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 III. The Parliaments of the Dominions

Collection:: Economics Books

358 PARLIAMENTS OF THE DOMINIONS [PART 111 the two cases quoted had put an end to the doctrine which appeared at one time to have been concurred in that a Colonial Legislature was a delegate of the Imperial Parliament. It was a Legislature restricted to the area of its powers, but within that area unrestricted, and not acting as an agent or a delegate. Again, in Dobie v. The Temporalities Board, the Privy Council held that within the limits prescribed to them by the British North America Act, Provincial Legisla- tures were supreme, and there was no limit to the authority of a supreme legislature except the lack of Executive power to enforce its enactments. If the Legislatures do not act by delegated authority, it is entirely within their discretion by what means and in what manner they shall carry out the duties to legislate for the peace, order, and good government entrusted to them. This was asserted clearly in the case of Riel v. The Queen? where it was contended that the Canadian Act 43 Vict. c. 25, which provided for the administration of criminal justice in the North-West Territories, was ultra vires, and that the Imperial Parliament could not have intended to permit the Dominion Parliament to legislate with regard to the high crime of treason. or as to altering the rights, under an English statute, of a man accused of the crime, and further, that the Dominion Act was not necessary for peace. order, and good yovernment. It was clearly laid down by the Court that this doctrine was not tenable. They said — It appears to be suggested that any provisions different from the provisions which in this country have been made for administering peace. order. and good government. 2 "7 App. Cas. 136. Cf. Lafferty v. Lincoln, 38 S. C. R. 620. On the other hand, according to North Cypress v. Canadian Pacific Raihway Co., 35 8. C. R. 550, the North-Western Territories Legislature was a new delegate of the Canadian Parliament. * 10 App. Cas. 675. * This is the technical phrase now always used in conferring legislative power. The older phrase prefixed the needless word * public’, and had welfare’ for ‘order’; so e.g. the Royal Commission to the Governor- General of Canada in respect of each of the Maritime Provinces as late as 1861. and see 3 & 4 Vict. c. 35.5. 3. But though the change was presumably

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