Responsible government in the Dominions: Responsible government in the Dominions

Responsible government in the Dominions (Vol. 2)

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:: 1896935052

URN:: urn:nbn:de:zbw-retromon-238139

Document type:: Volume

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

Title:: Responsible government in the Dominions

Volume count:: Vol. 2

Place of publication:: Oxford

Publisher:: Clarendon Pr.

Year of publication:: 1912

Scope:: XI Seiten, Seiten 570-1100

Digitisation:: 2022

Collection:: Economics Books

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

Chapter

Document type:: Multivolume work

Structure type:: Chapter

Title:: Part IV. The federations and the union // Chapter I. The dominion of Canada

Collection:: Economics Books

CHAP. I] THE DOMINION OF CANADA 713 bo be run up to the boundaries of the provinces,! and also by their criticisms on Provincial Acts which empower companies to do things outside the limits of the province. They have insisted on the view that the express prohibition contained in the British North America Act must be given effect to, and, as seen above, this view has been enforced recently by the disallowance of the Saskatchewan and other provincial Acts above mentioned, all of which incorporate companies without regarding this limitation. 2 But the power of the provinces cannot be ignored. If & provincial and a Dominion railway cross, both consents, that of the province no less than that of the Dominion, are heeded,® though the transfer of a railway declared a federal railway cannot be authorized by a provincial Act.t In the case of Montreal Street Railway Co. v. City of Montreal ® the majority of the Supreme Court (Fitzpatrick C.J., Girouard, Idington, and Duff JJ.) held (Davies and Anglin JJ. dissent- ing) that it was not within the power of the Dominion by s. 8 (6) of the Railway Act to give the Railway Commissioners jurisdiction to make orders respecting through traffic over a provincial tramway or railway which crosses a railway subject to the authority of the Parliament of Canada. The case was decidedly a difficult one : a distinction was drawn between a provincial railway declared federal and a federal line which was interprovincial, and the judgements of Davies and Anglin show how much can be said for the Dominion, especially when the case of Attorney-General for British Columbia v. Canadian Pacific Railway Co.® establishes the right of the Dominion to affect by railway legislation the property of the province. * On this, cf. Dow v. Black, 6 P. C. 272. * This has been held valid in Ontario as well as by the Supreme Court (above, p. 705) ; see Clarke v. Union Fire Insurance Con. 86 0, R. 223: 10 0. P.R. 313. * Credit Valley Railway Co. v. Great Western Railway Co.. 25 Gr. 507: 1 Cart. 822, * Bourgoin v. Chemin de Fer de M. ontréal, Ottawa, et Occidental. 5 App. Cas. 381, at p. 404. ® (1910) 43 8. C. R. 197. ¢ 119061 A. C. 204.

Access restriction

Copyright

fullscreen: Responsible government in the Dominions (Vol. 2)

Multivolume work

Volume

Chapter

Table of contents

Download

Volume

Chapter

This page

Image fragment

Citation links

Citation recommendation