<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<TEI xmlns="http://www.tei-c.org/ns/1.0">
  <teiHeader>
    <fileDesc>
      <titleStmt>
        <title>The Constitution of Canada</title>
        <author>
          <persName>
            <forname>Joseph Edwin Crawford</forname>
            <surname>Munro</surname>
          </persName>
        </author>
      </titleStmt>
      <publicationStmt />
      <sourceDesc>
        <bibl>
          <msIdentifier>
            <idno>1895543282</idno>
          </msIdentifier>
        </bibl>
      </sourceDesc>
    </fileDesc>
  </teiHeader>
  <text>
    <body>
      <div>PROPERTY AND CIVIL RIGHTS. 246 
Judicial Committee, “it is impossible to advance a step 
in the construction of a scheme for the administration of 
insolvent estates without interfering with and modifying 
some of the ordinary rights of property and other civil 
rights®.” 
Patents, copyrights, lands reserved for Indians as well as 
other specific subjects enumerated in the 91st section, relate 
to property and civil rights, and therefore it is only as 
regards property and civil rights other than the property 
and civil rights assigned to the Dominion Parliament that 
fall within the jurisdiction of the provincial Legislatures. 
In some cases a province may avoid any conflict by Saving 
inserting a special clause in the provincial Act. A grant of was 
shore or of land extending into the water, with a proviso that 
the grant was not to give any right to interfere with 
« sommerce and navigation,” was held valid, inasmuch as 
this proviso reserved all Dominion rights’. 
The provincial rights are limited also by the implied Implied 
power of the Dominion to legislate on property and civil Jompal 
rights so far as that is necessary to exercise jurisdiction over 
the subjects assigned to it. 
On this ground the Dominion Act, 34 Vie. c. 5, s. 46, 
authorizing the transfer of warehouse receipts to banks by 
direct endorsement was held valid, inasmuch as such legis- 
lative power was implied in the right to regulate trade, 
commerce and banking”. 
The validity of the Canadian Temperance Act 1878, which 
authorized the inhabitants of a city or county under certain 
restrictions to prohibit the sale of intoxicating liquors, was 
challenged on this ground amongst others, that it affected 
« property and civil rights” in the provinces, but the Judicial 
1 Cushing v. Dupuy, 5 App. Cas. 409; 1 Cart. 252: and see Kinney v. 
Dudman, N. 8. 2 Russell &amp; Chesley 19; 2 Cart. 412. ‘ 
2 Normand v. St Lawrence Navigation Co. Q. 5 L. R. 215; 2 Cart. 231. 
3 Smith v. the Merchants’ Bank, O. 28 Grant, 629 ; 1 Cart. 828, and see 
Crombie v. Jackson, 34 U. C. Q. B. 575; 1 Cart. 685.</div>
    </body>
  </text>
</TEI>
