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

130 THE EXECUTIVE GOVERNMENT [part II Governor-General by the letters patent or instructions down to 1905. But did that power carry with it the sole right in Canada to pardon offences, including offences against the laws of the provinces? It was the intention of the Imperial Govern- ment to effect this end, for they declined to accept No. 44 of the Quebec resolutions, which gave the power to the Lieutenant- Governors, and, on the analogy of the cases of the appoint- ment of Queen’s Counsel, the reply in Canada was for a time that pardons could be conferred only by one who had a delegation of the royal prerogative, and that in Canada the only person who had such a delegation was the Governor- General! This view was supported by the terms of the instructions down to 1905. Further, as the Crown was not, in the view of the Canadian authorities or Courts, a part of the Provincial Legislatures, the Dominion Parliament alone could confer the prerogative of pardoning if any legislature were to do so. This view was naturally no longer tenable after the decisions of the Privy Council in the case of The Maritime Bank of Canada v. The Receiver-General of New Brunswick? and it was accordingly held, not only by the Courts of Ontario ® but also by the Supreme Court of Canada, that the Provincial Act of Ontario which authorized the Lieutenant-Governor to pardon offences against the laws of the provinces was perfectly valid and a good exercise of power.4 But it is clear that the Courts held that the power must be granted by some authority, either by the prerogative or by legislation. With this decision, as with the decision in the case of the appointment of Queen’s Counsel, is bound up the fact that the Dominion Parliament could not legislate on the topic, * Of. Canada Sess. Pap.,1869,No.16; 1875,No. 11. * [1892] A. C. 437. ' 22 0. R. 222; 19 0. A. R. 31. See Blake, The Executive Power Case, Toronto, 1892, Ontario Sess. Pap., 1888, No. 37, where the power is claimed as inherent in the Lieutenant-Governor and Lefroy, Legislative Power in Canada, pp. 130-4. ¢ 23 8. C. R. 458, where in view of the exact wording the validity of the Act is upheld, but it is not admitted that the power to pardon would else exist. The Provincial Acts (e.g. Ontario, 1910, c. 3) all enact it, but also enact that the power so conferred is not to be deemed necessarily not otherwise to appertain.

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