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

1404 THE JUDICIARY [PART VI will depend upon the unflinching application to every ques- tion of the constitutional principle, and that greater difficulties and troubles will arise from the avoidance than from the assumption of the full responsibility which the sub-committee suggest should, by the alteration of the existing instruction, be imposed on ministers even in capital cases. As a result there was adopted a new form of instruction similar to that of the Commonwealth, which will be cited below. Even so in cases of equal division in the Council the Governor must decide, and he did so in Shortis’s case, after consulting the Secretary of State, the Council being unable to advise, and in all cases he considers carefully the recom- mendations of the Minister of Justice.2 § 3. Tae Discussion AT THE CONFERENCE OF 1887 The question of the exercise of the prerogative of pardon was considered at the Colonial Conference of 1887, when the delegates present were invited to express their opinion on a question raised by Sir F. Dillon Bell, on behalf of New Zealand, as to whether the time had not come when it was expedient to instruct the Colonial Governors that in matters relating to the prerogative of mercy they should be guided by the advice of their responsible ministers? Mr. Deakin stated that he was advised by the Government of Victoria to support this contention? He stated that some Governors had adopted the attitude that they were constitutionally bound to accept the advice of their ministers with reference to the reprieving or execution of a criminal, but other Governors had stood upon their rights under the instruc- tions, and had declined to take the advice of their ministers. The position was inconvenient and difficult for the Governor, for he had been subject to public pressure, and he was unable ! Canada House of Commons Debates, 1896, Sess, 1, pp. 827-50, 7171-85; Sess. 2, p. 2279; 32 C. L. J. 237. ? Ibid., 1908, pp. 2915 seq. ® See Parl. Pap., C. 5091, pp. 545 seq. ¢ Cf. Higinbotham’s view, Victoria Debates, 1875, pp. 504 seq.; Morris, Memoir, p. 200. In the Wantabadgery case in New South Wales in September 1885, the Governor used his discretion against ministerial advice ; Debates, 1885-6, p. 311. But otherwise Lord Carrington in the Mount Rennie case, Parkes, ii. 177; cf. Debates, 1911, p. 12986.

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