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

248 THE EXECUTIVE GOVERNMENT [PART II doing extra work during a vacancy in the bench : this action was attacked in the Assembly, but the Opposition failed to carry the motion of censure : it is clear, however, that the act was illegal! In the case of Western Australia the same Governor, in 1909, was forced to allow the meeting of Parliament to be delayed until July 28, after the return from England of his Premier, who had been there on a visit, and so the country was for a considerable period without legal authority for appropriation at all. In South Australia the habit of signing excess warrants has existed for no less than twenty years, and has been approved, if not recognized as legal, by no less than three ministers, one after another, it being defended by one minister as a convenient and, indeed, necessary means of procedure. It is clear that it merely assists the Lower House to secure its sway over the Upper House, which can hardly reject expenditure which has already been incurred, and this is certainly in South Australia sometimes a source of annoyance to the Upper House. But it is quite helpless in the matter: the only possible action would be to refuse supply, and despite the large powers in law of the Upper House of that state the House dare not interfere with popular expenditure, if the members wish to retain their seats in Parliament. It is significant of the whole position that the Government of Western Australia? announced, evidently with honest pride, in 1910, that though they had the money for a certain public work they would not spend it without a legal appropriation : it is not quite certain whether their audience was as apprecia- tive of the virtue thus displayed as it should have been. New South Wales used to be the worst offender of all. if + See Hobart Mercury, October 15, 1908, for a report of the attack on the Government. For a case in 1877 see Legislative Council Journals, 1877, Sess. 4, No. 11, p. 13. * West Australian, July 4, 1910 (Mr. Gregory's speech). See also the Reports of the Auditor of Western Australia for 1909 and 1910; West Australian, December 15, 1909, December 15, 1910; South Australia Auditor’s Report, 1910, pp. xi, xii. Cf. also Adelaide Advertiser, November 21, 22, 1900, as to personal duty thrown on Governor under Loan Act No. 648 of 1896. The practice in Newfoundland is also very irregular.

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