Das Kapital: Der Produktionsprozeß des Kapitals

Responsible government in the Dominions (Vol. 3)

Bibliographic data

Multivolume work

Identifikator:: 1780159447

Document type:: Multivolume work

Author:: Marx, Karl http://d-nb.info/gnd/118578537

Title:: Das Kapital

Place of publication:: Berlin

Publisher:: J. H. W. Dietz Nachf., G. m. b. H.

Year of publication:: 1926-

Collection:: Economics Books

Usage license:: Get license information via the feedback formular.

Volume

Identifikator:: 1780159595

URN:: urn:nbn:de:zbw-retromon-188277

Document type:: Volume

Author:: Marx, Karl http://d-nb.info/gnd/118578537

Title:: Der Produktionsprozeß des Kapitals

Volume count:: 1.1928

Place of publication:: Berlin

Publisher:: J. H. W. Dietz Nachf., G. m. b. H.

Year of publication:: 1928

Scope:: XLVIII, 768 Seiten

Digitisation:: 2022

Collection:: Economics Books

Usage license:: Get license information via the feedback formular.

1154 ADMINISTRATION AND LEGISLATION [PART V tiaries, and they avoided the necessity of any formal treaty by arranging for concurrent legislation. But they had already negotiated with representatives of America at Ottawa, and it is significant that in the Canadian House of Commons, challenged on a question of the precedence of consuls, Sir W. Laurier expressed the view that though the position of consuls was anomalous it was nevertheless semi-diplomatic, and that it would be desirable that prece- dence should be accorded to them, but he did not raise this issue at the Conference. It is clear, indeed, that the recent negotiations have raised in a new form the old view which was held by the Liberal party in Canada, that the Dominion Government should have the treaty power. Mr. Blake spoke in favour of this view on October 3, 1874.2 and in 1882, and Sir W. Laurier re-echoed the matter in his speech on the Alaskan debate on October 23, 1903.2 With this view may be compared that of the Royal Commission appointed by the Governor of Victoria to consider federal union, which recommended that the ! See Debates, 1910-1, pp. 973 seq. See also his answer in the House of Commons on December 2, 1909, pp. 853-5 ; Canadian Annual Review, 1909, p. 162. On the other hand, on December 15, 1909 (ibid., 1582-5), he emphatically declined to adopt the proposal of a Canadian attaché to the Embassy at Washington on the ground that Mr. Bryce’s services were quite adequate, and in January 1911 he publicly eulogized the services of the Ambassador in negotiating treaties for Canada. The praise was deserved : Mr. Bryce’s term of office saw not merely the Fisheries Arbi- tration Treaty of 1909, but also a Pecuniary Claims Treaty (1911), a Pelagic Sealing Treaty (1911), Arbitration Treaties (1908 and 1911), and treaties for the Passamaquoddy boundary (1910), the regulation of boundary waters, including a general provision for an arbitration tribunal for Canadian questions (1909), which may solve informally many difficulties as to diplo- matic intercourse, transit of prisoners, wrecking privileges, &ec. * See Willison, Sir Wilfrid Laurier, i. 206 seq. Cf. Goldwin Smith, Canada, p. 187 ; House of Commons Debates, 1882, p. 1075; 1887, p. 376; 1889, pp. 171-94 (Cartwright) ; 1892, p. 1123 (Mills). * See Canadian Annual Review, 1903, pp. 328-330, where Mr. Borden’s and Sir C. Tupper’s views were both given. Cf. also Sir W. Laurier in Debates, 1907-8, p. 1260 ; 1909, p. 1980 (on External Affairs Department, Act 8 & 9 Edw. VIL ec. 13). But see Mr. Asquith’s reply in House of Commons. March 3. 1909 (i. 1421, 1422).

Access restriction

Copyright

Object: Responsible government in the Dominions (Vol. 3)

Multivolume work

Volume

Table of contents

Download

Volume

Chapter

This page

Image fragment

Citation links

Citation recommendation