an inter- "testamell/a'}'
    assode » du vivant du testateur dont iI est cense exprimer illstrument"
    governmental organization with the agree-
    les dernieres volontes, sait apres son deces,
    ment of the competent organ of the United
    qu'il ait trait it des biens meubles au immeu-
    Nations,
    bles, au it des biens des deux categories.
    (b) engaged by the Secretary-General of the
    United Nations, by a specialized agency of
    « activite terroriste» S 'entend au sens du para- «activit'}
    terroriste »
    graphe 83.01(1).
    the United Nations or by the International "terrorist
    aclfrity"
    Atomic Energy Agency, or
    « agent» S'agissant d'une organisation, tout {{agent»
    (c) deployed by a humanitarian non-govern- "representative"
    administrateur, associe, employe, membre,
    mental organization or agency under an
    mandataire ou entrepreneur de celIe-ci.
    agreement with the Secretary-General of the
    United Nations, by a specialized agency of « agent de la paix» « agent de la
    paix)}
    the United Nations or by the International a) Tout maire, president de conseil de corn- ''peace officer"
    Atomic Energy Agency, te, prOfet, sherif, sherif adjoint, officier du
    to carry out activities in support of the fulfil- sherif et juge de paix;
    ment of the mandate ofa United Nations opera- b) tout agent du Service correctionnel du
    tion; Canada, designe comme agent de la paix
    Criminal Code -March 19,2010

    for the purpose of engaging in prostitution or of c) soit arrete au tente d'arreter une personne
    obtaining the sexual services of a prostitute is ou, de quelque maniere que ce soit, commu-
    guilty of an offence punishable on summary nique au tente de communiquer avec elle.
    conviction.
    Definition of (2) In this section, "public place" includes (2) Au present article, « endroit public» Definition de
    "public place" {( endroit
    any place to which the public have access as of s'entend notamment de tout lieu auquel Ie pu~ public»)
    right or by invitation, express or implied, and blic a acces de droit au sur invitation, expresse
    any motor vehicle located in a public place or ou implicite; y est assimile tout vehicule it 1110-
    in any place open to public view. teur situe dans un endroit soit public soit situe a
    RS., 1985, c. C-46, s. 213; RS., 1985, c. 51 (1st Supp.), s. la vue du public.
    l. L.R (1985), ch. C.46, art. 213; L.R. (1985), ch. 51 (I"
    suppl.), art. 1.

    PART VIII PARTIE VIII


    OFFENCES AGAINST THE PERSON AND INFRACTIONS CONTRE LA PERSONNE
    REPUTATION ET LA REPUTATION
    INTERPRETATION DEFINITIONS

    Definitions 214. In this Part, 214. Les definitions qui suivent s'appliquent DUinitions

    "abandon" or "abandon" or "expose" includes


    a la presente pattie.
    "expose"
    «abandonner» ou« exposer» S'entend notam- ({ abandOlmer»
    « abandonncr» (a) a wilful omission to take charge of a ou {{ exposer»
    011 « e.>:poser» ment:
    child by a person who is under a legal duty "abandon" or
    "cxpose"
    to do so, and a) de l'omission volontaire, par une person-
    ne legalement tenue de Ie faire, de prendre
    (b) dealing with a child in a manner that is
    soin d'un enfant;
    likely to leave that child exposed to risk
    without protection; b) du fait de traiter un enfant d'une fa,on
    pouvant l'exposer a des dangers contre les-
    "aircraft" "aircraft" does not include a machine designed
    ((Oerow/» quels il n'est pas protege.
    to derive SUppOlt in the atmosphere primarily
    from reactions against the earth's surface of air « aeronef» La presente definition exclut l'appa~ ({ aeronef»
    "aircraft"
    expelled from the machine; reit con9u pour se maintenir dans l'atmosphere
    par l'effet de la reaction, sur la surface de la
    "child" [Repealed, 2002, c. 13, s. 9]
    terre, de l'air qu'il expulse.
    "form of "form of marriage" includes a ceremony of
    marriage" « bateau» Est assimile au bateau I' appareil «bateau»
    «jormofite de
    marriage that is recognized as valid "vessel'
    COlWU pour se maintenir dans l'atmosphere par
    mar/age»
    (a) by the law of the place where it was l'effet de la reaction, sur la surface de la terre,
    celebrated, or de Pair qu'il expulse.
    (b) by the law of the place where an accused « conduire» ({ conduire)}
    is tried, notwithstanding that it is not recog- "operate"
    a) Dans Ie cas d'un vehicule it moteur, Ie
    nized as valid by the law of the place where
    conduire;
    it was celebrated;
    b) dans Ie cas de materiel ferroviaire, parti-
    "guardian" "guardian" includes a person who has in law or
    ({ lutellr» eiper au contrOle immediat de son deplace·
    in fact the custody or control of a child;
    ment, notamment a titre de cheminot au de
    "operate" "operate" substitut de celui-ci au moyen du controle a
    {( camiuire »
    (a) means, in respect of a motor vehicle, to distance;
    drive the vehicle, c) dans Ie cas d'un bateau Ott d'un aeronef,
    (b) means, in respect of railway equipment, notamment les piloteI'.
    to participate in the direct control of its mo- « enfant» [Abrogee, 2002, ch. 13, art. 9]
    tion, whether

