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

112 PARLIAMENTS OF THE DOMINIONS [PART 111 that the Imperial Acts should not apply to transactions governed by that Act of the Commonwealth, a provision which would have been waste paper if the Act had applied bo the cases as Imperial Acts and not as legislation intro- duced by an Imperial Act giving a power of modification. One somewhat important point has been raised in Canada, namely that while it cannot be denied that Canada is subject to the operation of the law of 1865, yet the British North America Act really gives authority to the Parliament of the Dominion to repeal any Imperial Act whatsoever referring to Canada passed before 1867. It was held by Draper C. J. in the case of Regina v. Taylor! that the word ‘exclusive’ in s. 91 of the British North America Act was in- tended to operate as a final renunciation by the Imperial Parliament of any intention to legislate for the Dominion of Canada. In this judgement it seems that Strong C. J. afterwards expressed his concurrence.? Lefroy ? also quotes as supporting this view the case of The Royalt in which it was held that the provision in the Imperial Merchant Shipping Act of 1854 which forbad a sailor to bring a suit for wages in the Vice-Admiralty Court for a sum under £50 had been repealed by s. 56 of the Dominion Seamen’s Act of 1873, which fixed the amount as two hundred dollars in the case of ships registered in Quebec, Nova Scotia, and British Columbia. But this is a different case, and it falls under the rule that an Imperial Act can be altered in virtue of a power given thereby, viz. in the case in question the power to regulate registered vessels, which by s. 547 included the power to regulate these vessels in a manner other than that expressly provided for in the Act itself. In the case of Holmes v. Temple,5 however, Chauveau J. in Sessions of the Peace of Quebec also interpreted ‘ exclusive’ as meaning that the Imperial Parliament had abdicated its functions, but that opinion is one of so inferior a Court. and so little con. * (1875) 36 U. C. Q. B. 183. See Lefroy, Legislative Power in Canada, pp. 208-31, * Lefroy, p. 211. * Op. cit., p. 212. '(1883) 9 Q. L. R. 148. Contrast The Farewell, 7 Q. L. R. 380. (1882) 8 Q. L. R. 351 ; the actual decision in the case was correct.

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