THE ANNOTATED CONSTITUTION
OF THE
AUSTRALIAN COMMONWEALTH.
N^
ANNOTATED CONSTITUTION
OF THE
AUSTRALIAN COMMONWEALTH
BY
(S^t) JOHN QUICK LL.D.
OF THE VICTORIAS BAB, ONE OF THE REPRESENTATIVES OF VICTORIA IX THE NATIONAL AUSTRALASIAS CONVENTION 1897-8
AND
ROBERT RANDOLPH GARRAN M.A.
OF THK NEW SOUTH WALES BAR, AUTHOR OF "'THE COMING COMMONWEALTH*
SYDNEY MELBOURNE
ANGUS & ROBERTSON MELVILLE & MULLEN
LONDON : THE AUSTRALIAN BOOK COMPANY
38 WEST SMITHFIELD E.C. 1901
SIDNEY
Websdale, Shoosmith & Co., Printers, 117 Clarence Street.
v^
TO
THE PEOPLE OF AUSTRALIA
THIS BOOK IS DEDICATKD BY THE AITHORS
Digitized by tine Internet Archive
in 2007 with funding from
IVIicrosoft Corporation
http://www.archive.org/details/annotatedconstitOOquicuoft
PEEFACE.
The preliminary part of this work is a historical introduc- tion and guide to the study of the Constitution of the Australian Commonwealth. This is followed by analytical, legal, and political commentaries on the Constitution, for the use of those who seek a special and comprehensive acquaintance with its provisions.
Our chief aim has been a practical one. Clear as is the language of the Constitution, it cannot be fully understood without the study of a large correlated literature.
The Federation of the Australian colonies has occupied the best energies of the statesmen and the people of Australia for many years ; and this Constitution is the outcome of exhaustive debates, heated controversies, and careful com- promises. It is an adaptation of the principles of British and colonial government to the federal system. Its language and ideas are drawn, partly from the model of all modern govern- ments, the British Constitution itself ; partly from the colonial Constitutions based on the British model ; partly from the Federal Constitution of the United States of America ; and partly from the semi-federal Constitution of the Dominion of Canada ; with such modifications as were suggested by the circumstances and needs of the Australian people.
The Constitution of the Commonwealth, therefore, is not an isolated document. It has been built on traditional foundations. Its roots penetrate deep into the past. It embodies the best achievements of political progress, and realizes the latest attainable ideals of liberty. It represents the aspirations of the Australian people in the direction of nationhood, so far as is consistent and in harmony with the solidarity of the Empire.
Such an instrument of government must needs be rich in historical associations, and many of its derivative enactments
PREFACE.
are necessarily intertwined with the course of constitutional development and interpretation in kindred systems and communities. There is hardly a phrase in it without a history, or without analogy with a phrase which in some other Constitution has been the subject of exhaustive arguments and judicial decisions. The Commentaries of the great American jurists, and the numerous judgments on constitutional questions given by the Supreme Court of the United States during the last century, are full of profound reasoning which is applicable to the words of this Constitution. Many decisions of the Supreme Courts of Canada and the Australian colonies upon constitutional questions, and reviews of them by the Privy Council, are of great value in the elucidation of the Constitution of the Commonwealth. There is thus an immense store of material for comparative study.
The actual history of the Constitution is traced generally in Part IV. of the Historical Introduction, and in detail in the Historical Notes appended to each clause, section, or sub- section. But its study involves many other aspects. Its character as a colonial Constitution demands a review of the history and principles of colonization, which are shortly dealt with in Parts I. and II. of the Historical Introduction. As an Australian Constitution, it is intimately associated with the story of the constitutional development of the Australian colonies, which is traced in Part III. of the Historical Introduction. As a Constitution on the British model, it requires some knowledge of British constitutional law and history, the outlines of which are sketched in the notes to the Preamble and elsewhere. And as a Federal Constitution, light is thrown upon it by the American, Canadian, Swiss, and German Constitutions. Wherever comparison was thought useful, the corresponding provisions of those Consti- tutions have been set out in small type immediately after each section.
We are fully sensible of the difficulty of attempting to expound a Constitution before it has been the subject of practical working or judicial exposition. It is impossible to foretell where the real difficulties will be found, or how they
PREFACE.
will be met. The experience of other countries is a guide, but not an infallible guide ; and the development of the Constitution of the Commonwealth must assuredly follow lines of its own. We have, however, endeavoured, from the vast and scattered materials bearing on the subject, to produce a work which we hope will facilitate the interpretation of, and foster an affection for, the Constitution. We trust that by the orderly arrangement of historical matter, by the minute and impartial analysis of every fundamental word, phrase, and enactment of the Constitution, and by the provision made for the comparative study of other Constitutions, with their wealth of associated precedents, the work may prove of assistance, not only to students of constitutional history and political science, but also to those who, in the active fields of law, politics, or commerce, have a practical interest in the working of the new federal institutions of Australia.
For valuable assistance to the study and exposition of the Constitution of the Commonwealth, we desire to express our acknowledgments and obligations to the following works : —
Sir Thos. Erskine May : ParliameHtary Practice.
Walter Bagebot : The English Constitution.
Dr. E. Heam : The Gotemment of England.
Professor E. Jenks : The Government of Victoria.
Professor A. V. Dice}' : The Law of the Constitution.
Sir Richard ChaflFey Baker, M.L.C. : Manual for the Use of the Convention of
1891 ; and Pamphlets. Kent's Commentaries on the Constitution oj the United States. Storey's Commentaries on the Constitution of the United States. George Bancroft : Formation of the Constitution of the United Stales. Dr. John W. Burgess : Political Science and Constitutional Law. A. J. Baker (Iowa) : Annotated Constitution of the United States. Dr. J. A. Poraeroy : Constitutional Law of the United States. Dr. H. Von Hoist : Constitutional Lata of the United States. John Fiske : The Critical Period of American History. Roger Foster : Commentaries on the Constitution of the United States. Dr. Thomas M. Cooley : Constitutional Limitations and Constitutional Laic oi
the United States. E. P. Prentice and J. G. Egan : Commerce Clause of the United States
Constitution. James Bryce : The American Commonwealth. Carl E, Boyd : Cases on American Constitutional Law. Alpheus Tofld : Parliamentary Government in the British Colonies. Goldwin Smith : Canada and the Canadian Question. Gerald John Wheeler : Confederation Law of Canada. A. H. F. Lefro}' : Legi.4ative Power in Canada.
PREFACE.
For information as to the progress of Federation and constitutional orovernment in South Australia we are indebted
o
to Sir Richard C. Baker, and for similar materials in the case of Tasmania to the Hon. Nicholas J. Brown, M.H.A. Professor Morris, of the University of Melbourne, kindly revised the sketch of ancient colonies and modern coloniza- tion down to Magellan's great voyage. We have to thank Mr. Francis Walsh, Parliamentary Librarian of New South Wales, Mr. R. Church, Parliamentary Librarian of Victoria, Mr. G. W. Waddell, Librarian of the Supreme Court of New South Wales, and Mr. John Schutt, Librarian of the Supreme Court of Victoria, for courteous facilities afforded and assist- ance given in referring to original reports and authorities.
J. Q. R. R. Gr. 7th Dec, 1900.
-^ I
TABLE OF CONTENTS.
PAGE.
PREFACE ^-ii.
TABLE OF IMPERIAL STATUTES CITED xiu.
TABLE OF CASES CITED xix.
HISTORICAL INTRODUCTION.
Part L— AXCIENT COLONIES
(1) Hellenic City SUtes 1
(2) Roman Colonise ... ... ... ... ... ... ... 4
Pakt II. -modern COLONIZATION
(1) In America, Africa and Asia ... ... ... ... ... ... 6
(2) In Australasia ... ... .. ... ... ... ... 23
Part III.— COLONIAL GOVERNMENT IN Ai;STRALlA
(1) New South Wales 35
(2) Victoria ... ... ... ... ... .. ... ... 51
(3) Tasmania ... ... ... ... ... 58
(4) South Australia ... . . ... ... 62
(5) Western Australia ... .. ... ... ... .. 67
(6) Queensland... ... ... ... ... ... 72
(7) New Zealand . . ... ... ... ... ... ... 75
Part IV.— THE FEDERAL MOVEMENT IN AUSTRALIA
(1) The Germ of Federation 79
(2) Earl Grejf^s Schemes 81
(3) The Constitutional Committees of 1853 90
(4) Australian Efforts, 1854-1863 92
(5) The Tariff Question, 1855-1880 100
(6) The Federal Council • 109
(7) The Commonwealth Bill of 1891 115
(8) The Fate of the Commonwealth Bill of 1891 143
(9j The Popular Movement ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... 150
(10) Adelaide Session of the Convention, 1897 ... -■• .. 165
(11) Consideration by the Legislatures ... ... ... ... 182
(12) The Sydney Session of the Convention, 1897 ... ... ... 187
(13) The Melbourne Session of the Convention, 1 898 .. . ... ... 194
(14) The Referendum of 1898 206
(15) Events in New South Wales 213
TABLE OF CONTENTS.
(16) The Premiers' Conference, 1899
(17) Adoption of the Constitution, 1899
(18) Enactment of the Constitution, 1900
LIST OF MEMBERS OF CONVENTIONS. CONFERENCES, &c. COMMONWEALTH OF AUSTRALIA CONSTITUTION ACT ..
COMMENTARIES ON THE CONSTITUTION
TITLE
PREAMBLE
COVERING CLAUSES
Chapter L-THE PARLIAMENT
Part I. — General
Part II. — The Senate
Part III. — The House of Representatives Part IV. —Both Houses of The Parliament Part V.— Powers of The Parliament
Chapter IL— THE EXECUTIVE GOVERNMENT
Chapter IIL— THE JUDICATURE
Chapter IV.— FINANCE AND TRADE ...
Chapter V.— THE STATES ...
Chapter VL— NEW STATES
Chaiter VII.— miscellaneous
CuAiTER VIIL— ALTERATION OF THE CONSTITUTION ALPHABETICAL SUBJECT INDEX
PAGE.
. 218 . 221
. 228
. 253 . 262
281 282
311
383 384 411 445 483 508 699 719 811 927 967 978 985
997
TABLE OF IMPERIAL STATUTES
CITED LN THIS WORK.
PAGE.
