M. T. Burke, president of the Law Undergraduates' Association, presided. Regrets were received from Right Honourable R. L. Borden, Sir Wilfrid Laurier, Sir Francis Langellier, Sir Lomer Gouin and Hon. A. R. Angers.

About sixty students attended the dinner, which was also attended by representatives of Harvard, Laval (Montreal), Laval (Quebec), and Bishop's College.

The Minister of Justice, in replying to the toast in his honour, proposed by Mr. John MacNaughton, stated that to a large extent the fate of the country was in the hands of the lawyers. The profession had had in the past, and still had, a large part to play in the moulding of the destinies of the country, and in teaching their fellow countrymen the differences between right and wrong. The old proverb that it is righteousness which exalteth a nation, still held good, he declared, and there was no body of men which could contribute more to the righteousness of the nation than the members of the legal profession.

It was necessary for a young man, he continued, to have a proper realizing sense of the power, dignity, and responsibility of the profession which he had undertaken to practice.

Other toasts were as follows: Alma Mater, proposed by A. K. Hugessen and responded to by Dean Moyse; The Bench, S. McDougall and Hon. Mr. Justice Davidson; The Faculty, H. E. Herschorn and Dean Walton; The Bar, O. S. Tyndale, J. L. Archambault, R. C. Smith and J. Creelman; Sister Universities, R. Moyse and A. Macdermott (Harvard); Graduating Class, S. G. Dixon and M. T. Burke.

In speaking of the growth of the Faculty of Law at McGill, Dean Moyse gave some interesting comparisons by quoting from the files of the Gazette for the year 1855, one article stating that the Law Faculty was in an encouraging situation, as it had, besides a full professor, a lecturer to assist in the work.

He also spoke of the needs of McGill, and said that the demands made during the recent campaign would not be the last tax on the generosity of Montreal by any means.

The menu was enlivened by the fact that the various courses were christened after well-known students in the third year, and by the addition of legal terms of a more or less humourous and appropriate nature.

The Committee in charge of the dinner consisted of Messrs. M. T. Burke, D. Gilmour, H. Scott, A. Mills, J. Kerry, and H. Howard.

PRESENTATION TO CHIEF JUSTICE WETMORE.

The retirement of Hon. E. L. Wetmore, Ex-Chief Justice of Saskatchewan, has not been permitted to go into effect without another example of the esteem in which he is held by members of the legal fraternity.

Yesterday afternoon, J. F. Frame, president of the Regina Bar Association, presented the Ex-Chief Justice on behalf of the association with a handsome polished black ebony cane, with a gold head, on which was inscribed the name of the recipient and the fact that it was presented by the Regina Bar Association.

P. H. Gordon, as secretary of the association, read an appreciative address.

The address was illuminated and on parchment. The presentation took place at the Court-house in the presence of a large number of lawyers.

A COMMON BRITISH CITIZENSHIP.

The report which comes from Ottawa of the conditions for naturalization which have been accepted over the Empire, and which only awaits the necessary legislation,

are:

1. The Government may grant a certificate to an alien who:

A. Has resided in his Majesty's Dominions for a period of not less than five years, or has been in the service of the Crown for not less than five years within the last eight years before the application; and

B. Is of good character and has an adequate knowledge, in the case of Canada, of the English and French language; and

C. Intends if his application is granted either to reside in his Majesty's Dominions or to serve under the Crown.

2. The residence required is residence in the country granting the certificate for not less than one year immediately preceding the application, and previous residence, either in the same country or in some other part of his

Majesty's Dominions for a period of four years within the last eight years before the application.

And there are some further provisions, such as the reserving of discretionary power to the Government and the taking of the oath of allegiance.

The gist of the proposed law, put briefly, is Imperial citizenship after five years residence within the Empire, and acquaintance with one of the languages officially recognized; in England, Australia and New Zealand, English alone; in Canada, English or French; in South Africa, English or Dutch.

WORKMEN'S COMPENSATION LAWS ARE SIMPLE AND EFFECTIVE IN ENGLAND.

