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

cuAP. viI] CABINET SYSTEM IN DOMINIONS 329 to turn it out.! In 1903 in the same province the Ministry retained office though supported on a motion for a dissolution only by the Speaker’s vote.? There is no fixed rule in the Colonies, just as there is hardly yet one in England, as to whether a Ministry should resign when a general election turns against them, or wait to be turned out on the meeting of the House. The older custom (as, for example, in Canada in 1848 and Ontario in 1871) was no doubt to meet the House and be ejected by a vote of no confidence, as was usual in England up to 1868, when Mr. Disraeli retired on defeat at the polls followed by Mr. Glad- stone’s resignation in 1874, and this new precedent was followed by Mr. McCulloch’s Ministry in Victoria in 1877, and by Mr. Mackenzie’s Ministry in Canada in 1878. So in 1884 the Atkinson Ministry and in 1887 the Stout Ministry in New Zealand resigned on the result of the polls. On the other hand, Sir C. Tupper did not resign on the defeat of his party at the polls in 1896 until he found that the Governor- General was no longer prepared to accept his advice as to appointments and so forth.® But he may have intended to resign before Parliament met, as he based his retention of office in part at least on the fact that all the results of the polls were not certain owing to recounts. In British Colum- bia in 1900 Mr. Martin’s Ministry clung to office for months, though it had no parliamentary support at all. In 1891 the Atkinson Ministry in New Zealand resigned when the t Canada Sess. Pap., 1900, No. 174. On the other hand, in 1874 Mr, Molteno wished to resign on a defeat (Wilmot, South Africa, i. 244, 245), and Mr. Daglish resigned office in Western Australia in 1905 as he could not command a really undivided support in the Lower House for his followers ; see Parliamentary Debates, xxvii. 803 ; and in 1909 Sir E. Lewis in Tasmania resigned, with the result that after a very brief period of Labour rule the party reunited and turned that party out. In the Cape, Sir G. Sprigg retired similarly in 1881 and 1890 (Wilmot, South Africa, i. 142; iii. 18), and Sir T. Scanlen in 1884. * Canadian Annual Review, 1903, p. 218. Cf. ibid., 1902, p. 74; 1901, pp. 333, 334. 3 Canada Sess. Pap., 1896, Sess. 2, No. 7. Cf. a similar case in New Brunswick, Canadian Annual Review, 1908, p. 402; and in Ontario, ibid., 1905, p. 489.

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