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

110 THE EXECUTIVE GOVERNMENT [part 11 sovereign power, out of the limits of the authority so given to him, would be purely void, and the courts of the Colony over which he presided could not give it any legal effect. We think the office of Governor is of the latter description, for no authority or dictum has been cited before us to show that a governor can be considered as having delegation of the whole royal power in any colony, as between him and the subject, when it is not expressly given by his commission. And we are not aware that any commission to colonial governors conveys such an extensive authority.’ Again, it is said :—* All that we decide is that the simple act of the Governor alone, unauthorised by his commission, and not proved to be expressly or impliedly authorised by any instructions, is not equivalent to such an act done by the Crown itself.’ In the well-known case! of the action brought by Mr. Phil- lips against Mr. Eyre, the former Governor of Jamaica, for acts done by him, whilst he was governor, in suppressing an insurrection in that Colony, the question raised was, whether the Colonial Act of Indemnity was an answer to an action brought in England. That such an Act was thought to be necessary, and that it was alone relied on as a defence to the action, raises a strong presumption that it had been thought that the action might, but for this Act, have been maintained. It is to be observed, however, that the facts of the rebellion and of its suppression, were averred in the plea by way of introduction to the Act of Indemnity, and Mr. Justice Willes in delivering the judgment of the Exchequer Chamber, after saying that the court had dis cussed the validity of the defence upon the only question argued by counsel, viz., the effect of the Colonial Act, adds,2— ‘ but we are not to be understood as thereby intimating that the plea might not be sustained upon mors general grounds as showing that the acts complained of were incident to the enforcement of martial law.” It is to be noticed that the nature of those acts, and the occasion upon which they were sommitted, were shown by distinct averments in the plea. It is apparent from these authorities that the governor of a Colony (in ordinary cases) cannot be regarded as a viceroy ; nor can it be assumed that he possesses general sovereign power. His authority is derived from his commission, and limited to the powers thereby expressly or impliedly en- trusted to him. Let it be granted that for acts of power done by a governor under and within the limits of his com- ' Phillips v. Eyre, 4 Q. B. 225; 6 Q. B. 1. ! 6 Q. B. at p. 31.

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