Responsible government in the Dominions: Responsible government in the Dominions

Responsible government in the Dominions (Vol. 3)

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:: 1896935311

URN:: urn:nbn:de:zbw-retromon-237672

Document type:: Volume

Author:: Keith, Arthur Berriedale http://d-nb.info/gnd/119086794

Title:: Responsible government in the Dominions

Volume count:: Vol. 3

Place of publication:: Oxford

Publisher:: Clarendon Pr.

Year of publication:: 1912

Scope:: XII Seiten, Seiten 1102-1670

Digitisation:: 2022

Collection:: Economics Books

Usage license:: Get license information via the feedback formular.

Chapter

Document type:: Multivolume work

Structure type:: Chapter

Title:: Part V. Imperial control over Dominion administration and legislation

Collection:: Economics Books

CHAP. VII] MERCHANT SHIPPING 1201 opinion of the Supreme Court as to the extent of the juris- diction of that Court. It was held by the Chief Justice ! that the power given to the New Zealand Legislature by s. 53 of the Constitution Act of 1852 (15 & 16 Vict. c. 72) covered acts done beyond the territories of New Zealand. This was necessary, for other- wise the power given, which is to make laws for the peace, order, and good government of New Zealand, could not be effectively carried out. The Chief Justice said that the laws of New Zealand applied to persons on board a New Zealand ship as distinct from a British ship, even beyond the terri- torial limits of New Zealand. He admitted that the doctrine laid down in his judgement was a development of the doctrine of self-government, but he regarded it as part of the British Constitution to allow growth and development of powers, and that such a power had not hitherto been claimed under the provisions of the Constitution Act was no proof that the Act did not contain a potency of both legislation and administration not hitherto exercised in the Colony. On these grounds he held that the award made by the Court of Arbitration bound New Zealand vessels even in Australia, and he also held that they did not bind Australian vessels, on the ground that the Arbitration Courts could not be assumed to deal with an Australian company or with Australian ships. It was possible for the Australian Parlia- ment to legislate for those vessels, and the New Zealand Parliament had not, in his opinion, legislated in the Arbitra- tion Act for foreign vessels owned by foreign owners, even if it had power to do so, and the Act could not be considered as referring to such vessels. He stated, however, that if the Huddart-Parker Company’s vessels were to engage in purely coastal trade and make contracts in New Zealand with seamen and others on board their ships for labour in + His judgement is certainly so expressed as to be very doubtful law. But all that was actually decided could equally well have been decided under s. 735 of the Merchant Shipping Act, 1894, which cannot be limited bo territorial waters only, but must apply to registered vessels wherever they may be. For a criticism, see Journ. Soc. Comp. Leg., ix. 208 sed.

Access restriction

Copyright

fullscreen: Responsible government in the Dominions (Vol. 3)

Multivolume work

Volume

Chapter

Table of contents

Download

Volume

Chapter

This page

Image fragment

Citation links

Citation recommendation