21 Hen. 111. (1236-7) Confirmation of Charters 383
3 Edw. I. (1272) First mention of Parliament 383
15 Eclw. II. (1322) First recognition of Parliament by Crown 302
4 Edw. 111.(1.330)0.14. Yearly Parliament 411
25 Edw. III. (1352) st. 5. c. 13. Coinage 573
36 Edw. III. (1362) c. 10. Yearly Parliament 411
4 Hen. IV. (1402) c. 1. Confirmation of Charters 303
7 Hen. IV. (1405) c. 15. Election of Knights of Shires 307
9 Hen. IV. (1407) Confirmation of Charters : Statute of Gloucester 307
1 Hen. V. (1413) c. 1. Parlianientarj- elections — residence 477
8 Hen. VI. (1429) c. 7. House of Commons (electors) 307
10 Hen. VI. (1432) c. 2. House of Commons (electors) 307
23 Hen. VI. (1444-5) c. 14, House of Commons (electors) 307
32 Hen. VIII. (1540) c. 16. Aliens 600
34 and 35 Hen. VIII. (1542-3) c. 4. Bankruptcy 586
35 Hen. VIII. (1543-4) c. 3. King's style 298
43 Eliz. (1601) c. 2. Poor relief 321
21 Ja. I. (1623) c. 3. Patent 596, 597
3 Cha. I. (1627) c. 1. Petition of Right 316,318
16 Cha. I. (1640) c. 1. Yearly Parliament 411
c. 10. Star Chamber ; Privy Council ... 318, 502, 751
12 Cha. II. (1660) Restoration Parliament 406
16 Cha. II. (1664) c. 1^ Triennial Parliaments ... 411
29 Cha. II. (1677) c. 3^ Statute of Frauds 322,558
31 Cha. II. (1679) c. 2. Habeas Corpus 318, 5<>2
1 Will, and Mary (1688) Convention declared a Parliament... ... ... ... 406
c. 21. Lords Commissioners of Great Seal ... ... 480
Sess. 2. c. 2. Bill of Rights 316,318,323
6 and 7 Will, and Mary (1694) c. 2. Parliament— Triennial Act ... 411, 462
7 and 8 Will III. (1696) c. 3. Treason 3-50
c. 15. Parliament— Demise of Crown ... ... ... 462
c. 22. Plantations— validity of laws ... ... 1, ^^7
c. 25. Infant: Parliament ... 476
12 and 13 WilL HI. (1700) c. 2. Act of Settlement 317, 318, 324, 478, 728, 731, 733
1 Anne (1702) c. 2. Demise of Crown 462
c. 8. Commissioners to negotiate union with Scotland ... 296
6 Anne (1707) c. 11. Union of England and Scotland 298
c. 41. Demise of Crown. Pension Place-holders 462, 493, 494
8 Anne (1709) c. 21. Copyright 593
10 Anne (17U)r,c. 31. House of Commons electors — clergj- ... ... ... 304
1 Geo. I. St. 2 (17U)j|c. 4. Naturalization ... 478
|,|c. 38. Parliament— Septennial Act 462
4 Geo. I. (17liVc. 11. Transportation to American Colonies 29
6 Geo. I. (171B1JC. 5. Dependency of Ireland on Great Britain ... 299
TABLE OF IMPERIAL STATUTES.
4 Geo. 8 Geo. 18 Geo. 1 Geo. 6 Geo. 6 Geo.
11 Geo.
13 Geo.
14 Geo.
II.
II.
II. III. III. III.
III. III. III.
18 Geo. III.
22 Geo.
23 Geo.
24 Geo. 27 Geo.
III.
III. III. III.
III. III. III.
31 Geo.
33 (Jeo.
37 (ieo.
39 and 40 Geo.
54 Geo. Ill,
59 Geo. Ill
1 and 2 Geo. IV
3 Geo.
4 Geo. 9 Geo.
10 Geo. 1 Will
IV. IV. IV.
IV. IV.
c. 21. c. 13. c. 18. c. 23. c. 12.
1731) 1735) 1745) 1760) 1765) 1766) c. 11.
c. 12.
c. 42.
c. 21.
c. 58.
c. 83.
c. 12.
1770) 1773) 1774)
1778)
1782)
British Subject ...
Copyright Engravings ...
House of Commons Electors — clergy ,
Commissions and salaries of Judges
Stamp Tax (America) ...
Repeal of Stamp Tax (America)
Declaratory of right to tax the colonies
Grenville Act ; Election Petitions
British Subject ...
Residence in constituency
Canada — Quebec Act
Colonial Charter— Declaration that Great
will not tax th(3 colonies ... Contractors : House of Commons
45. c. 53.
c. 75. Patent Offices in Colonies
1783) c. 28. Ireland
1784) c. 56. Transportation .. 1787) c. 2. New South Wales Foundation
c. 13. Consolidated Fund
c. 38. Designing and printing of linens
1791) c. 31. Canada Upper and Lower
1793) c. 13. Act of Parliament — Commencement .
1797) c. 97. Treaty with United States
III. (1800) c. 67. Union of Great Britain and Ireland
1813) c. 15. (Recovery of debts in N.S.W.)
1819) c. 12. " Sturges Bourne's Act "—Poor Rates
c. 114. Duties in New South Wales
(1821) c. 8. Duties in New South Wales
Repeal of Act for securing dependency of Ireland ... 299
730, 733 ... 299 29,35 ... 35 ... 812 593, 598 22, 310, 512 ... 331 ... 769 ... 299 ... 348 284 ... 36 ... 36 ... 36
PAGE.
478, 599 ... 593 ... 304 ... 728 ... 21 ... 22 ... 22 ... 496 478, 599 ... 477 ... 511 Britain
318, 348 ... 493
1822) c. 96. Duties in New South Wales
1823) c. 96. Justice in New South Wales and Van Diemen's Land 36, 59 1828) c. 61. Public Houses ... 281
c. 8.3. Government of New South Wales and Van Diemen's
Land 37,59,344,366,462,512,808
22. Western Australia - Foundation 33,68,512
1829) c. 1830-1)
Sand 4 Will. IV. (1833)
4. (Demise of Crown) c. 20. (Lower Canada— validity of laws) 2 and 3 Will. IV. (1832) c. 4.5. Reform Ast -England
Hou-so of Commons (offices)— Speaker Statute of Limitations
Judicial Committee 330,
Plantations— vali<lity of laws Bank of England : Bank Note South Australia— Foundation Recovery of Debts— Ireland
Oaths
Copyright (lectures) M u u ici pal Corporations Patents
c. 59. International Copyright
c. 60. South Au.stralia
c. 38. Election Petitions .
c. 67. Patents
4 and 5 Will
5 and 6 WiU
IV. IV.
(1834) (18,35)
c. 105. 0. 27. c. 41. 0. 59. c. 98. c. 95. 0. 55. c. 62. c. 66. c. 76. c. 83.
1 and 2 Vic. (1838)
2 and 3 Vic. (1839)
... 462 ... 348
298, 307, 308 ... 480 ... 462
730, 751, 766 ... 348 .. 575 63, 352, 374 ... 322 ... 348 ... 593 ... 475 ... 596 ... 593 ... 352 ... 496 ... 597
TABLE OF IMPERIAL STATUTES.
XV.
|
3 and 4 Vic. |
(1840) |
c. 9. c. 35. c. 62. c. 105. |
|
4 and 5 -Vic. |
(1841) |
c. 13. |
|
5 and 6 Vic. |
(1842) |
c. 45. 0. 61. c. 76. c. 100. |
|
6 and 7 Vic. |
(1843) |
c. 34. c. 38. c. 73. c. 94. |
|
7 and 8 Vic. |
(1844) |
c, 12, c. 66. c. 69. c. 74. |
|
8 and 9 Vic. |
(1845) |
c. 20. c. 109. |
|
9 and 10 Vic. |
(1846) |
0.77. c. 93. c. 103. |
|
10 and 11 Vic. |
(1847) |
c. 95. |
|
1 1 and 12 Vic. |
(1848) |
c. 12. c. 42. |
|
12 and 13 Vic. |
(1848-9) c 95. |
|
|
c. 96. |
||
|
13 and 14 Vic. |
(1850) |
c. 21. c. 59. |
|
14 and 15 Vic. |
(1851) |
c. 83. c. 99. c. 100. |
|
15 and 16 Vic. |
(1852) |
c. 12. c. 72. c. 83. |
|
16 and 17 Vic. |
(1853) |
c. 48. |
|
17 and 18 Vic. |
(1854) |
c. 31. c. 104. c. 125. |
|
18 and 19 Vic. |
(1855) |
c. 54. c. 55. c. 56. c. 84. |
|
20 and 21 Vic. |
(1857) |
c. 3. |
|
21 and 22 Vic. |
(1858) |
c. 70. |
|
22 and 23 Vic. |
(1859) |
c. 12. |
|
23 and 24 Vic. |
(1860) |
c. 34. c. 122. |
Publication of Parliamentary papers 503
Canada — Union of Upper and Lower 23,512
To Separate Islands (New Zealand) from New South
Wales 75, 344, 512
Recovery of Debts — Ireland ... ... ... ... 322
Loan to South Australia... ... ... ... ... 352
Copyright 301, 348, 349, 594, 595, 600, 602
South Australia : Crown Colony 64,352
New South Wales : Representative Legislature — Van
Diemen's Land, .38, 52. 53, 59, 60, 72, 74, 344,
375, 385, 512, 688, 689, 690, 691, 692, 694, 976 CopjTight of Designs ... ... ... ... ... 598
Fugitive Offenders 618,619
Judiciail Committee ... ... .. ... ... 330
Solicitors 809
Foreign Jurisdiction ... ... ... ... ... 618
Copyright— International ... ... ... 594, 770
Aliens and Naturalization ... ... 478, 600, 601
Judicial Committee 330, 741, 743
AssenttoBills— N.S.W. and V.D.L 690
Railway Clauses Consolidation 905, 90S, 910
Wagers ... ... ... ... ... ... ... 558
House of Commons (officers) ... 480
(Lord Campbell's Act — Death by Accident) 281
New Zealand Government .. ... ... 76
Copyright (colonial) 49,594
Treason — Felony ... ... .. ... ... ... 492
Justices of the Peace ... ... . ... •■• 618
Judgments — Ireland ... ... .. ... ... 322
Offences on the high seas ... ... 358
Abbreviation of language in Acts of Parliament ... 475 Australian Colonies Act (N.S. W., S.A , V.D.L., Vic,
W.A.), 40, 52, 53. 56, 60, 61, 64, 65, 68, 72, 74,
88, 90, 104, 344, .352, 385, 512, 690, 888, 976
Judicial Committee
Evidence
Criminal Procedure
Copyright (international)
New Zealand — Constitution
Patents
Coin, Colonies
Railway and Canal Traffic
Merchant Shipping
Common Law Procedure
330
348
808
59.3, 594
76
597
49
896, 906-10, 912 ...49,355, 359 781
New South Wales— Constitution, 44, 72, 463, 504,
512, 690, 889, 976 Victoria— Constitution 45, 46, 57, 463, 504, 512, 690, 704 Australia — Crown Lands Sale ... ... ... ■• 61
House of Commons (offices) —Deputy Speaker
Transportation : Cessation
Cop vright of Designs
Evidence ...