(EVIDENCE OF AN AMERICAN EXPERT.)

Mr. Sherman is a graduate of Yale University and of Columbia Law School, was formerly commissioner of labor of the State of New York and has spent much time in Europe studying compensation laws. A summary of his

remarks is as follows:

"Insurance is not an essential feature of the compensation law. Where insurance is required in a compensation law, that requirement is simply an ancillary method of effectuating the purpose of the liability thereby imposed upon the employer.

"There is a specific danger under the compensation law that insurance may thwart the purpose of that law as a regulation for accident prevention. If the employer with a high risk is enabled to insure his liability at the same rate as a competitor with a distinctly lower risk, then the effect of the compensation liability as an incentive to the employer to study out methods and to incur expense to cut down his rate will be defeated. The cost of his insurance is the civil penalty each employer pays for maintaining the hazards of his business and to be effective it must be closely proportionate to those hazards.

TWO PROBLEMS PRESENTED.

Therefore, we have two problems which are logically absolutely distinct. The first problem is to frame a just

and beneficial compensation law. The second problem is to determine how far insurance should be required to effectuate the purpose of the compensation law. Great care must be exercised not to confuse these two problems; otherwise you are apt to sacrifice much of the good to be derived from a proper compensation law by muddling it in a harmful experiment in social insurance.

"Whether insurance should be compulsory or optional under the compensation law, is a question that should be determined by experience. It should be made compulsory only if and where reasonably necessary in order to assure to injured workmen the payment of their compensation. In no event, therefore, should those concerns that are amply able to carry their own insurance be required to buy insurance or to contribute to a state scheme; for that would be pure economic waste."

It is on this portion of Mr. Sherman's argument that the C. P. R. claims that it should have the right to provide its own insurance.

In commenting upon the Washington law Mr. Sherman said:

"One serious objection to the Washington law is that it makes an employer not only an insurer of his own workmen, but an insurer of the workmen of all his competitors. in the same trade, thus multiplying his risk. It taxes him a heavy premium, but does not really insure him because he is subject to another assessment in case the funds run short."

THE BRITISH LAW.

Both the Washington and Ohio laws have been made attractive by their exceptionally low rates, but these are merely experimental rates, and cannot be maintained. Neither state board has published a report in the form and with the details required of private insurance companies. Under neither law has. there been sufficient experience to justify any conclusion as to the sufficiency of the rates or the cost of the scheme.

The British law makes the employer directly liable for compensation to his injured workman and permits him to insure it or not as he chooses and how he chooses.

Sir William Meredith asked what would happen in case the employer broke down and fled from the country.

"The plant is always left," replied Mr. Sherman, "and the accident liability would be a preferred claim."

PREFERS ENGLISH LAW.

Mr. Sherman analyzed the German law in detail in an effort to shew how complicated it was and how unsuitable it would be in Ontario. When asked which one he preferred, he emphatically said that he preferred the British.

"The English law is comparatively simple," he said. "It imposes upon the employer a direct liability to compensate his employes for accidental injuries arising out of and in the course of their employment. The scale of compensation is approximately 50 per cent. of the estimated wage loss from injury, beginning at the end of the first week and under conditions reverting back to the date of injury. The employer may insure or not at his option. Disputes may be settled by arbitration. An employer and his workmen may by agreement substitute a scheme of mutual benefit insurance.

"From the foregoing the conclusion is obvious. For us to adopt substantially any integral part of the German workmen's insurance law would be a leap in the dark-it would be making the welfare of our people the playfield of impulsive experiment and would entail a radical change in our political principles and in our social and industrial habits and customs. Both the British and German laws, although in different ways and to different degrees, are products of gradual development. Even if our ideal be a system of broader and more perfect insurance than that provided by the British law, yet prudence dictates a course of gradual approach. The safest and most surely beneficial. first step on that course would be the adoption of an adaptation of the earlier form of the British law."

VOL. XXXIII. C.L.T.-9