The decision of the Supreme Court of Canada is relevant to our study of Persons and Property for which main reasons? {pick all that apply]

Select 2 correct answer(s)

	it demonstrated that women were once not full legal persons in Canada
	it showed that judges in Canada interpreted and applied the law to exclude women from public roles
	it established that men could be Senators based on their gender alone
	it demonstrated that Canadian judges did not rely on rulings made by English judges

Based on his decision Chief Justice Anglin appears as someone who was:

	A radical reformer who sought to bring equality between men and women
	A voice in support of male superiority in Canadian society
	A cautious incrementalist who believed in women's rights, just not now

The Interpretation Act (Lord Brougham's Act) stated then (as now) that "words importing the Masculine gender shall be deemed ... to include Females.... unless the contrary as to Gender.... Is expressed provided." Chief Justice Anglin reasoned that this provision:

Question 3 options:

	Applied in the case as women as the male pronoun was used to describe qualifications for eligibility for appointment.
	Did not apply in this case as the word "person" in the BNA, expressly excluded women as a matter of clear and plain interpretation
	Did not apply because the BNA used the term "person" not "men".