CHAP, 111] JUDICIAL APPEALS 1365
An Order in Council was also issued in respect of the Trans-
vaal before the Union of South Africa was constituted.’
An Order in Council confined to matters of procedure has
been issued in respect of the High Court of the Common-
wealth of Australia from which appeals lie only by special
leave, and the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of
the Union of South Africa, which is in the same position
under s. 106 of the South Africa Act, 1909.
In one class of cases the Privy Council will not exercise
jurisdiction at all, namely, election petitions, because these
are matters referred to Courts in quite a special capacity,
and not ordinary judicial matters. This was decided in
Théberge v. Landry? and has been followed by the High
Court of Australia in Holmes v. Angwin.3
§ 2. THE LIMITATION OF THE PREROGATIVE
There has been noted above the Canadian Act which pur-
ports to bar the prerogative in criminal cases. This Act
stands in a peculiar position, for the Judicial Committee
cannot, it is clear, desire to deal with such cases. On the other
hand, the proposal of the Dominion Parliament to set up
2 Supreme Court barring all appeal thence to the Privy
Council was abandoned on an intimation that the law would
certainly not receive the royal assent.’ ‘In New Zealand
Sir R. Stout has protested energetically against certain
judgements of the Privy Council,® but the Government has
made no move in favour of the weakening of the power of the
Court in question. In Australia, however, the limitation of
* Natal Bank, Ltd. v. Rood’s Heirs, [1909] T. S. 402; [1910] A. C. 570.
* 2 App. Cas. 102. Cf. a land case, Moses v. Parker, ex parte Moses,
1896] A. C. 245, where it was held that the special character of the jurisdic-
“ion (Tasmania Act, 22 Vict. No. 10) forbade an appeal. Cf. 30 N. Z. L. R.
530. Contra, Reg. v. Demers, [1900] A. C. 103, as regards the Quebec
petition of right ; re Robert Barbour, 12 N. 8. W. L. R. 90.
'4C. LR. 297.
\ Lord Norton, Nineteenth Century, July 1879, p. 173.
Wallis v. Solicitor-General of New Zealand, [1903] A. C. 173. See also
Parl, Pap., Cd. 3523, pp- 200-30 (discussion of Court at Colonial Conference,
1907); 3524, pp. 179 seq. (complaints of its action); Jebb, Colonial
Nationalism, pp. 303. 304. Cf. Ewart. Kingdom of Canada, pp. 235-45.
