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

746 THE FEDERATIONS AND THE UNION [PART IV but an Act of 1906 (c. 12), confirmed the Order in Council of August 14, 1905. Notwithstanding this the company brought an action on December 26, 1906, against the Cobalt Lake Mining Company, to whom the Government had in the mean- time sold the property. In April 1907 an Act (c. 15) was passed by the Ontario Legis- lature which confirmed the sale made by the Government, and declared the property to be vested in the purchasers as and from the date of the said sales absolutely freed from all claims and demands of every nature whatsoever in respect of or arising from any discovery, location, or prospecting. Great efforts were made by the mining company to securé that the Bill should not be assented to, but their efforts were unsuccessful, and the Bill became law: whereupon the Governor-General was asked to disallow the Act, but on the advice of his ministers he declined to do so. The case was still carried to trial, but the decision of the Court was, of course, in view of the Act, against the company. A good deal of feeling was excited in financial circles in Canada, and the Court used somewhat strong language in admitting its inability to deal with the case. The matter was discussed at length in the Dominion Parliament on March 1 and May 18, 1909, and the action of the Ontario Government was defended on grounds of the interest of the provinces at large, namely that there was thus saved to the provinces a very valuable property which otherwise would have simply conferred benefits on a few individuals, Mr. Aylesworth, Minister of Justice, defended the conduct of the Dominion Government in not disallowing the Act.2 He admitted that if the matter had been before 1896 the Act would have been disallowed. In 1873. Chief Justice Draper in the Goodhue case? had ! See 18 O. R. 275. But it was held both in the Ontario Appeal Court in 1909 (House of Commons Debates, 1909, pp. 6920 seq.) and in the Privy Council in 1910 that there was really no good case. ® Sir J. Whitney replied in the press on March 2, energetically condemning Mr. Aylesworth. #19 Gr. 366, at p. 386.

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