Der Steinkohlenbergbau in Preussen und das Gesetz des abnehmenden Ertrages

Urtheile der deutschen Handelskammern über Zollpolitik und Handelsverträge

Bibliographic data

Monograph

Identifikator:: 876560443

URN:: urn:nbn:de:zbw-retromon-2470

Document type:: Monograph

Author:: Bosenick, Alfred http://d-nb.info/gnd/116266589

Title:: Der Steinkohlenbergbau in Preussen und das Gesetz des abnehmenden Ertrages

Place of publication:: Tübingen

Publisher:: Verlag der H. Laupp'schen Buchhandlung

Year of publication:: 1906

Scope:: 1 Online-Ressource (VII, 114 Seiten)

Digitisation:: 2017

Collection:: Economics Books

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

438 PARLIAMENTS OF THE DOMINIONS [PART III Validity Act, 1865. It has been held in New Zealand, as, for example, during the discussions of the possibility of rendering the Upper Chamber elective ! and of changing the title of ‘ General Assembly’ to ‘ Parliament’, that no altera- tion can be made in these sections as the law at present stands. It would seem doubtful whether this doctrine is strictly correct. The Act of 1865 is general in its terms, and it would appear to give a right of alteration of the constitution subject only to the observation of such forms as may be prescribed. It is true that the existence of the express provisions of the Act of 1857 may be held to mitigate against this restriction, but the argument is not decisive? and it may seriously be doubted whether if the power were exercised the exercise would be held to be invalid by any Court. The question is obviously of more than theoretic interest, since alteration of the Upper House has been often discussed, though hitherto vainly, and it would seem per- fectly possible that the question may in the future cease to be merely academic if Mr. Seddon’s idea of a single chamber revives. Bills altering the Governor’s salary or the appro- priation for native affairs still require reservation under 8. 65 of the Act of 1852. $4. THE ALTERATION OF THE SOUTH AFRICAN CONSTITUTIONS In the case of the Cape there were no restrictions under the Constitution Ordinance of 1852 as to the alteration of the constitution; alterations could therefore be made by a simple Act, which would no doubt have been reserved in the case of important changes as in the case of Bill No. 1 of 1872 to establish responsible government, although re- servation was not legally requisite. The case in Natal was precisely the same under the Act ' Parliamentary Debates, 1907, cxxxix. 276. * Cf. Dicey, Law of the Constitution’, p. 106, note. * In the case of Cape and Natal alike the rule before responsible govern- ment was that alteration required reservation; this was law in Natal by 5. 51 of the letters patent of July 15, 1856.

Access restriction

Copyright

Full text: Urtheile der deutschen Handelskammern über Zollpolitik und Handelsverträge

Monograph

Table of contents

Download

Volume

Chapter

This page

Image fragment

Citation links

Citation recommendation