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

1260 ADMINISTRATION AND LEGISLATION [PART V motion being put in such a form as to reflect upon the Governor instead of attacking the ministers, and secondly the motion was unsuccessful, while the Government pro- seeded to accept the Governor’s advice and placed the forces under the supreme control of the general officer commanding in South Africa. The Secretary of State also approved his action in a dispatch of March 21, 1878. This case was also of importance because of a question that arose as to the proclamation of martial law. It appeared from a dispatch of June 9, 1878, that he had agreed to a declaration of martial law on the advice of ministers, so as to provide that Colonial judicial officers should preside at the trials of martial law and try offences, in place of dealing with captured persons by drum-head court martial. In a reply on February 16, 1878, the Secretary of State expressed regret that it should have been necessary to resort to martial law, and his hope that it would be found possible to amend the Colonial law 50 as to avoid the recurrence of similar proceedings. A favourable view of Sir B. Frere’s proceedings is taken by Todd! but, on the other hand, Mr. P. A. Molteno, in his life of his father,? has represented the situation in a manner very unfavourable to Sir Bartle Frere. It was, in his opinion, the aim of Sir J. Molteno to encourage the Colony to adopt a self-reliant attitude and to carry out operations affecting the Colony by means of the local forces only. Nor can there ve much doubt that it would be impossible to defend many of the views expressed by Sir Bartle Frere. He could claim by law and by constitutional practice no power whatever over the local forces except what was given to him by law, and the fact that the existing Acts passed before the grant of respon- sible government gave powers of control to the Governor t Parliamentary Government in the British Colonies,® pp. 480-90. Cf. Wilmot, South Africa, i. 238-61; above, pp- 289, 290. v Sir John Molteno, ii. 300-401. See also Cape Parl. Pap., 1878, A. 4, p. 14, for an able opinion by the Cape Attorney-General, and cf. Parl. Pap., 0. 2740, p. 103. Sir B. Frere was at least very headstrong, and quite ignorant of constitutional law. It is fair, however to say that Sir W. Manning held that a New South Wales Act of 1867 conferred a personal duty on the Governor; see Clark, Australian Constitutional Law, pp. 263 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