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

1318 ADMINISTRATION AND LEGISLATION [PART V dating and amending the law, and when the Revised Statutes (c. 155) appeared in 1906, another Order in Council suspended the operation of the Imperial Acts. It may be added that it is not altogether easy to see what practical advantage is thus gained,! as the only difference resulting is that the detention in this country of a prisoner while in transit from Canada to a foreign state, or vice versa, under extradition is probably at least informal and, if he escaped re-arrest, would have to be under a new process, as against a fugitive offender at large in this country, whereas if the proceedings were taken all under the Imperial Act the warrant under which he was being conveyed from Canada would be in these circum- stances adequate authority for his re-arrest. Again, the Acts of 1869 (32 Vict. c. 10) and 1884 (47 & 48 Vict. ¢. 31) provide for the removal of prisoners from one Colony to another or to the United Kingdom in cases where such removal may be deemed desirable. The first Act pro- vides for permanent arrangements between two Colonies approved by Order in Council ; the second for transfers in individual cases. In all these cases the approval of the Secretary of State is needed as well as the assent of both Colonies, and the matter has sometimes attained considerable political importance, as in the case of the deportation of the chief Dinizulu from Zululand, and in the deportations from Natal after the revolt of 1906-8 ;2 the prisoners were on the coming into force of union released by the order of the new Government. It would, of course, have been open to the Natal Government and Legislature to banish the men in question, but it could not by any exercise of legislative power ! Tt is true that the Governor now acts as a Colonial officer, not under an Imperial Act, but that is only a formal difference. For the history of this matter, see Canada Sess. Pap., 1877, No. 13, pp. 10 seq. ; Parl. Pap., 0. 1482, 1526, 1557, 1621, 1645, 1683. Cf. also Forsyth, Cases and Opinions on Constitutional Law, pp. 341-74 ; Clarke, Extradition, pp. 96 seq. Canada also has provision in its Extradition Act (since 1889, c. 36) for extradition without treaty, and the legality of this is seen from Attorney-General for the Dominion of Canada v. Cain and Gilhula, [1906] A. C. 542; Robtelmes v. Brenan, 4 C. L. R. 395 ; Hong Kong v. Attorney-General, [1910] T. S. 348. ¢ Parl, Pap., Cd. 3563, pp. 8, 9

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