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

712 THE FEDERATIONS AND THE UNION [rART IV the advantage of two or more provinces. This power must be read in connexion with subsection 11, which permits the Provincial Legislatures to incorporate companies with provincial objects. In the case of Hewson v. Ontario Power Company} the Supreme Court of Canada was divided in opinion, two judges on one side and two on the other, as to whether a declaration that a work was for the public advantage of Canada contained in the preamble to a private Act fell within the meaning of Clause (c), but the Court were unanimously of opinion that when an Act provided for a power company connecting its wires with the wires of foreign countries, it was clear that it fell within the jurisdiction of the Dominion, and they decided the case in question on that basis. This is in accord with the view of the Privy Council in the case of Toronto Corporation v. Bell Telephone Co. of Canada? The question was raised, though it was not formally decided, as to whether the Provincial Legislature could have incorporated the company in question. The Court appeared to be of opinion that it could not have done so if the company had been authorized to connect its wires with those of a company in another province, in view of the terms of sub- section 11, and they inclined to the view that a Provincial Legislature could not authorize a company to connect its wires with those of a company in a foreign country. A distinction was drawn between the case of the Dominion and the provinces. In both cases no doubt a legislation empowering the company to do matters outside the boun- daries was subject for its effect to international comity, but in the case of a province the express power conferred on the province was limited by the requirement that the object should be provincial, and therefore, while the Dominion was under no disability in law, the province was under an express legal disability. This view is paralleled by the constant criticisms of the Ministers of Justice on Provincial Acts which permit railways * 368. C. R. 596. [1905] A. C. 52, overruling BR. v. Mohr, 7 Q. L. R. 183.

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