    252
    Criminal Code -March 19,2010

    of a female person, whether or not she is preg- instmment au une chose, sachant qu'iIs sont
    nant, is guilty of an indictable offence and lia- destines a etre employes au utilises pour obte-
    ble to imprisonment for a term not exceeding nir l'avortement d'une personne du sexe femi-
    two years. nin, que celle-ci soit enceinte au non.
    RS., c. C~34, s. 252. S.R., ch. C-34, art. 252.

    VENEREAL DISEASES

    289. [Repealed, R.S., 1985, c. 27 (lst 289. [Abroge, L.R. (1985), ch. 27 W
    Supp.), s. 41] suppl.), art. 41]

    OFFENCES AGAINST CONJUGAL RIGHTS INFRACTIONS AUX DROITS CONJUGAUX

    Bigamy 290. (1) EvelY one commits bigamy who 290. (1) Commet Ia bigamie quiconque, se- Bigamie
    Ion Ie cas:
    (a) in Canada,
    a) au Canada:
    (i) being married, goes through a form of
    marriage with another person, (i) etant marie, passe par une formalite de
    mariage avec une autre perSOlllle,
    (ii) knowing that another person is mar-
    ried, goes through a form of marriage with (ii) sachant qu'une autre personne est ma-
    that person, or riee, passe par une formalite de mariage
    avec cette personne,
    (iii) on the same day or simultaneously,
    goes through a form of marriage with (iii) Ie meme jour au simultanement, pas-
    more than one person; or se par une fonnalite de mariage avec plus
    d'une personne;
    (b) beiug a Canadian citizen resident in
    Canada leaves Canada with intent to do anyM b) etant un citoyen canadien residant au
    thing mentioned in subparagraphs (a)(i) to Canada, quitte ce pays avec I'intention d'ac-
    (iii) and, pursuant thereto, does outside complir line chose mentionnee a l'nn des
    Canada anything mentioned in those sub- sous-alineas a)(i) a (iii) et, selon cette inten-
    paragraphs in circumstances mentioned tion, accomplit a l'etranger une chose men-
    therein. tionnee a Pun de ces sous-alineas dans des
    circonstances y designees.
    Matters of (2) No person commits bigamy by going (2) Nulle personne ne commet la bigamie en DUense
    defence
    through a form of marriage if passant par une formalite de mariage :
    (a) that person in good faith and on reasona- a) si elle croit de bonne foi, et pour des mo-
    hIe grounds believes that his spouse is dead; tifs raisonnables, que son conjoint est dece-
    de;
    (b) the spouse of that person has been con-
    tinuously absent from him for seven years b) si Ie conjoint de cette personne a ete con-
    immediately preceding the time when he tinument absent pendant les sept annees qui
    goes through the form of marriage, unless he ant precede Ie jour au elle passe par la for-
    knew that his spouse was alive at any time a
    malite de mariage, mains qu'elle n'ait su
    during those seven years; a
    que son conjoint etait vivant un moment
    quelconque de ces sept annees;
    (c) that person has been divorced from the
    bond of the first marriage; or c) si cette persollne a ete par divorce liberee
    des liens du premier mariage;
    (d) the former marriage has been declared
    void by a court of competent jurisdiction. d) si Ie mariage anterieur a ete declare nul
    par un tribunal competent.
    Incompetency (3) Where a person is alleged to have com- (3) Lorsqu'il est allegue qu'une persOime a L'inhabilite ne
    no defence cCll5tilue pas un
    mitted bigamy, it is not a defence that the par- commis la bigamie, Ie fait que les parties au- m(lyende
    ties would, if unmarried, have been incompe- raient, dans Ie cas de celibataires, ete inhabiles defense

