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

1204 ADMINISTRATION AND LEGISLATION [pArTV in that case the Act came into conflict with s. 166 of the Merchant Shipping Act, 1894, which provides that when a seaman is engaged for a voyage or engagement which is to terminate in the United Kingdom, he shall not be entitled bo sue in any Court abroad for his wages except on certain conditions! which had not been fulfilled in the cases in question. It was true that the case actually before the Court was not one of a voyage which was to terminate in the United Kingdom. But the Chief Justice held that as the Victorian Parliament had adopted similar provisions to 8. 166 of the Act of the Imperial Parliament by Act No. 1557, the same respect should be paid to the Victorian Act as was paid to the Imperial Act, and he therefore held that the seamen could not claim for their wages, but only for the extra payment required under the legislation of New Zealand to make their wages up to the standard prevailing in the coasting trade.2 He also held that power to endorse the articles had been properly vested in the Superintendent of Mercantile Marine, and that the Collector of Customs could properly refuse a clearance of a vessel if the conditions as to payment had not been complied with. Williams J. agreed with the Chief Justice ; it is not quite clear how far he held that s. 75 in purporting to give a seaman the right to sue for the wages specified in the articles was repugnant to s. 166 of the Imperial Act and to that extent void. Chapman J. agreed in substance with the Chief Justice and Williams J., but not on the grounds given by them for their decisions. He reconciléd s. 166 of the Imperial Act with s. 75 of the New Zealand Act on the ground that the two sections dealt with totally different matters, and that therefore there was no repugnancy. The New Zealand ! i.e. the Court did not hold that the power given by 8. 736 of the Merchant Shipping Act, 1894, extends to repealing a provision of the {mperial Act even as regards coasting vessels. But the judgement in offect gives the right to alter materially, and it is not easy to see why they did not allow repeal. ' The Court overlooked the fact that s. 264 of the Act of 1894 gives the Victorian enactment Imperial validity.

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