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

1312 ADMINISTRATION AND LEGISLATION [PART Vv above the Chief Justice. But in Victoria and Tasmania the Chief Justice and the Puisne Judges still retain their sxceptional position. : In the case of Newfoundland, the Charter of Justice of 1825, which was issued under the authority of the Act 5 Geo. IV. ¢. 67, gives the Chief Justice and the judges pre- cedence after the Governor for the time being, excepting all such persons as by law or usage take place in England before the Chief Justice of the Court of King’s Bench. The result of that provision is that the Chief Justice takes rank after the Prime Minister, if a Privy Councillor, but before a Prime Minister, who is not a Privy Councillor, although in 1905 a precedence was granted to the Prime Minister of England which placed him immediately after the Archbishop of York. The New Zealand table was altered in 1903 to give the Premier precedence over the Chief Justice, and the Union fable of 1910 gives him a similar precedence. An attempt was made in 1871 in South Australia to take way the precedence of bishops as it then existed,! South Australia having always been a particularly democratic and anti-clerical community. The Bill was reserved and never received the royal assent, which was refused on the ground that precedence was a matter especially for the King to regulate by the prerogative and not suitable for consideration in an Act of Parliament, and that it was not right to deprive the existing bishops of their precedence without their con- sent. On an address being adopted in 1872 in favour of change, it was promised that on no account would future bishops be granted precedence without the approval of the Colonial Government.? Justice respectively, could not be changed save by law. This is not a sase where express words are needed to bar the prerogative. ! They were placed before all Colonial officers, just as in Canada they follow the Lieutenant-Governor, who represents the Sovereigu, and so they were placed in the provisional Commonwealth table. t Parl. Pap., 1871, Nou. 115; 1872, Nos. 61 and 68; Journals, 1872, pp. 194, 230; Debates, 1871, pp. 486, 656-63, 785-800, 887-91; 1872, 717~ 28, 830-45, 1021-4. In Victoria in 1868 an address to the same effect was adopted in respect of the revised Colonial Regulations of 1867; see Debates, vi. 816-23, 1101, 1102. A hint was given in a dispatoh of September 16, (872, that the clergy should relinquish their precedence.

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