    328
    Code criminel-19 mars 2010

    tent to contract marriage under the law of the a contracter mariage d'apres la loi de l'endroit
    place where the offence is alleged to have been ou l'infraction amait ete commise, ne constitue
    committed. pas une defense.
    Validity (4) Every marriage or form of marriage (4) Pour l'application du present article, Prcsomption de
    presumed validite
    shall, for the purpose of this section, be deemed chaque mariage ou fonnalite de mariage est
    to be valid unless the accused establishes that it cense valide a moins que Ie prevenu n'en de-
    was invalid. montre I'invalidite.
    Act or omission (5) No act or omission on the pat1 of an 'ac- (5) Aucun acte ou omission de la part d'un L'acte ou
    by accused omis.sion d'un
    cused who is charged with bigamy invalidates a prevenu qui est inculpe de bigamie n'invalide accuse
    marriage or form of marriage that is otherwise un mariage ou une formalite de mariage autre-
    valid. ment valide.
    RS., c. C-34, s. 254. S.R, ch. C-34, art. 254.
    Punishment 291. (I) Every one who commits bigamy is 291. (I) Est coupable d'un acte criminel et Peine
    guilty of an indictable offence and liable to im- passible d'un emprisonnement maximal de cinq
    prisonment for a term not exceeding five years. ans quic'onque commet la bigamie.
    Certificate of (2) For the purposes of this section, a certifi- (2) Pour l'application du present article, un Certificat de
    marriage mariage
    cate of marriage issued under the authority of certificat de mariage emis SOllS l'autorite de la
    law is evidence of the marriage or form of mar- loi fait preuve du mariage Oll de la fonnalite de
    riage to which it relates without proof of the mariage auqueJ it a trait, sans preuve de la si-
    signature or official character of the person by gnature au de la qualite offidelle de la perSOll-
    whom it purports to be signed. ne qui semble I'avoir signe.
    RS., c. C-34, s. 255. S.R, ch. C-34, art. 255.
    Procuring 292. (I) EvelY person who procures or 292. (I) Quiconque obtient ou sciemment Mariage feint
    feigned marriage
    knowingly aids in procuring a feigned marriage aide a obtenir un mariage feint entre lui-meme
    between himself and another person is guilty of et une autre personne est coupable d'un acte
    an indictable offellce and liable to imprison- criminel et passible d'un emprisonnement
    ment for a term not exceeding five years. maximal de cinq ans.
    Corroboration (2) No person shall be convicted of an of- (2) Nulne peut etre declare coupable d'une Corroboration
    fence under this section on the evidence of only infraction visee au present article sur la deposi-
    one witness unless the evidence of that witness tion d'un seul temoin, a moins que la deposi-
    is corroborated in a material particular by evi- tion de ce temoin ne so it corroboree sous un
    dence that implicates the accused. rapport essentiel par une preuve qui implique Ie
    RS., c. C-34. s. 256; 1980-81-82-83, c. 125, s. 21. prevenu.
    S.R. ch. C-34. art. 256; 1980-81-82-83, ch. 125, art. 2l.

    Polygamy 293. (I) Every one who 293. (I) Est coupable d'un acte criminel et Polygamie
    passible d'un emprisonnement maximal de cinq
    (a) practises or enters into or in any manner
    ans quiconque, seion Ie cas:
    agrees or consents to practise or enter into
    a) pratique ou contracte, ou d'une fa90n
    (i) any form of polygamy, or
    quelconque accepte ou convient de pratiquer
    (ii) any kind of conjugal union with more ou de contracter :
    than one person at the same time,
    (i) soit la polygamie sous une forme que!-
    whether or not it is by law recognized as a conque,
    binding fonn of marriage, or
    (ii) soit une sorte d'union conjugale avec
    (b) celebrate.s, assists or is a party to a rite, plus d'une personne a la fois,
    ceremony, contract or consent that purports
    qu'eHe soit ou non reconnue par la loi com-
    to sanction a relationship mentioned in sub-
    me une fonnalite de mariage qui lie;
    paragraph (a)(i) or (ii),

