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 I. Introductory

Collection:: Economics Books

CHAP. 1] ORIGIN AND HISTORY 3 more strongly the force of this view than that in 1763, on the cession of French Canada, the Royal Commission to the Captain-General and Governor-in-Chief of the Province of Quebec contemplated the calling together for purposes of legislation of the freeholders of the province, although it was cautiously provided in the instructions that in the meantime, until the condition of affairs allowed this to be done, the Governor could legislate with the advice of the Council with which he was associated in the Government. It might, however, have been thought that if such grants of favour could be made they could also be taken away, but that view, which was certainly the natural one, was finally disposed of by the decision of the case of Campbell v. Hall} when it was laid down after long delay and much hesitation, but in decisive terms, by Lord Mansfield, that a grant of a representative constitution could not be recalled, and that the legislative power of the Crown in respect of a con- quered or ceded colony departed when the Crown had granted such a constitution, unless, indeed, the Crown had reserved a right of revocation in the instrument by which the constitution was granted. The decision rests on no very intelligible ground of law, but in point of expediency it was certainly deserving of approval. From these principles flowed the result that the Imperial Parliament had soon to be invoked for the purpose of securing the establishment of suitable legislative arrange- ments in the Colonies. If a Colony were acquired by settle- ment, the only constitution which could be granted was one which had a lower house elected by the freeholders, or at any rate by a considerable part of the freeholders, for the exact nature of the franchise was not defined by any judge- ment of a court, and the Crown had some latitude in settling the details of the franchise. Even if a Colony had been acquired by conquest, if the Crown had bestowed upon it ' 20 St. Tr. 239. Contrast the case of Cape Breton, which had only a Governor and Council from 1784 to 1820, It was decided (5 Moo. P. C. 259) that the province had no claim to separate existence when merged by the Crown with Nova Scotia in 1820, R22

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