Responsible government in the Dominions: Responsible government in the Dominions

Responsible government in the Dominions (Vol. 2)

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:: 1896935052

URN:: urn:nbn:de:zbw-retromon-238139

Document type:: Volume

Author:: Keith, Arthur Berriedale http://d-nb.info/gnd/119086794

Title:: Responsible government in the Dominions

Volume count:: Vol. 2

Place of publication:: Oxford

Publisher:: Clarendon Pr.

Year of publication:: 1912

Scope:: XI Seiten, Seiten 570-1100

Digitisation:: 2022

Collection:: Economics Books

Usage license:: Get license information via the feedback formular.

Chapter

Document type:: Multivolume work

Structure type:: Chapter

Title:: Part IV. The federations and the union // Chapter I. The dominion of Canada

Collection:: Economics Books

686 THE FEDERATIONS AND THE UNION [PART Iv province with laws of its own, difficulty might arise as to the legal principle to be applied, but the conflict was between one set of legal principles and another, and in the present case it did not appear to their lordships that the claim of the Dominion could be sustained on any principle of law which could be held to be applicable. The case ought to be regarded as if what had been done by the Crown in 1873 had been done by the Dominion Government, as it was in fact done. The Crown acted on the advice of ministers in making treaties, and in owning public lands held them for the good of the community. When differences arose between the two Governments in regard to what was due to the Crown as maker of treaties from the Crown as owner of public lands, they must be adjusted as though the two Governments were separately invested by the Crown with its rights and respon- sibilities as treaty-maker and as owner respectively. So regarding it, there did not seem sufficient ground for saying that the Dominion Government in advising the treaty did so as agent for the province. They acted in great national interests in pursuance of the powers given by the Act of 1867 without the consent of the province and in the belief that the lands were not part of the province. As guardians of the Indian interest empowered to accept a surrender and to give equivalents, they had no special duty to the province, and in regard to the proprietary rights in the lands apart from the Indian interest which enured to the benefit of the pro- vince, they had no share in it at all. The only thing in regard to which the Dominion could conceivably be thought trustees for the province, namely the dealing with the Indian interest, was a thing concerning the whole Canadian nation. In truth, the duty of the Canadian Government was not that of trustees, but that of ministers exercising their powers and their discretion for the public welfare. They also declined to accept the argument that the case was analogous to that of a purchaser of real estate who pays money to discharge an existing encumbrance upon it without notice of an infirmity in his title. The Dominion Govern- ment were never purchasers of the lands; they had notice

Access restriction

Copyright

fullscreen: Responsible government in the Dominions (Vol. 2)

Multivolume work

Volume

Chapter

Table of contents

Download

Volume

Chapter

This page

Image fragment

Citation links

Citation recommendation