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

378 PARLIAMENTS OF THE DOMINIONS [PART III was registered in Scotland, had been registered in Newfound- land the Legislature could not affect acts done on the high seas bevond its territorial limits. He said :(— The Terra Nova is a ship of the British nation, and as such the Imperial Parliament would unquestionably be competent to give effect to an Act prohibiting with penalties the killing of seals or such like at a specified time anywhere over the seas by persons on board said ship, but that is from supreme and unlike Colonial limited authority. Little J.! on the whole agreed in this view, though perhaps slightly less decisively; and on the other hand, Pinsent J.2 held that the case was one in which the Court had jurisdic- tion, though it would not have had jurisdiction over a foreign ship pursuing the business from a foreign port: he held, however, that the Legislature could affect things within its limits, even if the action dealt with took place outside the limits, and this view has so much truth in it, and Carter C. J. agreed with it in this regard, that it cannot be denied that laws can be so worded as to effect pretty much what would have been effected by a direct exercise of extra-territorial legislation. For example—and this is no doubt what was at the back of Mr. Pinsent’s remarks—if the Legislature enacted, as it did in 1887 (50 Vict. c. 26), that it should not be legal to bring into the ports of Newfoundland seals caught on the high seas in the close season the legislation could not have been held to be invalid.? So to avoid extra-territorial legislation over foreigners, an Imperial Act of 19094 was passed by which the landing in England of fish caught by foreign vessels trawling in the Moray Firth was forbidden, and thus in great measure the aim of the law could be effected. There isan excellent example of the same principle in the legislation of the Federal Council of Australasia in 1888 and 1889 regarding the pearl fisheries in Queensland and Western Australia. Under t 1897 Newfoundland Decisions, at p. 343. ? Ibid., at pp. 333, 334. * Carter C. J. held that this Act did not apply to the case as it was passed after the capture of the seals in question. Pinsent J. held it did not, but relied on it as showing that the Act of 1879 on which the case proceeded was intended to operate extra-territorially. 4 9 Edw. VII. c. 8.

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