Petitions of Right
Homicide: Sea
4S0 61 598 3J8 805 49
xvi. TABLE OP IMPERIAL STATUTES.
|
24 and 25 Vic. |
(1861; c. 44. |
|
c. 134. |
|
|
25 and 26 Vic. |
(1862) c. 63. |
|
c 89. |
|
|
26 and 27 Vic. |
, (1863) c. 24. |
|
27 and 28 Vic. |
(1864) c. 24. |
|
28 and 29 Vic. |
(1865) c. 14. |
|
c. 63. |
|
|
c. 64. |
|
|
29 and 30 Vic. |
(1866) c. 19. |
|
c. 74. |
|
|
30 and 31 Vic. |
(1867) c. 3. |
|
c. 45. |
|
|
c. 102. |
|
|
c. 124. |
|
|
31 Vic. |
(1868) c. 29. |
|
31 and 32 Vic. |
(1868) c. 72. |
|
c. 105. |
|
|
e. 125. |
|
|
32 and 33 Vic. |
(1869) c. 11. |
|
c. 15. |
|
|
c. 43. |
|
|
c. 55. |
|
|
c. 71. |
|
|
33 and 34 Vic. |
(1870) c. 10. |
|
c. 14. |
|
|
c. 23. |
|
|
c. 52, |
|
|
c. 91. |
|
|
c. 102. |
|
|
34 and 35 Vic. |
(1871) c. 28. |
|
35 and 36 Vic. |
(1872) c. 19. |
|
36 and 37 Vic. |
(1873) c. 22. |
|
c. 48. |
|
|
c. 60. |
|
|
c. 66. |
|
|
c. 88. |
|
|
38 and 39 Vic. |
(1873) c. 38. |
|
c. 51. |
|
|
c. 53. |
|
|
c. 77. |
|
|
39 and 40 Vic. |
(1876) c. 59. |
|
c. 80. |
|
|
40 and 41 Vic. |
(1877) c. 47. |
|
41 and 42 Vic. |
(1878) c. 67. |
|
c. 73. |
|
|
42 and 43 Vic. |
(1879) c. 75. |
|
43 and 44 Vic. |
(1880) c. 9. |
South Australia and Queensland Boundaries
62, 374, 375, 976 Bankruptcy ... ... ... ... ... . 592
Merchant Shipping ... . ... ... 355,359
Companies 322, 591, 605
Vice-Admiralty Courts . 400,798
Naval Prize 797
Colonial Naval Defence ... ... ... ... 49, 695
Colonial Laws Validity ... 50, 229, 230, 232, 2.35, 236, 241, 245, 296, 318, 347-352, 364, 631, 650, 736
Marriage ... ... ... ... 50
Parliament — Oath ... ... ... ... ... 488
Reservation of Customs Bills ... ... ... ...40,59
British North America Act ... 23, 291, 294, 335, 347,
349, 509, 544, 705, 720, 798, 832 (&c., see Index)
Vice-Admiralty Courts Amendment ... ... 400,798
Demise of Crown — Representation of the People of
England 298,308,462,463
124. (Merchant Shipping) 358
(Medical Practitioners— Colonies) ... ... ... 350
Promissory Oaths... ... ... ... .. . 488
Hudson's Bay Company .. ... ... ... ... 350
Election Petitions ... 496
Merchant Shipping ... ... ... ... 50, 358
House of Commons — Pensions ... ... ... ... 493
Diplomatic Salaries ... ... ... ... ... 493
Municipal Corporation (Elections) 475
Bankruptcy ... .. ... 592
Coinage 573,575
Alien : British Subject and Naturalization ... 50, 478,
491, 600, 601, 603
Felony 492
Extradition 50, 635, 636, 770
Clerg3^ : House of Commons — Disabilities 304
Naturalization — Oaths ... ... ... ... 491
(British North America— Amending) ... 350, 514, 973
Pacific Islands 6.37
Australian Colonies Duties .50,
106, .393, 399, 691, 697-8
Regulation of Railways 896-7,910
Extradition 769
Judicature 769
Slave Tratle 797
Canada — Privileges 506
Pacific Islands 637
Canada : Copyright ... 595,694
(Judicature) 322
Appellate Jurisdiction 751
Merchant Shipping 50
South African Union 114
Foreign Jurisdiction 618
Territorial Waters Jurisdiction .359
Election Petitions... .. ... ... ... 496
Greenwich Time 332
TABLE OF IMPERIAL STATUTES.
|
44 and 45 Vic. |
(1881) c. 3. |
|
c. 58. |
|
|
c. 68. |
|
|
c. 69. |
|
|
45 and 46 Vic. |
(1882) c. 50. |
|
c. 76. |
|
|
46 and 47 Vic. |
(1883) c. 51. |
|
c. 52. |
|
|
c. 57. |
|
|
48 Vic. |
(1884) c. 3. |
|
48 and 49 Vic. |
(1885) c. 23. |
|
c. 60. |
|
|
c. 63. |
|
|
49 and 50 Vic. |
(1886) c. 33. |
|
c. 37. |
|
|
50 and 51 Vic. |
(1887) c. 70. |
|
51 and 52 Vic. |
(1888) c. 25. |
|
c. 32. |
|
|
c. 41. |
|
|
c. 46. |
|
|
c. 50. |
|
|
.52 and 53 Vic. |
(1889) c. 63. |
|
53 and 54 Vic. |
(1890) c. 9. |
|
c. 26. |
|
|
c. 27. |
|
|
57 and 58 Vic. |
(1894) c. 60. |
|
58 and 59 Vic. |
(1895) c. 34. |
|
c. 44. |
|
|
m and 64 Vic. |
(1900) c. 12. |
PAGE.
Judicial Committee 330,751
Army Act, 1881 51,117
House of Commons — Election Petitions ... ... 496
Fugitive OfiFenders 619,696
Municipal Corporations... ... ... ... . 476
Merchant Shipping 51,360
Corrupt and Illegal Practices Prevention ... ... 497
Bankruptcy .. 322,592
Patents, Designs, and Trade Marks .. ... 597, 598
Representation of the People ... ... ... 298, 308
Redistribution of Seats 298,308
Australasia— Federal Council .. 230, 263, 311, 345, 362,
363, 376-7, 570, 613, 614, 629
Patents ... ... ... ... ... ... 597
Copyright 594, 596
Patents, Designs, and Trade Marks ... ... ... 598
Judicial Committee ... ... ... ... 330, 751
Railway and Canal Traffic 745, 896-7, 906, 908-10
Imperial Defence — Australia ...
Local Government
Declaration : Oath
Patents, Designs, and Trade Marks
Acts of Parliament — Interpretation
117,562
475
488
598
.230, 322, .332, 352, 362, 475, 777, 792-3
51
71
400, 696, 797-9
Merchant Shipping
Western Australia : Constitution
Colonial Courts of Admiralty ...
Merchant Shipping ... 49,50,51,229,230,232,
301, 355, 357, 358, 3.59, 360, .362, 569, 651
Colonial Boundaries 263,311,378-9,640,975
Judicial Committee Amendment 244,751
Commonwealth of Australia Constitution 249, 262, 281
1^>
TABLE OF CASES
CITED IN THIS WORK.
Note ok American' Reports. — The first 90 volumes of the reports of the Supreme Court of the United States are cited by the names of the different reporters (Dallas, Cranch, Wheaton, Peters, Howard, Black, Wallace). From vol. 91 they are known as the United States Reports (cited thus : — " 176 U.S."). The early reports of the Federal Circuit Courts are cited by the names of the reporters, but since 1880 they are all contained in the Federal Reporter (cited "Fed. Rep.").
Selected cases from the American State Courts down to 1869 are collected in the "American Decisions" (100 vols.); from 1870 to 1887, in the "American Reports" (60 vols.); and from 1888 to the present time in the "American State Reports." Under the national reporter s\'stem, the decisions of the highest courts of the different States are now contained in the following group of reports : — Atlantic Reporter, North-eastern Reporter, North-western Reporter, Pacific Reporter, Southern Reporter, South-eastern Reporter, South-western Reporter.
FAGK.
Abercrombie v. Dupuis (jurisdiction — residence), 1 Cranch (U.S.) 343 ... ... 777
Ableman v. Booth (suits by and against United States), 21 How. (U.S.) 506 ... 773 Ackman r. Town of Moncton (provincial tax on federal employees), 24 N.
Bruns. 103 ... ... ... ... ... . ... ... ... ... 553, 554
Addington r. Cann (Crown, when bound by legislation), 3 Atk. 154 ... ... 322
Add vston Pipe and Steel Co. v. United States ( commerce —monopolies), 175
U.S. 211 538-9
Ah Toy V. Musgrove (see Chung Toy I'. Musgrove)
Albany Bridge Case (interstate rivers — federal control), 2 Wall. (U.S.) 403 ... 886
Allan, Exp. : ;e Victoria Steam Nav. Board, 7 V.L.R. 248 («cc Victoria Steam
Nav. Board, He)
Allan V. Pratt (Privy Council — special leave to appeal), 13 App. Ca. 780 ... 761 Allen V. Hanson (winding-up foreign companies), 16 Quebec L.R. 85 ; and 18
S.C.R. (Can.)667 591,606
Almy V. California (inter-state commerce — State tax on bills of lading), 24
How. (U.S.) 169 847
American Insurance Co. «'. Canter (territories — government), 1 Pet. (U.S.) 511 972
American Publishing Co. v. Fisher (trial by jury), 166 U.S. 464 . ... 810
Amory v. Amory (jurisdiction — citizens of different States), 95 U.S. 186 ... 777
Anderson, Re (habeas corpus — jurisdiction of Queen's Bench), 30 L.J.Q.B. 129 781
v. Dunn (legal tender— construction), 6 Wheat. (U.S.) 204 ... .. 575, 652
Antelope, The (jurisdiction — penal laws of States), 10 Wheat. (U.S.) 66 ... 778 Armour Packing Co. v. Snyder (police power -oleomargarine), 84 Fed. Rep.
136 851
Armstrong v. Carson (action on a judgment), 2 Dall. (U.S.) 302 . ... 963
Ash V. Abdy (construction— statute), 3 Swans. 664 ... ... 365
Ashbury v. Ellis (civil process — service) (1893), App. Cas. 339 ... 616
Ashby I'. White (franchise). Smith's L. Cas. Vol. I. 268 ... ... ... ... 471, 756
Asher r. Texas (State tax on inter-state commerce), 128 U.S. 129 847, 858
Attorney-General v. Bradlaugh (parliamentary oath), 14 Q.B.D. 667 488
V. Great Ea.stern Ry. Co. (marginal note'i, 11 Ch. D. 449 ... 282
V. Powis (preamble) 1 Kav 186 ; 2 Eq. R. 566 285
r. Sillem (creation of right of appeal), 10 H.L.C. 720 ... 746
r. Weymouth (title— statute), Ambl. 23 281
for Canada v. Attorney -General of Ontario (pardoning
power), 3 Ont. App. 6 ; 19 Ont. Rep. 6 390,702,930,983
Attomev-General for Canada v. Flint ( Vice-Admiralty Courts — power to vest
jurisdiction), 3 S.C. (Nov. Scot.) 453; 16 S.C.R. (Can.) 707 709, 803
TABLE OF CASES.
PAGE.
Attorney-General of New South Wales v. Rennie (payment of members)
(1896), App. Cas. 376 500
Attorney-General of Ontario v. Attorney-General of Canada (assignment for
creditors) (1894), App. Cas. 189 588,591
Attorney-General of Ontario v. Attorney-General for Canada (Liquor Prohi- bition) (1896), App. Cas. 348 513, 516, 547, 548
Attorney-General of Quebec v. Murray, 25 Lower Can. Jur. 208 .. 761
of Queensland v. Gibbon (non-attendance — parliament), 12
App. Cas. 442 442,482
Austin V. Boston Aldermen (statutes unconstitutional in part), 7 Wall. (U.S.)
