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

omar. 1v] THE PREROGATIVE OF MERCY 1421 to grant an amnesty ; this, however, is of no conceivable zonsequence, since the power can be exercised in the way of an undertaking that persons will not be prosecuted when the same effect results as if an amnesty had been offered! Since 1878, acting on a suggestion of Mr. Blake’s, specific power has been given to issue pardons for offences triable in a Colony though not there committed. It has been held since 1893 that a Governor can pardon for a contempt committed despite the objection of the judge, an important decision, for the power of the Crown to pardon contempts in the case of committals by the Irish Land Courts has been doubted, apparently without adequate ground? The Governor can, but in practice does not pardon offences committed within Colonial limits by members of the Imperial forces, whether naval or military, but he is clearly empowered to do so. Since 1871 specific provision has been made for the pardon of accom- plices. The right of remitting fines due to an informer is settled for the United Kingdom by an Act of 1859,7 but this Act does not apply to the Colonies, and when the power to remit » penalty, part of which was due to an informer, was used ! Thus in 1865 the Governor of New Zealand issued a proclamation promising that certain persons should not be prosecuted ; so in 1871, and in 1875 Lord Dufferin issued an amnesty for the rising of 1870 for all save Riel and Lepine (in whose case five years’ banishment was prescribed as a condition), and O’Donohue was omitted, but was pardoned on a like condition on November 22, 1877; see Canada Gazette, April 24, 1875; Sess. Pap., 1878, No. 55. See also Forsyth, Cases and Opinions on Consti- tutional Law, p. 113; Parl. Pap., C. 1202, p. 4. Of course an amnesty may be given by a local Act, as in New Zealand in 1882, Act No. 4 (Rusden, iii. 470), in Canada, 10 Viet. ¢. 116; 12 Viet. c. 13. * Cf. Canada Sess. Pap., 1876, No. 116 ; 1879, No. 181. The power would seem to have been included in the wide terms of the older commission ind was exercised under them. It is omitted in the latest Canadian form 11905) and in the Union form (1910) in error. * [1893] A. C. 138. ¢ Hansard, 1908, cxciii. 102. * Cf. his statutory duties under the 4rmy Act, 1881, 5. 54. * See Parl. Pap., C. 1202, p. 4; New South Wales Letters Patent, Feb- ary 23, 1872, s. 6; New Zealand Parl. Pap., 1872, A. 1a, pp. 10-2. ' 22 Viet. ¢. 32. 1279°3

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