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.

ADDENDA 1625 Pace 1347. New Zealand alone adopts the rule of compulsory retirement of judges appointed after the passing of an Act of 1903 on attaining the age of 72 years. In the Crown Colonies, judges who, save in British Honduras, Malta, Gibraltar, and Leewards, hold at pleasure are subject to the usual retiring age rules, but this would run counter to the Constitutions of Canada, the Commonwealth, and the Union, which rest on Imperial Acts : in the two latter cases the Constitution can be modified by local action. Pace 1354, n. 1. In R.v. Dodd, (1874) 2 N. Z. A. C. R. 598, it was held by the Court unanimously that the Supreme Court of New Zealand could not punish manslaughter committed by a British subject on a foreign ship (American) on the high seas (500 miles from Tasmania), though such a power was possessed by English Courts provided the accused did not belong to the ship, the counsel for the accused (Stout, now C.J.) and both Johnston J. and Richmond J. holding that the Act 30 & 31 Vict. c. 124, s. 11, did not apply to a Colonial Court. The decision may have been correct, for the accused may not have been a British subject—he claimed to have been naturalized in the United States—and if he were, may have been a member of the crew (cf. Richmond J., at p. 602), but the wording of the section (‘any Court of Justice in Her Majesty’s Dominions *) is absolutely conclusive in favour of the jurisdiction, and it may be presumed that none of the judges read the Act. Pace 1423. The power of the Roman Catholic Church in Canada has been much discussed in connexion with the Hebert case, where a marriage of Catholics celebrated by a Protestant clergyman was declared invalid by Archbishop Bruchesi, and then by Laurendeau J. held invalid on the principle laid down afresh in the ne temere decree requiring marriages to be celebrated by a Roman Catholic priest; the decree, however, extends the principle to mixed marriages. The Quebec Court held that (1) Catholics cannot be married by a Protes- tant, and (2) questions of the validity of Catholic marriages must be settled by the ecclesiastical courts. On both points the Courts have differed ; Catholic marriages by Protestants have been upheld in Burn v. Fontaine, 4 R. L. 163 ; Delpit v. Coté, R. J. Q. 20 C. 8. 338 ; and denied in other cases in accordance with the views of the eccle- slastical courts. Similarly some judges have asserted their authority to decide the issues (Delpit v. Coté, R. J. Q. 20 C. S. 338, per Archi bald J.), and reversed the decision of an archbishop, while others have held the reverse (Durocher v. Degre, R. J. Q. 20 C. S. 456, following Laramée v. Evans, 24 L. C. J. 235). The Hebert case is under appeal, and the issue will, it is hoped, be taken to the Privy Council. The Quebec Courts have not yet refused to deal with cases of mixed marriages (cf. Dorion v. Laurent, 17 L. C. J. 324 ; Burn v. Fontaine, 4 R. L. 163), nor have they decided any case on the new branch of the ne temere decree; see Ewart, The Kingdom Papers pp. 121-32. Mr. Lancaster has, however, introduced a Bill into the Dominion Parliament to declare valid any marriage duly celebrated

Access restriction

Copyright

fullscreen: Responsible government in the Dominions (Vol. 3)

Multivolume work

Volume

Table of contents

Download

Volume

This page

Image fragment

Citation links

Citation recommendation