694 796
Australian Smelting Co. v. Brit. Broken Hill Propr. Co. (appeal to Privy
Council), 23 V.1..R. 643, 20 A.L.T. 46 738
Ayers, i?e (jurisdiction — suit against State), 123 U.S. 443 ... ... ... 774
Baiz, ^e (jurisdiction-proof of), 135 U.S. 403 772
Baker v. City of Portland (Chinese labour- restrictive law) (U.S.), L.T. 18th
Oct., 1879, p. 403.- Todd, Gov. in Col. 2nd ed. p. 196 628
Baldwin j?. Bank of Newbury (State insolvency laws), 1 Wall. (U.S.) 234 ... 587
V. Franks (statute unconstitutional in part), 120 U.S. 678 ... ... 796
V. Hale (bankruptcy, discharge by State law), 1 Wall. (U.S.) 223 587
Bank of Australasia v. Nias (civil process— service), 16 Q.B. 717 ... ... 616
of Toronto v. Lambe (federal corporations — taxation), 12 App. Cas. 575
547, 553, 554
of United States v. Devaux (jurisdiction— corporation - not a citizen), 5
Cranch. (U.S.)61 777
Banks r. Orrell (civil process — service), 4 V.L.R. (L.) 219 ... ... ... 614
Banks, The v. Mayor (federal certificates to creditors subject to State taxation),
7 Wall. (U.S.) 16 949
Bank Tax Case (federal stock exempt from State taxation), 2 Wall. (U.S.) 200 559, 949
Barbier v. Connolly (State regulation of laundries) 113 U.S. 27 .. ... 853
Barney v. Baltimore (jurisdiction — resident ot territory), 6 Wall. (U.S.) 280 777
V. McCreery (qualification of members — laws), CI. and Hall (U.S.) 176 440, 475
Barque (/7iw.sa7i, The (commerce -navigation), 2 Story (U.S.) 455 ... ... 540
BaiTon r. Baltimore (trial by jury), 7 Pet. (U.S.) 243 808
r. Burnside (corporations— conditions of doing business), 121 U.S. 186
Barrow V. Wadkin (alien), 24 Beav. 1 ... ... ... ... ... 600
— r. Wadkin (statute — punctuation), 24 Beav. 327 282
Barry, Re (federal jurisdiction— common law offences), 136 U.S. 597 787, 788
Bartemeyer v. Iowa (police power— breweries). 14 Wall. (U.S.) 26 853
Barton v. Taylor (parliamentary privilege), 1 1 App. Cas. 197 504
Bauman ». Ross (just compensation), 167 U.S. 548 641
Baxendale r. ilastern Counties R. Co. (reasonable rate — common law), 27
L.J.C.P. 1.37 ... 916
V. Great Western R. Co. (delivery charges — undue preference), 28
L.J.C.P. 69 ... .. .. ^ .„ ... ... 908
Great Western R. Co. (delivery charges - undue preference), 28
L.J.C.P. 81 908
Beadell v. Eastern Counties R. Co. (railway cab-stand— undue preference), 26
L.J.C.P. 2.50 „ ... ... 907
Beadon r. King (construction-statute), 22 L.J. Ch. Ill 365
Beal r. Ford (residence), 3 C. P. D. 78 776
lieflard, /fc (precedence of .Judges), 7 Moo. P. C. 23 ... 727
lieers v. Arkansas (jurisdiction— suit against State), 20 How. (U.S.) 527 ... 774
Belanger v. Caron (plea of unconstitutionality), 5 Quebec L.R. 25 693
Bell ?•. Holtby (construction -statute), L.R. 15 Eq. 178 364
Bell Telephone Co., /^e (patent— tribunal), 7 Ont. Reps. 605 598
Bentley r. Rotherhani Local Hoard (title -statute), 4 Ch. 1). 588 281
Beresford-Hope r. Lady Sandhurst (election— women), 23 Q.B.D. 79 475
Bethell t>. Hihlvard (marriage -domicile), 38 Ch. D. 220 608
Bingham »;. CatKit (jurisdiction— residence of parties), 3 Dall. (U.S.) 382 ... 777
Hirtwhistle r. Vardill (marriage— domicile— title of statute), 7 CI. and Fin. 895 281 Blake p. McClung (corfMiration not citizen), 172 U.S. 239 .. .. ... 777,961
f- -Midland Ry. Co. (title— statute), 18 Q.B. 93 ... ... '.. ... 281
Blanchard v. Sprague (patent terms and conditions), 2 Story (U.S.) 164 ... 597
Bledsoe's Cawj (resignation of Senators), CI. and Hall (U.S.) 869 442
Boom Co. f. Patterson (resumption -compensation -jurisdiction), 98 U.S. 403 785
Borgmeyer V. Idler (construction of treaty), 159 U.S. 408 770
TABLE OF CASES.
PAGE.
Bowman v. Chicago, &c., R. Co. (police power— inter-state free trade). 125
U.S. 465 518, 528, 536, 537, 848, 851, 856
V. Farnell, 7 N.S.W. L.R. I (see Famell v. Bowman)
Boyer, ^xjff. (artificial stream — federal control), 109 U.S. 629 .. ... .. 883
Boynton v. Blaine, 139 U.S. 306 (see U.S. ex rel. Boynton v. Blaine)
Bradfield r. Roberts (establishment of religion), 175 U.S. 291 ... ... ... 953
Brashear r. Mason (mandamus to federal officer), 6 How. (U.S.) 92 ... 782
BreuU, Exp., re Bowie (residence -defined), 16 Ch. D. 484 960
Bridge Co. v. United States (federal control of bridges), 105 U.S. 470 ...517, 641, 884, 970 Brig Wilson, The v. United States (commerce includes conveyance), 1 Brock.
(U.S.) 423 515,540,873
Brimmer v. Rebman (commerce — State cannot prohibit importation), 138 U.S.
78 851,853,944
Briscoe v. Bank of Kentucky (legal tender — construction), 11 Pet. (U.S.) 257 575 Briton Medical Life Ass., lie (federal power foreign insurance), 12 Ont.
Reps. 441 592, 606
Broder v. Water Co. (riparian rights —reasonable use). 101 U.S. 274 ... ... 890
Broderick's Executor v. Magraw (legal tender), 8 Wall. (U.S.) 639 575
Brook, i?e (service of civil process), 33 L.J. C. P. 246 .. ... ... ... 614
17. Brook (marriage—deceased wife's sister), 9 H.L. Cas. 193 ... ... 609
Brown v. Houston (State tax on exports), 114 U.S 622 ... 845, 846, 848, 855, 856, 943
V. Maryland (State tax on imports), 12 Wheat. (U.S.) 419
286, 515, 520, 524-5. 527, 528, 537. 539, 846, 943-4, 959 Brownsville Commissioners v. League (mandamus to federal officer), 129 U.S.
493 782
Bryant v. Reading (appeal — "final and conclusive "), 17 Q.B.D. 128 746
Buchanan v. Rucker (civil process — ser\nce), 9 East 192 ... ... ... ... 616
Buckley v. Edwards (appointment of Judges) (1892), App. Ca. 387 727, 729
Buffington v. Day, 11 Wall. (U.S.) 113 (see Collector v. Day).
Burdett v. Abbot (Parliamentary privilege —contempt), 5 Dow 165 ; 14 East 1 502
Buron i>. Denman (Act of State), 2 Exch. 167 709
Burrow-Giles Litho. Co. v. Sarony (copyright in works of art). 111 U.S. 53 ... 596
Caird r. Sime (copyright), 12 App. Cas. 326 593
Caldwell t'. Van Vlissengen (patents), 21 L.J. Ch. 97 597
Caledonian R. Co. v. North British R. Co. (construction — statute), 6 App.
Cas. 114 365
Calhoun v. Lanaux (federal jurisdiction — how far exclusive), 127 U.S. 6.34 ... 803 California v. Central Pacific R. Co. (Federal power to construct railways —
State tax on federal franchise), 127 U.S. 1 516, 518, 520", 541, 552, 847
Californian Fig Syrup Co. 's trade mark (1888), 40 Ch. D. 620 599
CaUender, Sykes and Co. v. Colonial Sec. of Lagos (application of English
bankruptcy law) (1891), App. Ca 460 592
Calvin's Case (natural-born subject), 7 Coke's Reps 1 ... 478,599
Canada Sugar Refinery Co. v. The Queen (importation — when complete)
(1898), App. Ca. 735 859
Canadian Pacific Nav. Co. v. Vancouver City (quarantine), 2 Brit. Colu. Rep.
193 568
Cannon v. New Orleans (wharfage charge— State law), 20 Wall. (U.S.) 577 .. 5.36, 858
Capital Traction Co. y. Hof (trial by jury), 174 U.S. 1 810
Cardwell i'. Bridge Co. (navigable river— bridge), 113 U.S. 205 858, 885
Carew, Exp. (leave to appeal— criminal case) (1897), App. Ca. 719 752
Carnatica (Nabob of) v. East India Co. (judicial and political powers), 1 Ves.
J. 371; 2 »d. 56 723
Cameali7.Banks(jurisdiction—citizensof different States), 10 Wheat. (U.S.) 181 777 Carpenter v. Pennsylvania (pardoning power — Federal bankruptcy laws —
Constitution— construction), 17 How. (U.S.) 456 - 587
Carpenters' Co. v. Hay ward (questions of fact and law), 1 Dougl. 374 744
Carter v. Molson (Privy Council— special leave to appeal), 8 App. Ca. 530 .. 761
Carter Medicine Co. 's Trade Mark (1892), 3 Ch. 472 599
Cartledge v. Cartledge (custody of children), 31 L.J. Mat. 85 611
Chavasse, ^a: par^e, re Grazebrook (proclamation), 34 L.J. Bky. 17 331
Cherokee Nation v. Southern Kansas R. Co. (railway construction — federal
authority— compensation), 135 U.S. 641 .. .. 520, 541, 641, 874, 921 Chicago and Alton R. Co. v. Wiggrins Ferry Co. (judicial notice of State laws),
119 U.S. 615 ... .. 746
Chicago and Grand Trunk R. Co. v. Wellman (validity of statute— friendly
suit), 143 U.S. 339 767
TABLE OF CASES.
PAGK.
Chicago Burlington, &c., R. Co. v. Iowa (railroads— State regulation), 94
U S 155 ••• •■■••• ••• •• ••• ••• ■•• ^^"^
Chinese (American) Exclusion Case, 130 U.S. 581 .. ... 628,769
Chinese (Brit. Columbia) Tax Case, Todd Pari Gov. Col. 2nd ed. pp. 194 and 557 62/
Chisholm v. Georgia (jurisdiction -suits against States), 2 Dall. (U.S.) 419
286, 336, 774, 806
Christmas v. Russell (State judgments conclusive), 5 Wall. (U.S.) 290 963
Christy, Exp. (prohibition to inferior court), 3 How. (U.S.) 292 783
Chunc Toy v. Muserove (aliens— exclusion), 14 V.L.R. 349; (1891) App.
(fas. 272 . 390, 391, 600, 624, b26, 708, 710
Church of the Holy Trinity v. United States (Sunday— Christian religion),
143 U.S. 457 ... ••• 289,290,952
Chy Lung v. Freeman (State tax on foreign passengers), 92 U.S. 275 623, 855
Cincinnati, &c., R. Co. v. Inter-state C.C. (objects of Inter-state Commerce
Act — commission an executive body), 162 U.S. 184 ... 898, 900, 911, 915
Cissel V. McDonald (inhabitant of federal territory— status), 16 Blatch. (U.S.)
150 659
Citizens' Ins. Compy. v. Parsons (insurance contracts— provincial law),
7 App. Cas. 96 544,547,583,585
Civil Rights Cases (judicial power— to declare laws invalid), 109 U.S. 3 ... 792
Claflin v. Houseman (federal jurisdiction— how far exclusive), 93 U.S. 130 ... . 803
Clark V. Barnard (jurisdiction — suit against State), 108 U.S. 436 ... ... 774
Clarke and the Union Fire Ins. Co., Jie (winding-up— federal control), 14 Ont.
Reps. 618 591
Clarke's Design, ^e (trade marks) (1896), 2 Ch. 38 598
Clarke, ii/a; 7>ar<e (unconstitutional law — Aa6fias), 100 U.S. 399 .. ... ... 470
Clarkson v. Ontai'io Bank (assignment for creditors), 15 Ont. App. Reps. 166 591
Claydon v. Green (marginal note), L.R. 3 C.P. 511 ... ... 281
Clayton v. Utah (federal territories— operation of laws), 132 U.S. 632 972
Clegg V. Grand Trunk R. Co. (federal corporations— powers), 10 Ont. Reps.
