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 1207 provisions of the Imperial Statute had no application, for not only was the vessel in question registered in Victoria, but the seamen were not engaged for a voyage or engagement which was to terminate in the United Kingdom. All the members of the Court appear to have acquiesced in the view that the Victorian Statute No. 1557, which adopted the provisions of the Imperial Act, 1894, including S. 166, was to be regarded in the light of a Colonial Statute. The Chief Justice merely said that as the vessels were Tegis- tered and controlled by statute which the Imperial Legislature had authorized the State of Victoria, to pass, they ought to have the same protection as British ships registered in England ; apparently admitting that the Act had not, strictly speaking, the force of an Imperial Act, and this view was clearly expressed by Edwards J. If this were the case, then it is clear that the provisions of the New Zealand Act could not possibly be invalid, as there was nothing to which they could be repugnant except the law of another Colony. But as a matter of fact, the Court appears to have overlooked the fact that by s. 264 of the Imperial Merchant Shipping Act of 1894 the same effect as that of the Imperial Act itself is given to Acts passed by Legislatures of British Possessions which apply to British ships registered at, trading with, or being at another port in that possession, any provisions of part ii of the Merchant Shipping Act of 1894 which would not otherwise apply. The Victoria Parliament by Act No. 1557 applied mutatis mutandis to ships registered in Victoria the provisions of part ii of that Act including s. 166, and it would appear therefore that as a result there is imported into the Imperial Act a provision to the effect that if a seaman is engaged for d Voyage terminating in Victoria he shall not be entitled to sue abroad for his wages. There does not therefore Appear to be any substantial difference between the case of vessels registered in the United Kingdom and vessels regis- tered in a Colony, if that Colony has adopted under s. 264 the provisions of s. 166 of the Act of 1894, It may also be noted that the Court did not discuss the

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