The law of friendly societies, and industrial and provident societies, with the acts, observations thereon, forms of rules etc., reports of leading cases at length, and a copious index

Responsible government in the Dominions (Vol. 1)

Bibliographic data

Monograph

Identifikator:: 875232663

URN:: urn:nbn:de:zbw-retromon-2698

Document type:: Monograph

Title:: The law of friendly societies, and industrial and provident societies, with the acts, observations thereon, forms of rules etc., reports of leading cases at length, and a copious index

Place of publication:: with the acts, observations thereon, forms of rules etc., reports of leading cases at length, and a copious index$gTenth edition, revised and enlarged

Publisher:: Shaw and Sons

Year of publication:: 1881

Scope:: 1 Online-Ressource (XII, 303 Seiten)

Digitisation:: 2017

Collection:: Economics Books

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

Chapter

Document type:: Monograph

Structure type:: Chapter

Title:: Part III. Industrial and provident societies

Collection:: Economics Books

376 PARLIAMENTS OF THE DOMINIONS [PART III Supreme Court in the case in re Criminal Code, Bigamy Sections. The Code of 1892 by ss. 275, 276, punished bigamy committed anywhere by any British subject who left Canada for the purpose. The validity of the enactment was upheld by four judges, Gwynne, Sedgewick, King, and Girouard. The last-named judge rested his decision on the highest grounds: the Dominion Parliament was, he said, a subordinate legislature, but subordinate only to the Imperial Parlia- ment, and it had all the legislative authority of the Imperial Parliament so long as it did not contravene the positive prohibition of repugnancy enacted by the Colonial Laws Validity Act, 1865; and the other judges held that at any rate the actual exercise of power in this case, one of a Canadian resident, was justified, adopting the view that Macleod’s case depended on the wideness of the terms of the Act. On the other hand, the Chief Justice pronounced the sections invalid, and held that the limitation of the Act to cases of persons who left Canada for the purpose of committing bigamy did not render it valid. He cited Macleod’s case as decisive of the view, and reminded the Court of his judgement in Peek v. Shields? in which he had held that an act committed in England could not be an offence under the insolvency law of Canada? It seems probable that in the actual decision the majority of the Court were right and the Chief Justice wrong, but only on the ground that the offence penalized was leaving Canada with intent. Clearly the law could punish any leaving of Canada—the crime is committed at latest at the last moment of departure within the territory —and if it punished sub modo the fact that the act which proved the intent was done elsewhere could not be said to invalidate the penalty on the leaving. In one very interesting case, The Ship ‘DD. C. Whitney’ v. 8t. Clair Navigation Co.* the question was whether Canadian ' 27 8. C. R. 461. * 88. C.R. 579. ' Overruling the Ontario Appeal Court decision in 6 O. A. R. 639: 3 Cart. 283. + (1907) 38 8. C. R. 303, on appeal from the Exchequer Court, Toronto Admiralty Division, 10 Ex. C. R. 1.

Access restriction

Copyright

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

Monograph

Chapter

Table of contents

Download

Volume

Chapter

This page

Image fragment

Citation links

Citation recommendation