708 ... 579
Clinton Bridge (the federal control of bridges), 10 Wall. (U.S.) 454 ... 517, 858, 884 Clough V. Curtis (territorial courts— constitutionality), 134 U.S. 361 ... ... 382
Clyde Nav. Trustees v. Adamson (Crown property exempt from taxation),
4McQ. H.L. 931 322
Clyde Nav. Trustees v. Laird (statute — construction), 8 App. Cas. 658 .. 365
Coal Co. V, Blatchford (jurisdiction — citizens of different States), 11 Wall.
(U.S.) 172 777
Coe V. Errol (commerce— when it begins), 116 U.S. 517 519, 539, 846, 904
Cohens v. Virginia (jurisdiction— suits against States — "arising under the
Constitution"), 6 Wheat. (U.S.) 264 429,575,658,773,790,806
Cole r. Cunningham (State records— faith and credit), 133 U.S. 107 962,963
Collector V. Day (federal tax on salary of State officer), 11 Wall. (U.S.) 113
551 555 734 950 Collett V. Collett (naturalization— State law), 2 Dall. (U.S.) 294 ... ' ... ' '601
Collingwood r. Pace (natural-born subject), 1 Vent. 413 478
Collins V. New Hampshire (police power— prohibition of sale), 171 U.S. 30 ... 851
V. Welch (construction— statute), 5 C.P.D. 27 364
Collins Co. V. Brown (alien— trade marks), 3 Jur. (N.S.) 929 J 600
I'. Reeves (alien— trademarks), 4 Jur. (N.S.) 865 600
Colorado Central Mining Co. v. Turck (original jurisdiction), 150 U.S. 138 ... 785
Colson r. I^ewis (jurisdiction— grants of different States), 2 Wheat. (U.S.) 377 801
Commercial Bank of India, Re (British corporation — winding-up in colony),
L.R. eEq. 517 .. ... .. 605
Commercial Bank of South Australia, Re (winding-up), 33 Ch. D. 174 ... 606
Commonwealth r. Smith (validity of law), 4 Binney (Penns.) 123 796
Connell v. Neill and Co (service 'out of jurisdiction— British subject), 7 W.N.
(N.S.W.)6 •" 615
Conner V. Elliott (federal privileges and immunities), 18 How. (U.S.) 691 ... 960
Cook V. Peimsylvania (inter-state commerce— State tax on auctioneers), 97
U.S. 5(56 847,857
Cooley r. Port Wardens (pilots— state control), 12 How. (U.S.) 299
^ , 515, 516, 523, 629-30, 540, 657, 853, 858, 873
Coomlxir r. Berks Justices (title— statute), 9 Q.B.D. 17 281
Copeman r. (;allant (preamble), 1 P. Wms. 317 285
Corfield v. Coryell (commerce defined— incidents), 4 Wash. (U.S. ) C.C. 371 516, 616, 959 Corson r. Maryland (interstate commerce- State licenses), 120 U.S. 502 ... 847
TABLE OF CASES.
CotS V. Watson (provincial tax on assets in insolTency), 3 Quebec L. Reps.
157 ; 2 Cartwright .343 553
Covington and Cincinnati Bridge Co. v. Kentucky (inter-stat« railway rates),
154 U.S. 204 521
Cowan V. Milbourn (Christian religion), L.R. 2 Ex. 234 951
Cox, Exp. (mandamus to officer of Crown), 14S.C.R. (N.S.W.) 287 782
Crandall v. Nevada (State tax on passengers), 6 Wall. (U.S.) 35 ... 529, 958, 959
Craufurd r. Att. -Gen. (Crown — bankruptcy), 7 Price 2 ... ... ... ... 321
Crutcher v. Kentucky (foreign express companv — State licence), 141 U.S. 47 847
Cucktield Burial Board, Jte (Crown— when bound), 24 L.J. Ch. 585 321
Gushing i*. Dupuy (federal insolvency law— appeal to Pri\'y Council — *' final "),
5 App. Cas. 409 588, 589, 746, 747, 760, 761
Cuvillier »'. Aylwin (prerogative of appeal), 2 Knap 72 ... .. 746,761
Daniel Ball, The (inter-state commerce —beginning and duration — navigable
waters), 10 Wall. (U.S.) 557 515,517,519,882
D'Arcy r. Ketchum (State judgment — when conclusive), 11 How. (U.S.) 165 963
Davis V. Beason \biganiy and polygamy), 133 (U.S.) .3.33 939, 953
V. Packard (ambassadors — " matters affecting'"'), 7 Pet. 275 ... ... 771
r. Regina (appeal from State courts to Pri\-y Council), 1 Vic. R. Eq. 33 738
Dean v. Dawson (appeal from State comls to Privv Council), 9 N.S.W. L.R.
Eq. 27 .' 738
Debs, Ee (enforcement of executive power by injunction), 158 U.S. 564 ... 965
Decatur v. Paulding (mandamus to federal officer), 14 Pet. 497 782
Deeming, jLxp. (leave to appeal— criminal case) (1892) App. Ca. 422 752
De Geer v. Stone (natural-born subject), 22 Ch. D. 243 .. 478
Delahoyd, Se (process civil, defined), 11 Ir. Ch. R. 404 616
Delondre r. Shaw (copyright - foreigner), 2 Sim. 237 594
Denaby Main CoUiervCo. v. Manchester R. Co. (group rates — equality clause —
undue preference), 13 Q.B.D. 674; 147rf. 209 ; 11 App. Ca. 97 "74.5, 906, 908-9, 921 Denton v. Manners (common law— when altered bv statute), 27 L. J. Ch. 199,
623 .: .365
Devine v. HoUoway (Cro\vn— demise j, 9 Week. Rep. 642 462, 463
Dewhurst v. Coulthard (judiciary— extra-judicial opinions), 3 Dall. (U.S.) 409 766
DiU, Ke (parliamentary pri\'ilege), 1 W. and W. (L.) (Vic.) 171 505
V. Murphv (parliamentary privilege), 1 W. and W. (L.) (Vic.) 342; 1
Moo. P.C. (N.S.)487 505
Dillett, Be (leave to appeal -criminal case), 12 App. Ca. 4.59 752
Dobbins v. Erie County (State tax on federal employee), 16 Pet. (U.S.) 435
551 552 553 554 949 Doe d. Bywater r. Brandling (preamble), 6 L..J. (O.S.) K.B 162 ... ' ... ' ' 285
Duroure r. .Jones (natural-born subject), 4 Term Rep. 300 478
Doggett v. Railroad Co. (federal corporation— sinking fund), 99 U.S. 700 ... 382
Doherty r AUman (judicial discretion), 3 App. Ca 728 759
Donald v. Scott (imported and domestic liquor - discrimination), 67 Fed. Rep.
(U.S.) 854; 165 U.S. 58 947
Donaldson 1-. Beckett (copyright), 4 Burr. 2408 593
Dooley r. Smith (legal tender), 13 Wall. (U.S.) 604 575
Dover r. Maestaer (prerogative of pardon), 5 Esp. 92 . ... 630
Downham v. Alexandria Council (State tax on business). 10 WalL (U.S.) 173 856
Doyle V. Continental Insurance Co. (insurance), 94 U S. .535 583
f. Falconer (parliamentary pri\nlege), L.R. 1 P.C 328 504
Dred Scott v. Sandford (citizenship jurisdiction), 19 How. (U.S.) 393
286, 470, 602, 784, 956 Dubuque, &c., R. Co. v. Richmond, 19 Wall. (U.S.) 584 (see Railroad Co. v.
Richmond)
Ducat V. Chicago (corporations -inter-state rights), 10 Wall. (U.S.) 410 ... 961
Duncan v. Darst (State insolvency law— discharge), 1 How. (U.S.) 301 .. 587
Durousseau v. United States (federal jurisdiction), 6 Cranch (U.S.) 307 ... 738
Dynes r Hoover (naval and military law). 20 How. (US.) 65 564
Eastern Counties Ry. Co. r. Marriage (heading— statute), 9 H.L. Cas. 32 ... 281 Edwards' Case (resignation of members —notice to State Governor), CI. and
Hall>U.S.)92 437
Edye v. Robertson, 112 U.S. 580 (•see Head Monev Cases)
Eilenbecker v. District Court (trial by jury), 134 U.S. 31 808
Eldridge v. Trezevant (federal control of navigable waters). 160 U S. 452 ... 883
Electors v. Bailey (inhabitant -definition), CI. and Hall (U.S.) 411 477
AVtza A'et^A, The (navigation and shipping), 3 Queb. L.R. 143 874
TABLE OF CASES.
PAGE.
Elkanv. Do La Juvenay (extra-territorial service), 22 A. L.T. 34 ... ... 615
Ellis V. McHenry (bankruptcy- international), L.R. 6 C.P. 228 592
Elphinstone v. Bedreechund (treaty — municipal rights), 1 Knapp 316 ... ... 769
Emanuel v. Constable (preamble), 3 Russ. 4^36 ... ... ... ... ... 285
Embrey v. Owen (riparian rights — reasonable use), 6 Exch. 353... ... ... 892
Emert V. Missouri (State tax on sales), 156 U.S. 296 ... ... ... ... 848
Ervine's Appeal (legislative power), 11 Penn. St. 256 ; 55 Amer. Dec. 499 ... 721 Escanaba Co. v. Chicago (commerce —river wholly within a State — federal
control— bridges), 107 U.S. 678 531,534,852,883
Evans t?. Eaton (copyright), 3 Wheat. (U.S.) 454 597
V. Hiidon (Provincial tax on salary of federal employee), 22 Lower Can.
Jur. 268 ; 2 Cartwright 346 553
Evershed v. London and N.W.R. Co. (competitive rates — gratuitous cartage —
undue preference), 2 Q.B.D. 254, 3 id. 134, 3 App. Ca. 1029 906, 908
Exchange, The v. McFaddon (federal power to exclude aliens), 7 Cranch (U.S.)
116 564,628
Exchange Bank of Canada v. Regina (Crown — priority of creditors), 11 App.
Cas. 157 322
Falkland Islands Co. v. Regina (prerogative of appeal), 1 Moo. P.C.N. S. 299 750
i''a»ia. The (operation of treaty), 5 Rob. Adm. 106 ... ... ... ... 769
Fargo V. Michigan (inter-state commerce defined— State tax), 121 U.S. 230 ... 517, 847 Farnell v. Bowman (liability of Crown for tort), 7 N.S.W.L.R. 1 ; 12 App. Ca.
643 805
Fenton v. Hampton (parliamentary privilege), 11 Moo. P.C. 347 ... ... 604
V. Livingstone (marriage — lex loci contractus) 3 McQ. H. L. 497 ... 609
Fertilizing Co. v. Hyde Park (police powers— noxious trades), 97 U.S. 659 ... 853
Ficklen v. Shelby Taxing District (State tax on business), 145 U.S. 1 849
Firebrace ?;. Firebrace (divorce— jurisdiction), 47 L.J. Prob. 41 ... 611
Fletcher 17. Peck (validity of laws), 6 Cranch 87 796
V. Rhode Island, 5 How. (U.S.) (see License Cases)
FongYue Ting t'. United States (treaty), 149 U.S. 698 769
Ford V. London and S.W.R. Co. (special rates to carriers — undue preference),
60 L.J.Q.B. 130 906
Forsyth v. United States (government of territories), 9 How. (U.S.) 571 ... 972
Foster v. Davenport (commercial marine — federal control), 22 How. (U.S.) 244 542
V. Kansas (police power— breweries), 112 U.S. 201 853
V. Neilson (treaty-law of the land), 2 Pet. (U.S.) 253 769
V. Port Wardens (survey of trading vessels— State law), 94 U.S. 246 ... 943
Fowler v. Lindsey (controversies between States), 3 Dall. 411 774
Fox V. Ohio (currency law — offences), 5 How. (U.S.) 410 573
Franconia, The : Reg. v. Keyn, 45 L.J.M.C. 17 ; 2 Exch. D. 63 (see Regina v.
