CRIMINAL JURISDICTION. Co
This limited power of criminal jurisdiction does not Rules of
: . s 2 evidence.
extend to the alteration of the rules of evidence existing for
the protection of persons accused of offences; a man there-
fore cannot be compelled to criminate himself, even though
the offence be one created by a provincial Legislature’,
In so far as a province has power to enact penal laws, it Procedure
has an implied power to regulate the procedure requisite for
enforcing such laws®
The point has been raised in Quebec, whether a provincial Punich-
. . . . ment.
Legislature has power to punish by both fine and imprison-
ment or by one only of these modes. In one case’ the latter
view was taken, but in a subsequent case it was held that
the word or in s. 92 (15) is not used in a disjunctive sense®.
A province it has been held may enforce its penal laws
by hard labour in addition to imprisonment®.
Though this power of making criminal laws is vested in
the Dominion, the Attorney-General of the province is the
proper officer to prosecute in the courts of justice in the
province’.
Election Petitions. By section 41 of the Act it was pro- Election
vided that until the Parliament of the Dominion should Petitions.
otherwise determine, the old mode of hearing Election
Petitions was to continue, and it was held® that this gave
jurisdiction to the Dominion Parliament.
By an Act passed in 1874° the existing provincial courts
were constituted courts for the trial of Election Petitions,
1 Regina v. Roddy, 41 U. C. Q. B. 291; 1 Cart. 709.
3 Pope v. Griffith, 16 L. C. Jurist 169; 2 Cart. 291. Ex parte Duncan
16 In. C. Jurist 188: 2 Cart. 297. Page v. Griffith, 17 L. C. Jurist 302:
2 Cart, 308.
3 Ex parte Papin, 15 L. C. Jurist 334; 16 L. C. Jurist 319; § Cart. pp.
320-323. + Paige v. Griffith, 18 Ln. C. Jurist 119; 2 Cart. 324.
5 See the English Cases of Fowler v. Padget, 7 T. R. 514 and Ditcher v.
Denison, 11 Moore’s P. C. 838 where “or” in an Act of Parliament was held
to mean “and.” 8 Regina v. Frawley, O. 7 App. Rep. 246.
* 4, G.v. Niagara Falls Inter. Bridge Co., 20 Grant 34; 1 Cart. 813.
8 Valin v. Langlois, 5 App. Cas. 115; 1 Cart. p. 158.
9% 37 Vie. ¢. 10.
