Responsible government in the Dominions: Responsible government in the Dominions

Responsible government in the Dominions (Vol. 1)

Bibliographic data

Multivolume work

Identifikator:: 1896933912

Document type:: Multivolume work

Author:: Keith, Arthur Berriedale http://d-nb.info/gnd/119086794

Title:: Responsible government in the Dominions

Place of publication:: Oxford

Publisher:: Clarendon Press

Year of publication:: 1912-

Collection:: Economics Books

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

Volume

Identifikator:: 1896934455

URN:: urn:nbn:de:zbw-retromon-236504

Document type:: Volume

Author:: Keith, Arthur Berriedale http://d-nb.info/gnd/119086794

Title:: Responsible government in the Dominions

Volume count:: Vol. 1

Place of publication:: Oxford

Publisher:: Clarendon Pr.

Year of publication:: 1912

Scope:: LI, 568 Seiten

Digitisation:: 2022

Collection:: Economics Books

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

Chapter

Document type:: Multivolume work

Structure type:: Chapter

Title:: Part II. The executive Government

Collection:: Economics Books

CHAP. TV] THE GOVERNOR AS HEAD 187 arged that they were entitled to a dissolution, as the House had been elected under the auspices of their rivals, and there was every prospect that an election would leave them in a substantial majority. The Governor declined, because he did not think there was any certainty of a change in the views of the country, there was no great question at issue, other arrangements were possible, and there was no grant of supply. He could not undertake to consider a dissolution unless supply were granted for three months. The Ministry then advanced the view that the power to dissolve was one resting on the Constitution Act, not on the prerogative, and therefore should be exercised on ministerial advice without regard to the grant of supply. The Governor rejoined that he had a clear discretion to dissolve under the Act, and that the royal instructions left him full discretion to refuse to dissolve despite ministers’ advice, and he refused to dissolve. Ulti- mately Parliament was prorogued, the usual supplies having been voted! A month later the Governor was again asked bo dissolve, but he had now come to the conclusion that it was not necessary to do so, as the Premier could probably command a majority in the next Parliament. On the other hand, the Premier argued that the Governor was only a constitutional monarch, and must dissolve on advice. The matter was referred to the Secretary of State for the Colonies, who on February 15, 1878, definitely approved the views taken by the Governor of his rights and his duties, while emphasizing his duty to consider carefully the views of his ministers. In July 1879 the Government, however, was de- feated in the House on a motion of no confidence, and the new Governor consented to dissolve on condition that Parliament should be called as soon as possible. This was agreed to, but both Houses addressed the Governor to secure that there should be no delay in summoning them, and the Governor then asked for an assurance from the Premier that he would advise the House to be summoned early? The assurance New Zealand Parl. Pap., 1877, A. 7; 1878, A. 1, p. 3. bid. A. 2, p. 14; Gazette, 1878, pp. 911-14, ibid., 1879, A. 1 and 2; Rusden, New Zealand, iii. 278 seq.

Access restriction

Copyright

fullscreen: Responsible government in the Dominions (Vol. 1)

Multivolume work

Volume

Chapter

Table of contents

Download

Volume

Chapter

This page

Image fragment

Citation links

Citation recommendation