Keyn) Fredericton, City of v. The Queen (Provincial control over liquor traffic), 19
N. Bmns, (3 Pugs, and Burb.) 139 ; 3 S.C.R. (Can.) 505 349, 543, 545
Freight Tax Case (see State Freight Tax Case)
Freme w. Clement (construction -statute), 44 L.T. 399 365
Garden Gully, &c., Co. v. McLister (appeal from State courts to Privy
Council), 1 App. Ca. 39 738
Garland, Ex parte (oath— religion— State laws), 4 Wall. (U.S.) 333 ... 953
Gamett, /^e (extent of maritime pc>wer), 141 U.S. 1 874
Gartoii V. Bristol, &c., R. Co. (facility to carrier— undue preference), 28
L.J.C.P. 306 _ .. ... 908
Garton v. Great Western R. Co. (delivery charges - undue preference), 28
L.J.C.P. 158 908
Gas«ios v. Ballon (alien— naturalized— status), 6 Pet. (U.S.) 761 602
Geddes, Exp., Re Mowat (sequestration— relation back), 1 Glyn and J. 414 ... 692
Goer V. Connecticut (commorce— game laws), 161 U.S. 519 854
Oenevtee Chief, The, v. Fitzhugh (admiralty jurisdiction), 12 How. (U.S.) 443 800
(Georgia r. Stanton (judicial power— political question), 6 Wall. (U.S.) 50 ... 723 Gibbons r. Ogdon (commerce defined ; Constitution— construction), 9 Wheat.
(U.S.) 1 515, 516, 521-4, 525, 628, 536, 538, 578, 657, 796, 796, 904
Gibson, Exp. (mandamus tfj officer of Crown), 2 N.S.W. L.R. 202 782
— r. United States (federal control of navigable watei-s), 166 U.S. 269 ... 883
Oilman v. Lockwofxl (bankruptcy— discharge by State laws), 4 Wall. (U.S. ) 409 687 — — - V. Philadelphia (commerce-bridge), 3 Wall. (U.S.) 713... 631-2, 540, 852, 858 Gleich, i?e (N./.) (extra-territorial jurisdiction), Todd, Pari. Gov. Col. 2nd
''^- 303 618, 619, 630
TABLE OF CASES.
Gloucester Ferry Co. v. Pennsylvania (State tax on inter-state ferry company),
114 U.S. 196 515, 534-6, 846, 852, 853, 855, 873, 885
Goodwin v. Caraleigh Phosphate and Fertilizer Works (inspection laws), 119
X. Carolina (U.S.) 120 _ 944
Gordon, £xp. (prohibition to inferior court), 1 Black (U.S.) 503 783
Gorely, Exp., re Barker (preamble to section), 34 L.J. (B.) 1 ... . 285
Gosse't V. Howard (Parliamentary privilege — contempt), 10 Q.B. 359 502
Gov. -Gen. of Dominion v. Four Pro^^nces (Canadian Liquor License Acts- validity), Wheeler, C.C. 144 ... ... ... 547
Graham, Exp. (prohibition to inferior court). 10 Wall. (U.S ) 541 783
Grand Junction R. Co., Re (incorporation of companies), 45 Upper Can.
Q.B. 302 579
Great Western R. Co, v. Sutton (special rates to carriers— undue preference),
L.R. 4HL. 226 906
Green, i?e (mandamus to federal officers), 141 U.S. 325 • 778
1-. Regina (common law— when altered by statute), 1 App. Cas. 513 365
V. Van Buskirk (State judgment— faith and credit), 7 V> all. (U.S.) 139 963
Green Bay and Mississippi Co. v. Patten Paper Co. (federal control of navigable
waters), 172 U.S. 58, 173 U.S. 179 ... ... 884
Grimes v. Eddy (police power— exclusion of infected cattle), 126 Missouri 168 851 Guckenheimer'r. Sellers (State tax on imports — original package), 81 Fed.
Rep. (U.S.) 997 846
Gulf, Colorado, and Santa Fe R. Co. v. Hefley (inconsistency of laws), 158
U.S. 98 939
Guyr. Baltimore (wharfage — inter-state free trade), 100 US. 434 532, 857
Habeas Corpus Cases, 100 U.S. 371 {see Siebold, Exp.)
Haggin V. Comptoir D'Escompte de Paris (foreign corporation), 23 Q.B.D. 519 605
Hall V. London Brighton, &c., R. Co. (railway rates), 15 Q.B.D. 505 905
Halton r. Cove (preamble), 1 B. and Ad. 538 284
Hamilton r. Vicksburg, &;c., R. Co. (bridge— na\ngation), 119 U.S. 280 ^.. 858, 885
Hammersmith and City R. Co. v. Brand (heading — statute), L.R. 4 H.L. 171 281
Hampton v. McConner( faith and credit), 3 Wheat. (U.S.) 234 963
Hanley I?. Donoghue (faith and credit), 116 U.S. 1 ... . ... ... 962
Hans V. Louisiana (jurisdiction — suit against State), 134 U.S. 1 774
Harding r. WilUams (preamble), 14 Ch. D. 197 285
Harman r. Chicago (inter-state commerce— State licence), 147 U.S. 396 847, 849, 852 Harris v. Cockermouth, &c., R. Co. (competition — undue preference), 27 L.J.
C.P. 162 907
Harris f. Hardeman (State judgment — faith and credit), 14 How. (U.S.) 334 963
Harvey v. Famie (marriage — lex loci contractus), 8 App. Cas. 43 ... ... 609
Hatch't;. Willamette Iron Bridge Co. (federal control over bridge), 6 Fed.
Rep. .326 525
Haybum's Case (extra-judicial opinions), 2 Dall. (U.S.), 409 ... ... ... 766
Hays V. Pacific Mail Steamship Co. (State tax on vessels), 17 How. (U.S.) 596 858 Head Money Cases (taxation of alien immigrants — treaties), 112 U.S. 580
426, 520, 542, 550, 557, 769
Becla Foundry Co. r. Walker (trade mark), 14 App. Cas. 550 598
Henderson v. Major of New York (State tax on foreign passengers), 92 U.S.
259 623,847,853,855,876
Hepburn r. Griswold (legal tender), 8 Wall. (U.S.) 603 575,581
Hill t;, Thompson (patent), 2 xVIoore 224 ^ 597
V. United States (suits against United States), 9 How. (U.S.) .386 773, 806
Hillimore v. Colbourne (provincial tax on federal employee), 32 Can. Law. J.
Reps. N.S. 201 553
Hine, The, v. Trevor (admiralty jurisdiction), 4 Wall. (U.S.) 555 800
Hitz, i?a:/). (jurisdiction — proof of), 111 U.S. 766 ... -■... ... 772
Hodge V. The Queen (provincial control over liquor traffic), 9 App. Cas. 117... 509, 546
Hoge's Case (election laws), CI. and Hall (U.S.) 135 427
Holbom Union v. Chertsey Union (residence), 54 L..LM.C. 53 -477
Holmes 1-. Jennison (extradition). 14 Pet. iU.S). 540 ... 620,6.35
Home Insurance Co. v. New York (State tax on federal bonds— invalid),
134 U.S. 594 .. 5.59
Hope Insurance Co. v, Boardman (jurisdiction — corporation not a citizen),
5Cranch(U.S.)57 777
Homer r. United States (treaty), 143 U.S. 570 ... 769
Houston V. Moore (naval and military power — concurrent jurisdiction),
5 Wheat. (U.S.) 1 565, 80a
TABLE or CASES.
Howe Machine Co. v. Gage, 100 U.S. 675 (see Machine Co. r. Gage)
Huber v. Reily (State control over sufiFrage), 53 Penns. State Reps. 112 ... 468
Hudson's Trade Marks (18S6), 32 Ch. D. 311 599
Hunter r. Nockolds (title— statute), 19 L.J. Ch. 177 281
Huse V. Glover (commerce — improvement of rivers), 119 U.S. 543 ... 540, 850,. 885 Huson V. South Norwich (provincial control over liquor traflSc), 24 S.C.R.
(Can.) 146 513
Hvlton V. United States (direct taxes defined), 3 Dall. (U.S.) 171 550
Illinois V. Illinois C. R. Co , 146 U.S. 387 {see State v. Illinois C.R. Co.) Inman S. S. Co. v. Tinker (inter-state commerce — State wharfage tax), 94
U.S. 238 847,854
Insurance Co. v. Massachusetts, 10 Wall. (U.S.) 566 (see Liverpool Insurance
Co. V. Massachusetts) Insurance Co. v. Morse, 20 Wall. (U.S.) 445 (see Liverpool Insurance Co. v.
Morse) Inter-State Commerce Commission v. Alabama Midland R Co. (commission
may not prescribe rates), 168 U.S 144 521,745,898,912
Inter-State Commerce Commission v. Baltimore and Ohio Co. (power of the
commission — wholesale rate — undue preference), 145 U.S. 263 521, 905, 911, 914 Inter-State Commerce Commission v. Brimson (power of commission to
summon witnesses), 154 U.S. 447 521,898,903
Inter-State Commerce Commission v. Cincinnati, &c., R. Co. (powers of
commission— unduly low rates), 167 U.S 479 898,900,912,916
Intor-State Commerce Commission v. Detroit Grand Haven, &c., R. Co.
(competition — undue preference), 167 U.S. 633 ... ... ... ... . 912
Iron Clay Brick Manuf. Co., Rf (bankruptcy — winding up— provincial laws —
validity), 19 Ont. Keps. 113 589
Isaacson v. Durant (aliens). 17 Q.B.D. 54 ... ... .. ... ... ... 478
Jackson, Ex parte (post offices— lotteries — federal power), 96 U.S. 727 ... 560
Jeflerys f. Boosey (copyright), 4 H L. Cas. 815 ... ... ... ... ... 593
Johnston v. Minister of St. Andrew's Church, Montreal (appeal to Privy
Council— " final"), 3 App. Ca. 159 746,747,752
Jolly V. Terre Haute Draw-bridge Co. (vessels carrying federal commerce,
protected), 6 McL. (U.S ) 237 541
Jones t'. lyeague (jurisdiction — resident of State), 18 How. (U.S.) 76 777
Juilliard V. Greenman (legal tender— construction), 110 U.S. 421 ... 559,575,581 Junction R. Co., i?e, 45 Upper Can. Q B.R. (see Grand Junction R. Co., Re) Kaufi'man Milling Co v. Missouri Pacific R Co. (federal power to regulate
inter-state carriage), 2 Inter-state Com. Reps. 400 521
Kearnsr. Cord wainers Co. (preamble), 28 L.J. C. P. 285 285
Kelley V. Rhoads (State control over depasturing cattle, 51 Pac. Rep. Wyo.
(U.S.) 593 ... 519
Kempe's Lessee v. Kennedy. (inferior courts), 5 Cranch (U.S.) 185 726
Kemlall v. United States (suits against United States), 12 Pet. (U.S.) 524 ... 773, 806 Kennedy v. Purcell (disputed election— appeal to Privy Council), Wheeler
C.C.,314 '.': .. .: 497,498
Kennett v. Chambers (judicial power— political question), 14 How. (U.S.) 38 723
Kenrick V. Lawrence (title— statute), 25 Q.B.D. 99 ... 281
Kentucky v. Dennison (inter-state extradition — political question), 24 How.
