Denkschrift der Ersten k. k. privilegirten Donau-Dampfschiffahrts-Gesellschaft zur Erinnerung ihres fünfzigjährigen Bestandes

Responsible government in the Dominions (Vol. 2)

Bibliographic data

Monograph

Identifikator:: 844100943

URN:: urn:nbn:de:zbw-retromon-94613

Document type:: Monograph

Title:: Denkschrift der Ersten k. k. privilegirten Donau-Dampfschiffahrts-Gesellschaft zur Erinnerung ihres fünfzigjährigen Bestandes

Place of publication:: Wien

Publisher:: Selbstverl.

Year of publication:: 1881

Scope:: 1 Online-Ressource (95 S)

Collection:: Economics Books

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

840 THE FEDERATIONS AND THE UNION [PART IV be overcome, the Act would be invalid, as it authorized discrimination between states, and so violated s. 97 of the Constitution, which forbids any preference of one state over another. The two dissenting judges, on the other hand, maintained that the true mode of viewing the question was not to assert the doctrine of implied prohibition, but to construe the powers granted to the Commonwealth in as full a manner as if the Commonwealth Parliament were that of a unitary state. The powers of the states were the residual power remaining after the powers of the Commonwealth had been ascertained, and the possibility of the misuse of a legislative power was no argument against its existence ; the remedy lay with the electorate, not with the Courts. The objections aimed at the Act were based on alleged abuse of power, consequences, and motive, all of which the Court was incom- petent to entertain. The demand of a contribution to the consolidated revenue was taxation, and the Excise Tariff, construed as it stood and not transformed, was well within the powers of the Commonwealth. The Act did not attempt to render unlawful any conditions of manufacture : it was not an Act which a State Parliament could pass, but an exercise of the power of excise taxation, and it did not contravene s. 55 of the Constitution, for it merely imposed excise taxation. Nor did it discriminate between states as such, and so did not contravene the provisions of the Con- stitution forbidding such discrimination. The same principles, the determination to respect the sphere of action of the state and the wish to interpret strictly the powers granted to the Commonwealth Parliament by the Constitution, were illustrated by the case of the Attorney- General for New South Wales v. Brewery Employés Union of New South Wales! In that case the validity of part vii of the Commonwealth T'rade-Marks Act, 1905, came up for consideration. That section of the Act provided for the registration of workers’ trade-marks. These marks or labels were marks affixed to goods to show that they were manu- (1908) 6 C. L. R. 469 ; Harrison Moore. op. cit., pp. 371 seq.

Access restriction

Copyright

fullscreen: Responsible government in the Dominions (Vol. 2)

Monograph

Table of contents

Download

Volume

Chapter

This page

Image fragment

Citation links

Citation recommendation