Das Petroleumgebiet der galizischen Westkarpathen

Bibliographic data

Monograph

Identifikator:: 833658085

URN:: urn:nbn:de:zbw-retromon-28151

Document type:: Monograph

Author:: Walter, Heinrich

Title:: Das Petroleumgebiet der galizischen Westkarpathen

Place of publication:: Wien

Publisher:: Manz

Year of publication:: 1883

Scope:: 1 Online-Ressource (IV, 100 S)

Collection:: Economics Books

Usage license:: Get license information via the feedback formular.

PRIVILEGES. 5Y In the session of 1868—9 the Ontario Legislature passed he, a an Act conferring on the Legislative Assembly the same defining privileges as were enjoyed by the Dominion House of Pr ie8% Commons. The validity of the Act was doubted, and the Dominion Minister of Justice referred the question to the law officers of the Crown in England, who held that it was ultra vires’, Similar Acts were passed by Quebec in 1870, by British Columbia in 1871, and by Ontario in 1876. All these were allowed to come into force, on the ground that anyone affected by them could test their legality in a court of law. Amongst the powers conferred by the Quebec Act of Ex parte 1870 are a number of powers regarding the summoning of Dan- | witnesses and the punishment of persons disobeying such summons. The validity of these sections was raised in Ez parte Dansereau®, and the appeal side of the Quebec Court of Queen’s Bench held that the power of summoning witnesses was necessarily incident to the powers of the Provincial Legislatures, and that a Provincial Legislature had “a right bo exercise such powers and privileges as are mere incidents of the powers specifically vested in them and without which they could not properly exercise the duties devolving upon them 3” A somewhat similar point was raised in Landers v. Landers v. Woodworth * with respect to the right of the Nova Scotia Hor Assembly to remove one of its members for contempt. The Supreme Court of the Dominion held that the Legislative Assembly of Nova Scotia had in the absence of express legislation on the subject, no power to remove one of its members for contempt, unless he was actually engaged in obstructing the business of the House, but that the removal of a member for not making an apology required by the 1 Can. Sess. Papers 1877, No. 89, p. 202. * 19 L. C. Jurist 210: 2 Cart. 165. 8 per Dorion C. J. 4 2 Can, 8. C. R. 158: 2 Cart. 220. 5—_9

Access restriction

Copyright

fullscreen: The Constitution of Canada

Monograph

Table of contents

Download

Monograph

Chapter

This page

Image fragment

Citation links

Citation recommendation