cmap. iv] THE PREROGATIVE OF MERCY 1403 
there, who is chosen as other British ministers are chosen, 
and is responsible as other British ministers are responsible 
to the British Parliament for his advice. Therefore in the 
United Kingdom this power is exercised under the same 
restraints and with the same securities to the people con- 
cerned as the other powers of government. 
This it seems to the sub-committee is the practical result 
which should be obtained in the Dominion. 
Here while the Canadian Parliament makes laws for the 
punishment of crimes committed by the inhabitants of 
Canada, the Sovereign should exercise the prerogative of 
mercy towards such criminals under the advice of her Privy 
Council for Canada, or of her minister there, chosen as her 
other Canadian ministers are chosen, and responsible to the 
Canadian Parliament for his advice; nor, having regard 
to the reasons given in the report already referred to, can 
the suggested responsibility of the Governor to the Colonial 
Office for the exercise of this power independent of, though 
after advice, be deemed a satisfactory substitute for the 
responsibility to the Canadian people of a minister charged 
with the usual powers and duties in this respect. 
(IT) The second argument is that expediency requires that 
this prerogative should be independently exercised by the 
Governor, and it is suggested that ‘ the pressure political as 
well as social which would be brought to bear upon the 
ministers if the decision of such questions rested practically 
with them would be most embarrassing to them, while the 
ultimate consequences might be a serious interference with 
the sentences of the courts’. 
This suggestion, which is supported, in the case of one of 
the Australian Colonies, by the views of local authorities, 
is not applicable in a general sense to Canada, where it has 
been commonly supposed that the decision of this as of other 
questions rests (at any rate in the cases not covered by the 
special instruction) practically with the ministers; where 
it is believed that unless in the exceptional cases pointed out 
by the sub-committee the embarrassments suggested would 
but rarely occur, and that at any rate ministers would not 
be relieved of any such embarrassments by the proposed 
course ; and where it is confidently maintained that no 
improper interference with the sentences of the courts would 
result. 
No doubt in the exercise of this as of many other powers 
of Government embarrassments and difficulties may from 
time to time arise : but it is believed that their true solution