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

Caar. v] THE PRIVILEGES AND PROCEDURE 457 other powers.! But this is clearly wrong : the power to alter the constitution would of course enable it to take larger powers, but even without this it may safely be said that every legislature which is not restricted in the sphere of its powers is able to lay down what privileges it desires to lay down. It may be objected to this view that in the cases of Canada the privileges are expressly placed within the power of the Parliament. But the case is not merely that the privi- leges are placed within the power, but they are also expressly limited in extent, and further, it may have been, as was suggested in the case of Fielding v. Thomas by counsel, that the right was conferred in express terms upon the Dominion and not upon the provinces, because the matter was one of civil rights, and therefore prima faciereserved to the provinces exclusively of the power of the Dominion Parliament. Another and probable view is that the provisions were in- cluded simply because they form part of a constitution, and should be placed in a Constitution Act, just as has been done in Queensland, which enacted the provisions independently in a local Act, and later incorporated them with the Consti- tution Act of 1867. In the case of the Union of South Africa the insertion of the clauses is again justified in a different way : in each case the privileges to be possessed were defined in the Acts, and thus rendered legislation merely optional instead of necessary, as in cases like Canada, Victoria, South Australia, and Western Australia, and Natal, where the privileges are merely taken generally to be laid down by Act of Parliament, but are not to exceed those of the House of Commons.2 ! In New Zealand the Parliamentary Privileges Act, 1865, expressly repealed s. 52 of the Constitution Act, which gave power to make orders, but with limited effect. * Victoria and South Australia are prevented from taking further privi- leges than those enjoyed by the Commons at the date of their constitutions, until they formally alter these instruments. Canada was relieved from this restriction and given power to take the Commons’ privileges from time to time by the Act of 1875, and Western Australia and Natal took the latter power in their constitutions, and so has South Africa by Act No. 19 of 1911, s. 86. It should be noted, however, that Natal voluntarily restricted itself to the standard of 1893 by Act No. 27 of 1895, s. 21.

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