CHAP. 1] ORIGIN AND HISTORY 29 
sible government on the same terms of the grant of a suitable 
Civil List and the undertaking to make proper provision 
for both civil and military expenditure. This dispatch 
crossed a dispatch from Sir W. Denison of February 14, 
1854.1 in which he reviewed the reasons in favour of the grant 
of responsible government to Tasmania, and pressed for its 
adoption. He expressed the hope that there would be no 
objection to the adoption, instead of the principle of nomina- 
tion, of the principle of election for the Upper House. In 
his reply of August 3, 1854.2 the Secretary of State confirmed 
the dispatch of January 30, and expressed the view that the 
principle of election might be conceded. He referred to the 
delay in dealing with the Bills of the other three Colonies, 
and suggested that a Bill might be passed in Tasmania 
forthwith, and urged that it would be convenient if, unlike 
the other Bills, that from Tasmania kept within the legal 
powers of the Legislative Council. The reply to this was 
the passing of the Tasmanian Act, 18 Vict. No. 17, which 
constituted a Parliament and granted a Civil List, and 
which was reserved for the roval assent by the Lieutenant- 
Governor? 
In the three Bills of New South Wales, Victoria, and South 
Australia, an ingenious attempt was made to distinguish 
between Bills which were of Imperial concern and those 
which were not of such concern. The latter the Governor 
was to assent to at his discretion, or to reject, but the 
Crown had no further power with regard to them. But in 
the case of the former, besides the power of assent or rejection, 
in which the discretion of the Governor could be fettered 
by royal instructions, there was also the power of reservation 
subject to such instructions, and even after assent there 
was a power of disallowance. In the case of South Australia 
there was no attempt made to decide in the Act what were 
matters of Imperial interest and what not. Any doubt 
on the question was left to be decided by the Privy Council, 
but it was otherwise both in the case of New South Wales 
and of Victoria. The provisions in the case of Victoria 
* Parl. Pap., March 1855, p. 1. ® Ibid, p. 20.  * Ibid, pp. 11 seq.