(U.S.) 66 , ^ 620,775
Kentucky Bridge Co. v. Lfmisville, Ac. , Co. (Inter-State Commission— execu- tive power), 37 Fed. Rep. (U.S.) 567 898
Kidd V. Pearson (production not commerce — sale of alcohol — State regulation
—valid), 128 U.S. 1 :. ... 518,855
Kielley v. Carson (colonial legislature— prerogative— parliamentary privilege),
4 M.X.. P.C. 63 ... . ... ..* ... *^ ^^.., ^.:. 309,504
KillxMim ». Thomp.son (qualification of members), 103 U.S. 168 382,475
Killam, Re (Provincial insolvency laws— validity), 14 Canada L.J. (N.S.) 242 589 Kimmish v. Ball (pr)lice power— importation of diseased cattle - State law- valid), 129 U.S. 217 853,857,960
King, 'Ihe (see Rex)
Kinney v. Dudman (federal bankruptcy and insolvency laws), 2 Russ. and
ChcR., Nova Scotia Reps. 19 589
Klein, Re (bankruptcy and insolvency— federal control), i How. (U.S.) 277 ... 587
Kold r. United States (eminent domain), 91 U.S. 367 367,640
Koj)M V. Regina (leave to apy)eal— criminal case) (1894), App. Cas. 650 ... 752
Krefft, Exp. (mandamus to officer of Crown), 14 S.C.R. (N.S. W.) 446 ... 782
TABLE OF CASES.
PAGE.
Lake Shore and Michigan R. Co. v. Ohio (navigable waters), 165 U.S. 365 ... 882
Lamplugh i\ Norton (construction — statute), 22 Q.B.D. 452 ... ... ... 364
Lanmans Case (Senators — vacancy), CI. and Hall (U.S.) 871 ... 4.37
Lanz V. Randalls (foreigaer — right to vote — citizenship), 4 Dill. (U.S.) 425 ... 602
Lapierre 1/. Mcintosh (alien— disability), 8 L.J.Q.B. 112 600
Latless r. Holmes (commencement of Act), 4 T.R. 660 ... ... . .. 331
Lautour v. Teesdale (marriage — Cauon law), 2 Marsh. 243 ... ... ... 609
Leather Cloth Co. v. American Leather Cloth Co. (trade mark), IIH. L. Cas.
523 598
Lees V. Summersgill (preamble), 17 Ves. 508 .. ... 285
Legal Tender Cases (construction of constitution), 12 Wall. (U.S.) 457 575, 581, 796
Legal Tender Case, 110 U.S. 421 (see Juilliard r. Greenman)
Leisv I'. Hardin (State tax on imported goods— invalid), 135 U.S. 100
515, 518, 528, 530, 537-8, 846, 848, 850, 851, 853, 943, 946
Leloup i\ Port of Mobile (inter-state telegrams — State licenses), 127 U.S. 640 541, 847 Lempriere r. New Pinnacle Group S.M. Co. (service out of jurisdiction -
British subject), 21 A. LT. 182 615
Lenoir v. Ritchie (appointment of Queen's counsel), 3 S.C.R. (Can.) 575 ... 693 Leprohon v. City of Ottawa (Pro\incial tax on federal oflBcer), 2 Ont. App.
Rep. 522 ... . • 551, 553. 554, 555, 949
Letellier's Case (removal of Lieutenant-Governor), Todd, Pari. Gov. in Col.
(2nd Ed.) p. 612 732
Lewis I-. Graham (residence defined), 20 Q.B.D. 780 960
License Cases (liquor), 5 How. (U.S.) 504 517, 518, 527-8. 538, 602
License Tax Cases (police power), 5 Wall. (U.S.) 462 ... ... ... ... 555,850
Lindsay v. Cundy (interpretation clause), 1 Q B.D. 348 ... ... ... ... 365
Ling Sing v. Washburn (Chinese — discriminating laws), 20 Calif. Reps 534 ... 628
Lionberger r. Rouse (State tax on shares in national banks), 9 Wall. (U.S.) 468 949 Liquor Prohibition Case (Canada) (1896;, App. Ca. 348 (see Attorney-General
of Ontario v. Att. (Jen. for Canada) Lithographic Co. v. Sarony, 111 U. S. 53 {see Burrow-Giles Litho. Co. r. Sarony ) Liverpool Insurance Co. i". Massachusetts (insurance business is not commerce),
10 Wall. (U.S.) 566 583,853
Liverpool Insurance Co v. Morse (removal of causes from State to federal
courts), 20 Wall (U.S.) 445 959
Loan Association v Topeka (taxation — power of States), 20 WalL (U.S.) 655 990
Logan V. Courtown (construction — statute), 20 L.J. Ch. 347 ... ... ... 364
London and N.W.R Co. v. Evershed, 3 Q.B.D. 134 (see Evershed v. London
andN.W.R. Co.) i
London Corp. c. Att.-(]len. (Crown— when bound), 1 H.L. Cas. 439 ... ... 321
Lopez r. Burslem (parliament — foreigners), 4 Moo. P.C. 300 ... ... ... 355
Lord r. Steamship Co. (commercial marine — internal commerce), 102 U.S. 541 518, 855
Lotlawanna, The (lien on vessels — State and federal LawK 21 Wall. (U.S.) 588 540, 874
Loughborough v. Blake (operation of federal laws), 5 Wheat. (U.S.) 317 551, 658, 941
Louisiana r. Jumel (jurisdiction — suits against public officers), 107 U.S. 711 775
V. Texas (controversies between States), 176 U.S. 1 ... ... ... 775
Louisville, &c , R. Co. v. Behlmer (discrimination — competition), 175 U.S. 648 912 r. Letson (jurisdiction— corporation an inhabitant), 2
How. (U.S.) 497 777
Low r Routledge (see Routledge v. Low)
Lubbock r. Potts (colony — plantation). 7 Ea.st 449 36
L' Union St. Jacques de Montreal i'. Belisle (bankruptcy laws — provincial ^nd
federal powers), L.R. 6 P.C 31 588,589,590,693
Luther v. Borden (judicial power — political question), 7 How. (U.S.) 1
565, 722, 792, 927, 964 Lyall V. Jardine (Privy Council — special leave to appeal), 7 Moo. P.C.N S.
116; LR. 3 PC. .318 761
Lyon t7. Morris (appeal — " final and conclusive"), 19 Q.B.D. 139 ... 746 McAllister, A'e (State tax on imports — original package), 51 Fed. Rep. (U.S.)
282 846
McCall v. California (inter-state commerce — State license), 136 U.S. 104 ... 847, 857 McClanaghan r. St. Ann's M.B Soc. (voluntary liquidation not insolvency),
24Lower Can. Jur. 162 ; 2 Cart Wright 237 ' 589
McCormick v. Sullivant (Inferior Courts), 10 Wheat. (U S.) 192 726
McCready v. Virginia (fisheries — beds of tide waters), 94 U S. 391 961, 970
McCuUoch V. Maryland (construction of Constitution— federal power to
establish national bank), 4 Wheat. (U.S.) 316
286, 551, 552, 553, 554, 555, 577, 652, 875, 949
xxviii. TABLE OF CASES.
PAGE.
McCullough V. Brown (South Carolina dispensary laws), 41 South Carolina 220 947
McElmoyle v. Cohen (inter-state enforcement of judgments), 13 Pet. (U.S. ) 312 963^
McGregor v. Cone (State tax on imports— original package), TSN.W. Rep. 1041 846
Machine Co. v. Gage (commerce — State tax on peddlers), 100 U.S, 675 ... 849
Mackenzie, Exp. (mandamus to officer of Crown), 6 S.C.R. (N.S. W.), 306 ... 782 Macleod v. Att.-Gen. of New South Wales (extra-territorial jurisdiction)
(1891), App. Cas 455 355
McLeod V. McGuirk (Federal insolvency laws), 15 N. Bruns. Rep. (2 Pugs.) 248 689 V. Wright (Federal insolvency laws), 17 N. Bruns. Rep. (1 Pugs, and
Burb.)68 589-
McNab w. Robertson (waters of rivers — percolating water) (1897), App. Cas. 129 893
MeNiel, £"3; paWe (pilots— State regulations), 13 Wall. (U.S.) 236 641
McNutt V. Bland (jurisdiction — citizens of different States), 2 How. (U.S.) 9 777
Magner r. People (commerce — game laws), 97 Illinois 33... ... ... ... 854
Maine v. Grand Trunk R. Co. (commerce — State tax on receipts), 142 U.S. 217 849
Mallinson v. Mallinson (custody of children), 35 L J. Mat. 84 ... ... ... 612
Mann. /?e (bankruptcy), 13 V.L.R 590 592
Mansfield, &c., R. Co. v. Swan (federal jurisdiction — consent of parties), 111
U.S. 379 785
Mansion House Assoc, v. London and S. W.R. Co. (home and foreign merchan- dise—undue preference) (1895), 1 Q.B. 927 910,922
Marbury v. Madison (judicial power to declare laws invalid — mandamus to
federal officers), 1 Cranch (U.S.) 137 756,778-9,781,791
Maritime Bank of Canada f. New Brunswick Receiver-General (Crown — pre- rogative in Dominion and in Provinces) (1892), App. Cas. 437 . ... 798, 931
Marks, Exp. (treaty— interpretation of), 15 N.S. W. L.R. 179; 10 W.N. 224 770
Marois, i?e (prerogative of appeal). 15 Moo. P. C. 189 ... ... ... ... 747
Marriott v. London and N. W.R. Co. (railway omnibus— undue preference), 26
L J. C.P. 154 907
Marshall r. Murgatroyd (ship on high seas), L.R. 6 Q.B. 31 357
Martin v. Hunter's Lessee (construction— judicial power), 1 Wheat. U.S. 304
286, 511, 575, 651, 723, 765, 802"
v.Mott (military power), 12 Wheat. (U.S.) 19 565
Marye v. Baltimore and Ohio R. Co. (inter-state commerce — State tax on
property), 127 U.S. 117 849
Mason v. Armitage (preamble), 13 Ves. 25 285
Matheson Brothers, Limited, Be (winding-up — foreign company), 27 Ch. D.
225 ... 605
Maxwell V. Dow (trial by jury), 176 U.S. £81 810
Maynard v. Hill (territories— government— divorce laws), 125 U.S. 190 ... 972
Mayor, The, v. Cooper (federal jurisdiction), 6 Wall. (U.S.) 247 ... ... 802
Medway Navig. Co. v. Romney (riparian rights— reasonable use), 9 C.B.N.S.
575 892
Memphis, &c., R. Co. v. Alabama (jurisdiction — citizenship of corporation),
107 U.S. 581 ... 777
Mercer's Case (resignation of members), CI. and Hail (U.S.) 44 437
Merchants' Bank of Canada v. Smith (commerce— banking), 8 Ont. App. 15 ;
8 S.C.R. (Can.) 512 ... 578
Merchants' Bank of Halifax v. Gillespie (winding-up foreign corporations),
10 S.C.R. (Canada) 312 349,591,592,606
Merchants' National Bank v. United States, 101 U.S. 1 (see National Bank v.
Unite<l States)
Merrill r. Sherburne (legislative power), 1 New Hamp. 199 ; 8 Amer. Dec. 52 721 Mersey Docks v. Cameron (Crown property exempt from taxation), 11 H.L.
Cas. 443 321
Metcalfr. Watertown (original jurisdiction), 128 iil.S. 586 ... ... ... 785
Metropijlitan R.R. Co. v. District of Columbia (federal territory— government)
Middlesex (Sheriff), Case of (parliamentary privilege— contempt), 11 A. andE.
