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

698 THE FEDERATIONS AND THE UNION [PART 1V disqualified Japanese from voting, was not ultra vires of the Provincial Legislature. The Dominion Parliament has power to decide the conditions on which naturalization shall be accorded, but the rights of a naturalized person in any province must depend on the provincial law, a decision which really terminates the long-vexed questions still raised by Dominion Ministers of Justice as to legislation by the provinces allowing aliens to hold shares, &c. On the other hand, the Privy Council? held that the British Columbia Coal Mines Regulation Act prohibiting Chinamen from employ- ment under ground was not intra vires the Provincial Legisla- ture. They decided that the power exercised was not really a power to regulate coal mines, but to deprive the Chinese, naturalized or not, of the ordinary rights of inhabitants of the province, and in effect to prohibit their continued residence therein by preventing them earning their living in the province. This case was carefully distinguished from the suffrage case by the Judicial Committee. This decision seems to support the much older decision of Gray J., in the British Columbia case of Tas Sing v. Maguire, where he held the Chinese Tax Act, 1878, of that province to be ultra vires, because in substance it was not a taxing Act at all, as it claimed to be, but an Act to drive Chinese from the country, and as such an interference with the Dominion control of trade and commerce, of the rights of aliens, and of Imperial treaties, though in this latter regard it may be pointed out that there were no such treaties in existence. The same Court held invalid the Act, 47 Vict. c. 4, to regulate the Chinese by imposing a tax of ten dollars on each, as not being a valid exercise of the taxing power, but really a special discrimination against Chinese 3 Union Colliery Co. of British Columbia v. Bryden, [1899] A. C. 580. * 1B. C. (Irving) 101, decided in 1878 ; see Provincial Legislation, 1867- 95, pp. 1061-7. The Act (42 Vict. o. 35) was disallowed thereafter as objectionable. See also ibid., Pp. 244 b, 755 ; Lefroy, pp. 459, 460. * See Bull v. Wing Chong, Wheeler, P- 122; Provincial Legislation, 1867 95, p. 1095, See also Quick and Garran, Constitution of Commonwealth, pp. 601-4, which adopts the extreme federal view. But cf. Sir O Mowat

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