cusp. 1] THE POWERS OF THE GOVERNOR 123
by her direct representative, the Governor-General. ‘This
admirable judgement,” wrote Todd?! in 1880, ‘entirely
accords with the constitutional doctrine propounded at the
beginning of this section, which reserves to the Sovereign,
or to her direct and immediate representative, the administra-
tion of the prerogative of honour.’
It does not seem to have occurred to the Court or to
Mr. Todd to find the ground for the exercise of the right
of conferring an honour which justified the Governor-
General in doing so. It seems to have been assumed that
he had the right, and the decision of the case remained for
years prevalent in Canada. But the whole doctrine received
a rude shock from the decision of the Privy Council in the
case of The Liquidators of the Maritime Bank of Canada v.
The Receiver-General of New Brunswick, which abolished
effectively the theory that the Lieutenant-Governor was not
a representative of the Crown or the Legislature able to
affect royal prerogatives. This was followed in due course
by the reversal of the principle of the decision in the case
of Lenoir v. Ritchie by the Privy Council? They held
that ¢. 173 of the Revised Statutes of Ontario, which autho-
rized the Lieutenant-Governor to confer precedence and
appoint Queen’s Counsel in the province was intra vires in
view of the powers of the Provincial Legislature under s. 92
of the British North America Act, to alter the constitution
of the province, to provide as to provincial officers, and to
arrange judicial matters. The essence of the decision was
that the act was that of appointing officers, and that
accordingly the power of the Federal Government was that
of appointing federal officers, that of the Provincial Govern-
ments of appointing non-federal officers. Both powers could
therefore seem to be within the powers of the executive
head of the Government : neither has more power than the
nther. but the one is for federal purposes and the other for
' Parliamentary Government in the British Colonies, p. 246 (ed. 2, p. 337).
* [1892] A. C. 437. See also Ontario Sess. Pap., 1888, No. 37.
Attorney-General for Dominion of Canada v. Attorney-General for
Province of Ontario, [18987 A. C. 247.
