362 PARLIAMENTS OF THE DOMINIONS [PART 111 
works of Professor Harrison Moore ! and of Sir H. J. enkyns.? 
It is suggested, for example, that it would not be possible 
for a Colonial Legislature to enact that the enemies of the 
country should not be regarded as enemies while in the 
limits of the Colony. Or again, can a Colonial Legislature 
enact that a colonial bishopric can only be filled by colonial- 
born clergymen ? Or that the Governor should exercise his 
prerogative of pardon only in accordance with the voice of 
a plébiscite ? Or can a Colonial Legislature alter the rela- 
tions between the Governor and the Legislature ? The latter 
question must, in the opinion of Sir H. J enkyns, be answered 
totally in the negative as wholly beyond the powers of any 
Colonial Legislature. As will be seen elsewhere, it was the 
opinion of Mr. Boothby that the Imperial Parliament alone 
could pass an Act establishing a legislative council which the 
Crown could not dissolve, or setting up a limit to the royal 
choice of its legal advisers by requiring that they should be 
or become in three months members of the Legislature and 
so forth, and he also denied the power of the Colonial 
Legislature to allow a Court consisting of the Governor and 
his Executive Council to act as a Court of Appeal from the 
Supreme Court of the Colony? 
In this connexion there may be considered the doctrine 
of majora and minora regalia which, as laid down by Chitty, 
distinguishes between the attributes of the king such as 
sovereignty, perfection, and perpetuity, which are inherent 
in and constitute his Majesty’s political capacity, and which 
prevail in every part of the territories subject to the Crown, 
by whatever peculiar or internal laws they may be governed, 
and the minor prerogatives and interests of the Crown 
which must be regulated by the local law of such places as 
have peculiar laws. The distinction in the feudal writers 
was clearly based on the different capacities of the Crown as 
a sovereign and as a land-owning corporation, and in some 
cases there has been a tendency to treat the matter as if 
t Jour. Soc. Comp. Leg., ii. 280 seq. 
' British Rule and Jurisdiction beyond the Seas, pp. 69 seq. 
* Parl. Pap., August 1862, 
' On the Prerogative, p. 25. Cf. Chalmers, Opinions, pp. 50, 373.