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

CHAP, VII] THE UPPER HOUSES 567 Commons. The papers were laid before the Transvaal Legislature and considered by a Joint Committee of the two Houses, who reported that the law officers were of opinion that the view of the President of the Legislative Council was correct, and that the Bill was in effect a Money Bill, and under the letters patent could not be altered by the Legislative Council. They based their decision on the precise wording of the letters patent and not on the practice in the Imperial Parliament, which, as appeared from the letter of the Clerk of the House of Commons, would not have placed these Bills in the category of Bills to be treated as Money Bills. The Joint Committee did not advise that any action should be taken, in view of the fact that the Union was imminent, and that no useful purpose could have been served by any action, but they expressed clearly the view that the Upper House should have power to amend non-appropriation clauses in every case, even if they were introduced into Bills which dealt incidentally with appropriation. This solution was in accordance with the view of the President, who had held that though the Bill could not legally be amended still it was improper for the Government to introduce Bills con- taining incidentally appropriation clauses, and thus prevent- ing any alteration of non-financial matters by the Upper House. It was also in general, but not absolutely, in accordance with the practice of the Imperial Parliament, and it may be compared with the law officers’ opinion in 1863 regarding New Zealand, and s. 60 of the South Africa Act. It should be noted that no difference has ever been made between nominee Houses capable of being swamped and Houses not so capable. The Secretary of State in 1855 said that Canada had adopted the British system,! and this remains true of the limited Senate of the Federation, and Natal and Nova Scotia also were cases of limited nominee Upper Houses. In 1909 and in 1910 minor questions have arisen in the case of New Zealand as to the position of the Council. In Y Constitution and Government of New Zealand, p. 194. See also Parl. Pap., H, C. 194, 1890, p. 9.

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