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. X] MILITARY AND NAVAL DEFENCE 1255 The Governor protested energetically against this decision, and went so far as to assert that by the Constitution and by his commission as Governor and Commander-in-Chief, the Governor must possess full military control over all the forces, Imperial or otherwise, which were in the Colony, and that this control could not be taken away from him legally by a mere decision of the Imperial Government. The Governor’s position was clearly untenable, and it was a mistake to assume that an alteration was made by the Imperial Government in the actual position of the Governor with regard to the control of Imperial troops in a Colony. With regard to the one regiment which was still to be left, and which was left until 1869, the Governor still retained the same control as he constitutionally had. He was not entitled under that control to direct the details of military operations, but he was entitled to give general directions as to the military operations, and down to the end of his tenure of office he continued to have this power of control. On the other hand, the Imperial Government were obviously entitled to remove from the Colony troops which they did not intend should be employed therein, and the removal of such troops from the Governor's control could not be regarded as a breach of constitutional practice or an interference with the powers of self-government of the Colonies. The Ministry, which had first been anxious to adopt a sel- reliant policy, and which had passed resolutions in favour of such a policy, changed its attitude in 1868, when certain prisoners who had been confined on the Chatham Islands escaped from their confinement and landed in New Zealand. They then urged that the troops should be retained for a time, but they still declined to accept responsibility for the pay- ment of the troops, and the Imperial Government were no longer prepared to acquiesce in the retention of forces for which no payment was made. Vigorous protests by the ' See Parl. Pap., February 1866, p. 259; 1867, pp. 44 seq., 85 sed., 62 seq. ; H. C. 307, 1869, pp. 2 seq., 13 seq., 19 seq., 23 seq. In 1881 the Colonial Government claimed the right to move troops independently of the Governor: Rusden. iii. 406: Parl. Pap., O. 3382, p. 190.

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