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 II. The commonwealth of Australia

Collection:: Economics Books

390 THE FEDERATIONS AND THE UNION [PART IV the power given by the Australian Industries Preservation dct, 1906, as amended in 1907, to the Controller-General of Customs to demand under penalties replies to questions, when he believed that there existed any conspiracy to monopolize trade, &c., was valid, and that it was not an exercise of judicial power requiring the presence of a jury. The powers granted were no more than were necessary and useful for the purpose of administration of the Acts, and had other parallels in powers given to officers by the Audit Act, 1901, Immigration Restriction Act, 1905, and Census and Statistics Act, 1905. Isaacs J. put it that the inquiry was merely to inform the mind of the executive whether the law has or has not been observed, and if not, whether the nature of the contravention was such as to merit further action. On the other hand, O’Connor J. clearly laid it down that the power of inquiry must not be used if legal proceedings were m foot, and if used the Court would restrain such use. An interesting and important question arises in the case of the Commonwealth inasmuch as the judicial power is vested In Courts, defined by the Constitution. It is suggested by Professor Harrison Moore ! that the result of this enactment is to deprive the Parliament of any power to deal with matters which are judicial by means other than those of the Courts, and he deduces from the Huddart Parker case that while the Parliament could provide that certain matters could be inquired into by the Controller-General of Customs it could not empower the Controller to impose fines. Nor again, he arges, could the Parliament pass an ex post facto law making criminal acts which when done were lawful, though not avery retrospective act is an act of this prohibited class.? per Barton J.; at pp. 377 seq., per O'Connor J.; at pp. 381 seq., per [saacs J.; at p. 418, per Higgins J. Cox v. Coleridge. 1 B. & C. 37, was much relied on by the Court. ‘ Op. cit, pp. 95 seq., 313 seq.; cf. Clark, Australian Constitutional Law, pp. 36-41; Quick and Garran, op. cit., pp. 720-2. In Canada there i8 no provision for judicial powers being separate from legislative, and the doctrine has not been applied ; see Lefroy, Legislative Power in Canada. pp. Ivi, 124, 279. * Cf. Donohoe v. Britz, (1904) 1 C. L. R. 391. at n. 402.

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