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

cusp. v] THE PRIVILEGES AND PROCEDURE 451 enjoyed by the House of Commons in England, not in 1867 but at the date of the passing of the Act of the Dominion Parliament defining the privileges thus taken. Thus the Oaths Act was re-enacted in 1876 and was allowed to remain in operation, while the Imperial Act of 1875 itself confirmed the Act of 1868 which had been allowed to pass unobserved. In the case of the provinces the Legislatures of Ontario and Quebec passed in the session of 1868-9 Acts (31 & 32 Vict. ¢. 3 and 32 Vict. c. 4) conferring on these bodies the privileges enjoyed by the Canadian House of Commons, adding in the case of the Quebec Legislative Council those of the Canadian Senate. These Acts were promptly disallowed, being held not only by the Dominion Minister of Justice, but also by the Imperial law officers, to be ultra vires.* On the other hand, when an Act of Quebec of 1870 (33 Vict. c. 5) defined the privileges which it claimed, amounting to pretty much the same thing as had been claimed in the case of the previous Act, the Act was left in operation,® and the case ex parte Dansereau 4 decided that a provincial legislature had a right to summon witnesses before it and to punish persons who declined to appear, and that the provincial Act of 1870 was a proper exercise of the power which in itself was inherent in a legislature by reason of its being essential for the proper conduct of its legislative powers. This decision went further than was justified in holding that the power was inherent in a legislature, and was evidently one of those Quebec decisions held by Taschereau C. J. to have been overruled by the decision in Landers v. Woodworth? which followed the case of Falconer v. Doyle,® decided by the Privy Council, and which should have been followed in this matter by the judges in ex parte Dansereau. But the decision in itself was correct, as was to be proved later. In 1871 a British Columbia Act (35 Vict. c. 4, repealed by 36 Vict. c. 35, ! Parl. Pap., C. 911, pp. 3-9; Canada Sess. Pap., 1876, No. 45; Imperial Act, 38 & 39 Vict. c. 38; Canada Act, 39 Vict. c. 7. * Canada Sess. Pap., 1877, No. 89, pp. 202-11. 221: Provincial Legislation, 1867-95, pp. 83, 146, 147, &o. * Of. Canada Sess. Pap., 1877, No. 89, pp. 108-14, 325. "19 L. C. J. 210. ®28.C.R. 158. 4 Moo. P. C. (N.S.) 203 ; see above, pp. 446, 447. NF o2

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