CHAP. T] THE DOMINION OF CANADA 679
covered with waters other than in the case of waters forming
parts of harbours or canals : the Actitself forbade interference
by such sales with navigation or the use of harbours. Again,
the provincial legislatures are the proper authorities to
regulate the form of conveyance of fishery rights. The
provinces also can deal with, by regulations as to lease or
sale, their own rights in the fisheries in virtue of their un-
granted public lands. Such legislation really deals with
property, and does not come within the term fisheries in s. 91.
But again, the Federal Parliament could pass an Act regulat-
ing works constructed in or over navigable waters, for the Act
clearly related to matters of navigation.! As a result of this
decision, Ontario and Quebec issued licences to regulate the
valuable fisheries in their inland waters? It may be added
that the Canada Courts held that there is no private property
in the beds of the great lakes or great navigable rivers, and
the Australian High Court has applied this to a salt lagoon.
(e) Escheats
Another series of cases arose from the idea that the pre-
fogative could not be affected by anything less than the
Federal Parliament, as the provinces were not in any way
connected with the Crown, but were merely like municipal
bodies. Thus in 1874 the Governor-General in Council dis-
allowed an Act of Ontario regarding escheats. The reasons
all come to the same thing, that the Lieutenant-Governor
could not assent in the royal name to an Act, that it was
a matter of prerogative, and that the province had nothing
to do with prerogative.? In 1876 it was judicially held in
! Attorney-General for the Dominion of Canada v. Atiorneys-General for
the Provinces of Ontario, &c., 26 8. C. R. 444; [1898] A. C. 700; as to
great lakes, see 26 8, C. R., at pp. 520 seq. ; lagoons, Williams v. Booth,
10C.L. R. 342. See for the earlier cases, Wheeler, pp. 72seq. ; The Queen v.
Moss, 268, C. R. 322 (property in bed of navigable riversis in the provinces);
Wyatt v. Attorney-General of Quebec, [1911] A. C. 489.
* Canada House of Commons Debates, 1899, ii. 2910, 2911; the matter
still presents difficulties ; see Provincial Legislation, 1899-1900, pp. 46, 47,
57 seq. ; 1901-3, PD. 59-61; House of Commons Debates, 1910-1, pp. 6778 seq.
* Canada Sess. Pap., 1877, No. 89, pp. 88 seq. The Act was 37 Vict. c. 8.
The position is still different as recards Manitoba. where an Act. 47 Vict.
