Responsible government in the Dominions: Responsible government in the Dominions

Responsible government in the Dominions (Vol. 1)

Bibliographic data

Multivolume work

Identifikator:: 1896933912

Document type:: Multivolume work

Author:: Keith, Arthur Berriedale http://d-nb.info/gnd/119086794

Title:: Responsible government in the Dominions

Place of publication:: Oxford

Publisher:: Clarendon Press

Year of publication:: 1912-

Collection:: Economics Books

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

Volume

Identifikator:: 1896934455

URN:: urn:nbn:de:zbw-retromon-236504

Document type:: Volume

Author:: Keith, Arthur Berriedale http://d-nb.info/gnd/119086794

Title:: Responsible government in the Dominions

Volume count:: Vol. 1

Place of publication:: Oxford

Publisher:: Clarendon Pr.

Year of publication:: 1912

Scope:: LI, 568 Seiten

Digitisation:: 2022

Collection:: Economics Books

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

Chapter

Document type:: Multivolume work

Structure type:: Chapter

Title:: Part II. The executive Government

Collection:: Economics Books

L106 THE EXECUTIVE GOVERNMENT [PART II Captain-General and Governor-in-Chief of the island of Jamaica and its dependencies, and was and still is as such entitled to the privileges and exemptions appertaining to such office and to the holder thereof, and that the acts complained of in the said declaration were done by him as Governor of the said Island of Jamaica, and in the exercise of his reasonable discretion as such, and as acts of State ; and this the defendant is ready to verify, wherefore he prays judgment if he ought to be compelled to answer in this action.’ The plaintiff demurred to this plea, and the present appeal is from the judgment of the Supreme Court allowing the demurrer, and ordering the appellant to answer further to She writ and declaration. The plea is in form a dilatory plea, and does not profess to contain a defence in bar of the action. It was advisedly pleaded as a plea of privilege, with the object of raising the question of the immunity of the appellant as Governor from being impleaded and compelled to answer in the courts of the Colony. That this was so is plain not only from the form of the plea, but from an arrangement come to between the parties before the argument of the demurrer. In an inter- locutory proceeding to set aside a judgment of non pros. as irregularly obtained, an order was made by consent that all pleas of the defendant, Sir Anthony Musgrave, except the plea of privilege by attorney, be struck out, together with replications and entry of judgment of non pros. with liberty to the plaintiff to demur, it being arranged that the demurrer be set down for hearing at the present term, and if a judgment respondeat ouster the defendant, Sir Anthony have liberty to plead not guilty by statutes.’ The decision of the Supreme Court was accordingly given upon the plea, as a plea of privilege, and altogether upon this aspect of it, the judgment being one of respondeat ouster. Upon the hearing of the present appeal the Attorney- General, on the part of the appellant, whilst not giving up the plea in the shape in which it was pleaded, insisted that if it disclosed a good defence in substance to the action, as he contended it did, its form and the arrangement of the parties might be disregarded, and a general judgment given for the defendant; and, though under protest from the respondent’s counsel, the discussion at their Lordships’ bar was allowed to take the wider scope which the Attorney- General’s contention introduced into the case.

Access restriction

Copyright

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

Multivolume work

Volume

Chapter

Table of contents

Download

Volume

Chapter

This page

Image fragment

Citation links

Citation recommendation