cHAP. v] THE GOVERNOR AND THE LAW 247 
be expected to disappear for a long time. Recent instances 
of such happenings are afforded by the large sum expended 
by Mr. Philp’s Government in 1907-8, when the House 
had refused all supply, and had urged the Governor of 
Queensland not to dissolve the House as requested by the 
Ministry : in that case the opposition was extremely indig- 
nant, and there were many threats of what would happen 
in the country when they came back to office? indeed, 
that feeling was strong is shown by the fact that the money 
in question was ultimately voted in so indirect a manner 
that the Labour party, whichwould have resisted energetically 
its appropriation, was caught unaware and let the Bill through 
at the end of the session, when every one was thinking of 
getting away and vigilance was relaxed. In the case of the 
dissolution in 1908 in Victoria the Governor was assured 
that supply was available, but that was not true, and in that 
instance a most gross violation of law took place, because 
the Premier, who was also. Treasurer, spent large sums (over 
£180,000) not merely with only the consent of the Governor, 
which would have been at any rate, if undesirable, a not 
rare occurrence in the case of Australia, but without the 
sanction of a Governor’s warrant, in the face of the constitu- 
tion and in face of the Audit Acts? None the less, though 
a committee was appointed by the new Government to 
investigate the case, it did not appear that Sir Thomas 
Bent had been much of a sinner compared with the long 
tradition of financial irregularity in the case of Victoria. 
In Tasmania, again, a very vigilant and careful Governor 
found it necessary without legal appropriation to approve 
the issue of certain sums of money to the judges, who were 
! The Government of Mr. Kidston, which took office on Mr. Philp’s 
resignation, in face of the result of the general elections refused even to 
pay wages until a Supply Bill had been passed. Similar tactics were 
employed in 1908 by the Dominion Government to meet obstruction of 
supply in Canada ; see Canadian Annual Review, 1908, p. 53. 
' Victoria Parliamentary Debates, 1909, pp. 9 seq., 330-3; Parl. Pap, 
1909, Sess. 2, No. 1. It should be noted that in most of the Dominions 
there are now provisions in the Audit or other Acts allowing in certain cir- 
cumstances special expenditure (e.g. Canada Rev. Stat., 1906, c. 24. s. 42), 
but these provisions are constantly being exceeded.