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 VI. The judiciary

Collection:: Economics Books

THE JUDICIARY [PART VI land that the matter should be laid before the Judicial Committee. In 1872 it was proposed that the question of the education legislation of New Brunswick, which was alleged to infringe the terms of the British North America Act by limiting the rights granted to Roman Catholics under the terms of that Act, should be referred to the Privy Council for an expression of their opinion, but the Lord President of the Council pointed out that the matter was not a suitable one for such reference, and the advice of the Privy Council on a matter which might come before them later on in an appeal could not properly be given. There was also in that case no agreement by the Legislature of New Brunswick that the matter should be so considered.! In 1878, when the Govern- ment of Quebec asked the Secretary of State for the Colonies to refer to the Judicial Committee a legal question whether it was the right of the Governor or Governor in Council to remove a Lieutenant-Governor in a Canadian province, the Secretary of State likewise declined to accede to the request, on the broad general grounds that the matter was not one in which an agreement for reference had been made between the two Governments, and as no decision so given could be binding it would not be possible to proceed as proposed.? It is also proposed to refer to the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council, in due course, the disagreements between the Governments of Canada and Newfoundland with regard to the boundary of the two Colonies in Labrador. On the other hand, in the case of the dispute as to the boundary between Victoria and South Australia it is not proposed to 1384 Law Officers, not to the Privy Council, by the Secretary of State ; hence wild indignation on the part of Mr. Higinbotham, though the Law Officers decided in his favour ; see above, chap. i: Victoria Parl. Pap., 1864-5, B. 34, C. 2, 1866, Sess. 2, C. 8. 1 See Parl. Pap., C. 2445, p. 121. Again, the Canadian Government declined to agree to the Secretary of State’s desire to refer to the Privy Council the question of the rights of the British Columbia Government under its agreement with the Federal Government as to the Pacific railway ; see Canada Sess. Pap., 1885, No. 34. 3 Parl. Pap., C. 2445, p. 121, Cf. also C. 5489, pp. 13, 14.

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