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:: Chapter VIII. The constitutional relations of the houses

Collection:: Economics Books

CHAP. vii] RELATIONS OF THE HOUSES 575 number of the Lower House, and by making provision for bhe case of a deadlock, which it was recognized might arise if the existing position were disturbed! The proposal was Dot received with satisfaction in the country, and on the defeat of the Wade Ministry it appears to have been definitely dropped. Tt is indeed natural that there should be no wish to strengthen an Upper House. Even with the possibility of swamping before it, the Upper House of 1909 had rejected Proposals with regard to land put forward by the Govern- ment of Mr. Wade, and if its position were strengthened it is more probable that it would present serious difficulties in the way of progressive legislation than that it would effect ay great service to the state. In the short second session of 1910 the Labour party had hardly any representatives in the Council, but the Council and Assembly did not disagree oI any measure of importance. It is, however, the intention of the Labour party to abolish the Council if possible, and it will be expected of members appointed by the Labour party that they will agree to its abolition, though the device adopted in Nova Scotia and New Brunswick of asking a formal pledge willnot (on the advice of Mr. Watson) be followed in this case §2. NEW ZEALAND In the case of New Zealand disputes with regard to general legislation came to a head in 1891 and 18922 In January 1891 Lord Onslow, on the advice of his ministers, added six Members to the Legislative Council. His ministers had desired to reform the Council, but a Bill to reduce the period of nomination to seven years, and to limit its number to one-half of those in the House of Representatives, had failed In 1887 before it reached a second reading, and though in 1890 they supported a Bill which was introduced into the Council by a private member, it had been rejected by the ' See Parliamentary Debates, 1910, pp. 1844 seq. Cf. Herald, Fob. 15, 1911. ' See Parl, Pap., H. C. 198, 1893-4. There had, of course, often been lifficulticy carlier; see Pember Reeves, Long White Cloud, Pp. 372 seq. ; State Eaperiments in Australia and New Zealand. i. 104 seq. ; Dilke, Problems of Greater Britain. i. 494

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