limited in various ways, and the validity of its enactments is liable to be questioned, and often is questioned, in courts of law. It cannot make laws in conflict with any Act of Parliament the operation of which extends to the dominion, but such Acts are not numerous. It derives its powers from a written constitution and cannot exceed the powers thus conferred on it. Where the constitution is federal, the powers of the central legislature and of the local legislatures are limited in relation to each other. And lastly, the power of disallowing enactments when passed, a power corresponding to the veto formerly exercised by the king in England, is still exercised on behalf of the king in the case of enactments passed in British dominions beyond the seas. It used at one time to be very freely exercised, but its exercise is now very rare, and, as a rule, occurs only in cases where the legislature has clearly exceeded its powers or where the subject of legislation is a matter of imperial, as distinguished from local, concern. Newfoundland has not been absorbed in the dominion of Canada. New Zealand has remained independent of the commonwealth of Australia. But, with these exceptions, the self-governing dominions are under a federal form of government. Canada was the first to federate. The Act of 1867, which constituted the dominion of Canada, contains many features suggested by the constitution of the United States, but differs from it in important respects, particularly in entrusting larger powers to the central government. In the United States the presumption is that powers not specifically given to the federal government belong to the individual States. In Canada the presumption is the other way. Australia, which obtained a federal constitution in 1900, reverted more to the United States form of federation, but tendencies to increase the powers of the central legislature are already visible. The South African constitution of 1909 is more unitarian and less federal, that is to say the powers of the central government are greater, those of the individual states less, than either in Canada or in Australia. On the democratic character of government and legislation in the British dominions beyond the seas it is unnecessary to enlarge. The colonists who settled Canada, Australia and New Zealand took with them many English traditions, but they did not take with them the traditions of English aristocracy. The existence, in any of these countries, of a legislature containing any hereditary element in its composition would be almost inconceivable. And the legislative experiments which are constantly being tried in Australia and New Zealand show how powerful is the influence exercised by the working classes on the actual of their legislatures. These comparisons might be extended indefinitely, but we may end as we began. To the model parliament held by the first Plantagenet Edward may be traced back all the parliaments and legislatures which, during the reign of his latest namesake on the English throne, were making laws in every part of the civilized world. |