    329
    Criminal Code-March 19,2010

    is guilty of an indictable offence and liable to b) celebre un rite, une ceremonie, un contrat
    imprisonment for a term not exceeding five ou un consentement tendant Ii sanctionner un
    years. lien mentionne aux sous-alineas a)(i) au (ii),
    ou y aide ou participe.
    Evidence in case (2) \Vhere an accused is charged with an ofM (2) Lorsqu'un prevenu est inculpe d'une in- Preuve en cas de
    ofJKllygamy fence under this section, no averment or proof polygamie
    fraction visee au present article, iln'est pas ne-
    of the method by which the alleged relationship cessaire d'affirmer ou de prouver, dans l'acte
    was entered into, agreed to or consented to is d'accusation ou lors du proces du prevenu, Ie
    necessary in the indictment or 011 the trial of the mode par lequel1e lien presume a ete contracte,
    accused, nor is it necessary on the trial to prove accepte ou convenu. II n'est pas IH~cessaire non
    that the persons who are alleged to have en- plus, au proces, de prouver que les personnes
    tered into the relationship had or intended to qui auraient contracte Ie lien ont eu, ou avaient
    have sexual intercourse. l'intention d'avoir, des rapports sexuels.
    R.S., c. C~34, s. 257. S.K, ch. C-34, art. 257.

    UNLAWFUL SOLEr<.fNIZATION OF :MARruAGE CELl'mRATION ILLICITE DU ;\1ARIAGE

    Pretending to 294. Every one who 294. Est coupable d'un acte criminel et pas- Cmbrationdu
    solemnize manage sans
    sible d'un emprisonnement maximal de deux
    marriage (a) solemnizes or pretends to solemnize a autonsation
    ans quiconque, selon Ie cas:
    marriage without lawful authority, the proof
    of which lies on him, or a) celebre ou pretend celebrer un mariage
    sans autorisation legale, dont la preuve lui
    (b) procures a person to solemnize a mar-
    riage knowing that he is not lawfully author- incombe;
    ized to solemnize the marriage, b) amene une personne Ii celebrer un maria-
    ge, sachant que cette personne n'est pas lega-
    is guilty of an indictable offence and liable to
    lement autorisee Ii Ie celebreI'.
    imprisonment for a term not exceeding two
    years. S.K, ch. C-34, art. 258.

    KS., c. C-34, s. 258.


    Marriage 295. Everyone who, being lawfully author- 295. Est coupable d'un acte criminel et pas- t<.lariage
    contraIy to law
    ized to solemnize marriage, knowingly and wil- sible d'un emprisonnement maximal de deux a
    contraire la loi

    fully solemnizes a marriage in contravention of ans quiconque, etant legalement autorise Ii cele-
    the laws of the province in which the marriage breI' Ie mariage, celebre sciemment et volontai-
    is solemnized is guilty of an indictable offence rement un mariage en violation des lois de la
    and liable to imprisonment for a tenn not ex- province ou it est celebre.
    ceeding two years. S.R., ch. C-34, art. 259.
    KS., c. C-34, s. 259.

    BLASPHEMOUS LIBEL LIBELLE BLASPHE~IATOmE

    Off,n" 296, (\) Every one who publishes a blas- 296. (\) Est coupable d'un acte criminel et Infraction
    phemous libel is guilty of an indictable offence passible d'un emprisonnement maximal de
    and liable to imprisonment for a tenn not ex- deux ans quiconque pub lie un Iibelle blasphO-
    ceeding two years. matoire.
    Question offact (2) It is a question of fact whether or not any (2) La question de savoir si une matiere pu- Question de fait
    matter that is published is a blasphemous libel. bliee constitue ou non un libelle blasphematoire
    est une question de fait.
    Saving (3) No person shall be convicted of an of- (3) Nulne peut etre declare coupable d'une
    fence under this section for expressing in good infraction visee au present article pour avoir ex-
    faith and in decent language, or attempting to prime de bonne foi et dans un langage convena-
    establish by argument used in good faith and bIe, au cherche Ii etablir par des arguments em-
    ployes de bOlllle foi et communiques dans un

    330

    Potrebbero piacerti anche