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

637 HOUSES CHAP. vii] RELATIONS OF THE gone into the ordinary estimates; the distinction between hew salaries and new repairs or new works, and new motor- cars for the Post Office Service, is certainly more subtle than bonvincing or satisfactory. The effect of the prohibition of tacking was considered by the High Court of the Commonwealth in the famous case With regard to the validity of the Excise Tariff, 1906 (No. 16).! It was attempted in that case by the Parliament of the Commonwealth to provide that a certain excise should be levied on all agricultural implements manufactured in the Commonwealth, with the proviso that the excise was not to be levied if certain conditions as to labour intended to secure reasonable remuneration for the workers were observed. The High Court by a majority decided for many reasons that the excise tariff was invalid. The Chief Justice, O’Connor and Barton JJ. held that, even if otherwise valid, the Act which if valid would have the effect of regulating the conditions of manufacture would be invalid as dealing with matters Other than duties of excise contrary to s. 55 of the Con- Stitution. Higgins and Isaacs JJ. did not agree with this Ontention, and urged that the Act was valid. In general legislation the Upper House is at least the equal of the Lower. For example, such important Bills as the Navigation Bill have been introduced there, and all Bills “ent up are freely amended, while the Upper House does Dot concern itself much with party ties. Thus in 1909 the Upper House rejected the Bill to arrange for the taking over of the northern territory of South Australia, despite all the efforts of Mr. Deakin to secure the passing of the Bill. The Upper House is also decidedly inclined to academic debating, and exercised its favourite occupation in 1910, When the Senate spent valuable time in passing a resolution 0 favour of women’s suffrage for the benefit of the Prime Minister of England, which Mr. Asquith on its receipt by \ The King v, Barger, (1908) 6 C, L. R.41. On the other hand, the penalty Clauses in the Customs Act, 1901, which provides the general machinery of Customs administration, are not taxation; see Stephens v. Abrahams 0 V. LR. 201, at p, 299,

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