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

cHAP. tI] THE GOVERNOR AND MINISTERS 175 and had the satisfaction of receiving a full approval of his conduct from the Secretary of State for the Colonies! In 1877 the Lower House of the Parliament of Tasmania passed a vote of censure upon the Governor, Mr. Weld, for his conduct in granting his ministers a dissolution, but here again the Governor’s conduct was upheld by the Secretary of State? In the long controversy in South Africa which led to Sir Bartle Frere’s dismissal of the Molteno Ministry, it was moved in the Assembly by Mr. Merriman, that the Governor had exceeded his constitutional functions in insisting on the control of the Colonial forces being placed under the Imperial authorities, and that the action taken by the Governor had been prejudicial to the Colony and had delayed the termination of the rebellion. It was then ruled by the Speaker that it was ‘ contrary to constitutional principle and parliamentary practice to move any direct censure on His Excellency the Governor as the representative of the Sovereign, and it being held by the authorities on parliamentary government that the ministers in office are responsible for the actions of His Excellency the Governor’, The motion was therefore amended to avoid any direct censure, but it was not carried even in that form.* In 1875 Sir H. Robinson was the object of a vote of censure in Victoria because of the case of the liberation of a convict without advice, and was criticized for his action regarding the dismissal of a volunteer officer.’ In a very recent case in Queensland the speech from the Throne was replied to by an address in which regret was ! New Zealand Parl. Pap., 1878, A. 1, p. 1; 2, p. 7; Gazette, June 21. 1878; Rusden, New Zealand, iii. 206-209. * Tasmania Legislative Council Journals, 1877, Sess. 2, No, 45; Sess. 4, No. 19. 3 Cf. Molteno, Sir John Molieno, ii. 383. * Cape House of Assembly Votes, May 29, 1878; Parl. Pap., C. 2144. pp. 196, 197, Cf. below, pp. 219, note 1, 234, 235. * Cf. Parl, Pap., C. 1202 and 1248. It was proposed in April 1866 to ensure the Lieutenant-Governor of New Brunswick for his action in dis- agreeing with ministers (Pope, Sir John Macdonald, i. 297), and a vote of censure was passed on Lieutenant-Governor Doyle of Nova Scotia in 1868, which he insisted on the House expunging (ibid., i. 299).

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