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

392 PARLIAMENTS OF THE DOMINIONS [PART II [mperial Parliament, or by the statute of a local parliament to which the Crown has assented. If this delegation has taken place, the depositary or depositaries of the executive and legislative powers and authority of the Crown can exercise those powers and that authority to the extent delegated as effectively as the Crown could itself have oxercised them. The following cases establish these pro- positions : In re Adam, Donegani v. Donegani,? Cameron v. Kyte? Jephson v. Riera But as it is conceded that by the Law of Nations the supreme power in every State has the right to make laws for the exclusion or expulsion of aliens, and to enforce those laws, it necessarily follows that the State has the power to do those things which must be done in the very act of expulsion, if the right to expel is to be exercised effectively at all, notwithstanding the fact that constraint upon the person of the alien outside the boun- daries of the State or the commission of a trespass by the State officer on the territories of its neighbour in the manner pointed out by Mr. Justice Anglin in his judgement should thereby result. Accordingly it was in In re Adam definitely decided that the Crown had power to remove a foreigner by force from the Island of Mauritius, though, of course, the removal in that case would necessarily involve an imprison- ment of the alien outside British territory, in the ship on board of which he would be put while it traversed the high seas. The question, therefore, for decision in this case resolves itself into this: has the Act 60 & 61 Vict. c. 11, assented to by the Crown, clothed the Dominion Government with the power the Crown itself theretofore undoubtedly possessed to expel an alien from the Dominion, or to deport him to the country whence he entered the Dominion ? If it has, then the fact that extra-territorial constraint must necessarily be exercised in effecting the expulsion cannot invalidate the warrant directing expulsion issued under the provisions of the statute which authorizes the expulsion. It has already been decided in Musgrove v. Chun Teeong Toy that the Government of the Colony of Victoria, by virtue of the powers with which it was invested to make laws for the peace, order, and good government of the Colony, had authority to pass a law preventing aliens from entering the Colony of Victoria. On the authority of this case section 1 of the above-mentioned statute would be intra * 1 Moo. P. C. 460, at pp. 472-6. * 3 Knapp, 63, at p. 88. * 3 Knapp, 332, at p. 343. * 3 Knapp, 130. [1891] A. C. 272.

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