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. Xx] MILITARY AND NAVAL DEFENCE 1263 is also Commander-in-Chief.! The term is liable to some misapprehension, and has no doubt led to some confusion,? inasmuch as the Governor has in certain cases been held to have powers with regard to the local forces which were not merely the ordinary powers of the Governor in Council. In every Colony the Governor in Council has, of course, very important powers under the Acts relating to the forces, but these powers do not include, and are not intended to include, the command of the forces, except in the sense that the Governor is titular Commander-in-Chief as the representative of the Crown, which alone, of course, can raise armed forces. For example in 1872, the Governor, Sir Hercules Robinson, in New South Wales, found himself in an embarrassing position in consequence of the fact that he was required by Act No. 5 of 1867 to exercise certain powers of command as regards removal of officers of the local forces, and he was advised by his law officers that these powers were to be exercised by him without ministerial advice.# The result was that he was brought into collision with the Legislative Assembly. which disapproved his action in the case of a member of these forces called Rossi, and the Governor sensibly pointed out that it was undesirable in such a matter to leave anything in the hands of the Governor personally. In the same way the position in South Africa was complicated unnecessarily by the fact that the Governor was given by the local Acts various powers as to the forces, which apparently threw upon him a personal responsibility. As Commander-in-Chief, of course, the Governor has no power or control over the Im- perial forces within the Colony. His legal position with ! The King gave up the title in 1793, but it has lingered on in the Dominions ; see Harrison Moore, Commonwealth of Australia? pp. 175, 176. * Clearly in the case of Sir B, Frere, and cf. the New South Wales case in Clark, Australian Constitutional Law, pp. 263 seq. * Tt is, however, a mere blunder to assume that the King’s commission issued to officers in England gives them any power of command over Colonial forces ; the only power to command such forces must come from svmmissions under local Acts or Acts recognizing the validity of Imperial commissions ; cf. Parl. Pap., Cd. 2565. * Parl, Pap., C. 1202, pp. 53, 54; Clark, loc. cit. M2

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