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

136 THE EXECUTIVE GOVERNMENT [PART II been loath to pay. But it is in respect of the criminal liability of a Governor that the position is most anomalous. Under the Imperial Act 11 & 12 Will. III. ¢. 12, it is pro- vided that if any Governor oppresses any of His Majesty’s subjects beyond the seas, or is guilty of any other crime or offence contrary to English law or to the local law, he can be tried by the Court of King’s Bench in England or before Commissioners in any county assigned by the com- mission. This law was extended by 42 Geo. III. c. 85 to all persons employed civilly or in a military capacity abroad, guilty of any offence in their employment. The only place of trial there allowed is the King’s Bench in England, and the Act has been held not to apply to felonies! as the pro- cedure therein laid down, by information, is that appropriate only to misdemeanours, a decision which certainly deprived the Act of most of its value. These statutes were both discussed in the famous case of The Queen v. Eyre,? when it was sought to bring Governor Eyre to justice in England for his exploits in Jamaica. The Queen’s Bench were asked to issue a mandamus to a metropolitan magistrate to hear the evidence which was alleged against Eyre, with a view to his being committed to stand his trial. The Court decided that the case was one in which an indictment could legally be offered in England, and that the magisterial proceedings directed by the Act, 11 & 12 Vict. c. 42, were appropriate, but Eyre escaped conviction, the Grand Jury, despite an eloquent charge by Cockburn C. J., ignoring the indictment presented against him, a decision due rather to party feeling than cool judgement.? Proceedings under the second Act were also taken in the case of General Picton, who was charged with allowing the torture of Luisa Calderon in the island of Trinidad, but the case was adjourned, and General Picton’s death at Waterloo prevented the giving of a decision which would have been against him, but would. it is said, have ended only in a small sentence. More important, perhaps, than these musty relics of * Rex v. Shawe, 5 M. & S. 403. *3Q. B. 487. * On his conduct, cf. Forsyth, op. cit., pp. 551 seq. ¢ 30 St. Tr. 225.

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