659
.... 502
Mirlland Ry. Co. v. Ambergate, &c., Ry. Co. (interpretation clause), 10 Hare
359 ... ... ... ... ... ._ _ 3gg
Millar r. Taylor (copyright), 4 Burr. 2.303 ... ... ... .'. ... ... 593
Miller I'. Mayor of New York (commerce -navigation-obstruction), 109
x,u ^ ^^^ ^â– â– \ 516,517,531,640,884
Miller r. Race (bank note), 1 Burr. 452 575
Wills r. Durycc (proof of judicial record), 7 Cranch (U.S.) 481 ". ... 963
TABLE OF CASES.
Milnor t;. New Jersey R. Co. (State canals, highways, bridges), cited Baker,
Annot. Const. 25 ... ' 542
Miner v. Gilraour (riparian rights — reasonable use), 12 Moo. P.C. 131 892
Minnesota v. Barber (police power — inspection of animals before slaughter),
136 U.S. 313 536-7,848,857,944
Minor r. Happersett (citizen), 21 WalL (U.S.) 162 ^.. 776
Mississippi r. Johnson (judicial power — political question), 4 Wall. (U.S.) 475 723
Mitchell I' County Commissioners (federal notes exempt from State taxation),
91 US. 206 ... ... 559
Mitchell I". Harmony (military power — wrong committed in foreign country —
jurisdiction), 13' How. (U.S.) 115 642
Mobile V. Kimball (commerce — navigable streams — State tolls), 102 U.S. 691
518, 532, 540, 541, 849, 852, 885 Modee Kaikhooscrow Hormusjee v. Cooverbhaee (prerogative of appeal),
6 Moo Ind. A pp. 448 747
^lonongahela Na\ig. Co. v. United States (na\'igable streams — federal power),
148 U.S. 312 8.^2. 88.3, 885
3/o7i^e//o, The (navigable waters), 11 Wall. (U.S.) 411 540,882
JLToJt^cWo, The (navigable waters), 20 Wall. (U.S.) 4:i0 882,883
Montreal ^Mayor) v. Brown (creation of right of appeal), 2 App. Ca. 168 ... 746
Montreal v. Ecclesiastiques de St. Sulpice (Privy Council — special leave to
appeal), 14 App. Ca. 660 .. ... -- ... ... 753
Moore v. AJmerican Transportation Co. (internal commerce), 24 How. (US.) 1 855
Moran v. New Orleans (inter-state commerce — State licenses), 112 U.S. 69 ..'. 847
Morgan v. Parham (State tax on vessels), 16 WalL (U.S.) 471 ... ... ... 858
[Morgan's Steamship Co. v. Louisiana Board of Health (quarantine — State
fees), 118 U.S. 455 567,850,857
Mormon Church v. United States, 136 U.S. 1 {see Roraney v. United States)
Morrill v. Wisconsin (State tax on peddlers), cited Baker, Annot. Const. 28 ... 857
Morrison v. Springer (federal suffrage — State regulation), 15 Iowa Reps. (U.S.)
345 468
MostjTi V. Fabrigas (Colonial Governor— liability for wrongs), 1 Cowp. 161 ... 391
Munn V. Illinois (storage of grain — State regulation), 94 U.S. 113 533, 852, 857, 876
Murphv v. Ram.sev (fe<leral territories — government), 114 U.S. 15 ... ... 973
1 r. Ryan (fishery), Ir. Reps. 2 C.L. 143 568
Musgrave v. Pulido (Colonial Governor— authoritj-). 5 App. Cas. 102 ... ... 391
Musgrove r.* Chung Toj- (we Chung To\' v. Musgrove)
Myers v. Baltimore Commissioners (State tax on imported property), 35 Atl.
Rep. 144 848
Nash%ille, &c , R. Co. v. Alabama (commerce— license fees for railroad
employees). 128 U.S. 96 850,857
Nathan r. Louisiana (State tax on money — brokers — valid), 8 How. (U.S.) 73
516,517,856 National Bank v. Kentucky (federal securities exempt from State taxation ;
(State tax on shares in national banks), 9 Wall. (U.S.) 353 ... ... ... 555, 949
National Bank r. United States (federal power to tax bank established by
State laws), 101 U.S. 1 555
National Bank v. Yankton County (federal territories — government), 101 U.S.
129 972, 973
National Starch, &c. . Co r. Munn's Maizena Co. (treatj'— interpretation of),
13N.S.VV.L.R Eq 101 770
Neal 1-. Delaware (federal power to prevent electoral discriminations), 103
U.S. 370 468,623
Neilson v. Garza (inspection laws), 2 Woods (U.S ) 287 ... ... ... 944
Newby r. Van Oppen (foreign corporation doing business in British posses- sion), L.R. 7 Q.B. 293 605
New Hampshire v. Louisiana (jurisdiction — controversies between States), 108
U.S. 76 774
Newland r. Marsh (legislative power), 19 Illinois 383 ... ... ... ... 721
New Orleans f. De Armas (treaty— "arising under"), 9 Pet. (U.S.) 224 ... 770
V. Winter (jurisdiction — resident of territory), 1 Wheat. (U.S.) 91 777
Waterworks Co. r. Tammany Waterworks Co. (police power —
private property taken for public use), 14 Fed. Rep. (U.S.) 194 642
Newport, &c.. Bridge Co. r. United States, 105 US. 470 {see Bridge Co. r.
United States) Newry r. Great Northern R. Co. <group rates — imdue preference), 7 Ry. and
Can. Traf. Cas. 184 908
TABLE OF CASES.
New York (and see People of New York)
New York v. Louisiana (jurisdiction — controversies between States), 108 U.S.
76 774,775
New York v. Miln (commerce— reports — ship mastei-s), 11 Pet. (U.S.) 102
526-7, 529, 657 New York Board of Trade v. Pennsylvania R. Co. (federal power to regulate
rates of carriage), .*] Inter-State Com. Rep. 417 ... ... ... ... 521
Nicholson v. Great Western R. Co. (preference not necessarily unreasonable),
' 28L.J.C.P 89 907,914
Norfolk and Western R. Co. v. Pennsylvania (inter-state commerce — State
tax on railway company), 136 U.S. 114.. ... ... ... ... ... 847,857
North Lonsdale Iron Co. v. Fumess R Co. (group rates — undue preference),
60L.J.Q.B. 419 90S
Norton v. Shelby County (laws in excess of legislative power are void), 118
U.S. 425 346, 939
Norwich Railroad Co. v. Johnson, 15 Wall. (U.S.) 195 (see Railroad Co. v.
Johnson)
Nuth v. Tamplin (construction— statute), 8 Q.B.D. 247 364
Ogden r. Saunders (bankruptcy — State laws), 12 Wheat, (U.S. ) 213 587
Olcott V. Supervisors (railway — eminent domain), 16 Wall. (U.S.) 678 ... 641
Oriental Bank Corporation, Re (Crown— priority), 28 Ch. D. 643 322
Ormerod v. Todmorden Joint Stock Mill Co. (riparian rights — reasonable use),
11 Q.B.D. 155 892
Osborn v. Bank of the United States (State tax on branch of federal bank). 9
Wheat. (U.S.) 738 552, 602, 772, 773, 875, 949
Osborne v. Mobile (concurrent legislative power of States), 16 Wall. (U.S.) 479 856
Otto 1?. Linford (patent), 46 L.T. 35 597
Ouachita Packet Co. ^^ Aiken (wharfage rates), 121 U.S. 444 .. 532
Owen, Exp. (provincial tax on federal officer), 20 N. Bruns. Rep. (4 Pugs.
andBurb.)487 553
Owings V. Norwood's Lessee (treaty — "arising under"), 5 Cranch (U.S.) 344 770
Ox lade V. Eastern Counties R. Co. (special rate — undue preference), 26
L.J.C.P. 129 907
Pace r. Burgess (commerce — State stamp fee), 92 U.S. 372 519,849
Pacific Mail Steamship Co. v. Joliffe, 2 Wall. (U.S.) 450 («ee Steamship Co.
V. JoliflFe) Pacific Railroad Co. v. Peniston (State tax on corporation), 18 Wall. (U.S.) 5
552, 554, 655 Packet Co. r. Keokuk (wharfage rates— State control), 95 U.S. 80 ... 536, 796, 850 Palmer r. Cuyahoga Co. (navigable streams — obstructions — improvement),
3McL. (U.S.)226 541
Palmer v. London and S.W.R. Co. (undue preference— question of fact),
L.R. 1 C.P 588 ... 745,909,915
Panter r. Attorney-General (commencement of Act), 6 Bro. Cas. Pari. 486 ... 331
Parker I'. Overman (tax bill— machinery clauses), 18 How. (U.S.) 137 ... 66»
Parsons v. Chicago and N.W.R. Co. (local and through rates- undue
preference), l(i7 U.S. 447 .. 912
Passenger Cases (State tax on alien passengers), 7 How. (U.S.) 283
516, 518, 520, 528-9. 855, 877 Patapsco Guano Co. v. North Carolina Board of Agriculture, 171 U.S. 345 ... 944
Patterson r. Gaslight Coke Co. (patent), 2 Ch I). 812 597
t'- Kentucky (police powers— explosives), 97 U.S. 501 850,851
Paul V. Virginia (insurance is not commerce— State license fee), 8 Wall.
(U.S.) 1H8 ... 583,849,961
Pawlet (Town of) v. Clark (jurisdiction -land claimed under grants of
different States), 9 Cranch (U.S.) 292 801
Peacock w. Bell (inferior court.s— jurisdiction), 1 Saund. 73 726
Pearce V. Scotchcr (fishery), 9 Q.B.I). 162 569
Peete v. Morgan (State tax on foreign vessel— quarantine), i9 Wall. (U.S.)
581 85»
Peik V. Chicago and N.W.R. Co, (inter-state railroad— minimum rate), 94
„ U.S. H}4 856,857
Peirce v. New Hampshire. 5 How. (U.S.) .)04 (.see License Ca.ses)
Pembina Mining Co. v. Pennsylvania (commerce -State license fee on foreign
corporation), 125 U.S. 181 849,856
Ptnniman's Case (statute unconstitutional in part), 103 U.S. 714 ... ... 796-
Pennoyer w, Neff (service of process), 95 U,S. 714 96:i
TABLE OF CASES.
PAGE.
Pennsylvania v. Wheeling Bridge Co. (commerce — navigable river — bridged,
13 How. (U.S.) 518 526,530-1,032,540,886
Pennsylvania v. Wheeling Bridge Co. (commerce — navigable river — federal
power), 18 How. (U. 8.) â– 421 ... 517,531,852,878
Pensacola Tel. Co. v. Western Union Tel. Co. (electric telegraph an agency
of commerce), 96 U.S. 1 518,534,541,560
People V. Compagnie Generale Transatlantique (inspection laws— State tax on
foreign passengers), 107 U.S. 59 .. ... ... 847, 855, 944
People r. Edye (inspection laws — purpose), 11 Daley (U.S ) 132 944
People f. Hawkins (commerce — labelling convict-made imports\ 31 N.Y.
Suppl. 115 .. ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... 851
People V. Raymond (discriminatory legislation against Chinese), 34 Calif.
'Rep. (U.S.) 492 628
People of New York v. Commrs. of Taxes, 2 Wall. (U.S.) 200 (see Bank Tax
Case) Permoli v. First Miinicipalitv (religious liberty dependent on State laws),
3 How. (U.S.) 589 .. ". 953,970
Pervear v. Commonwealth (original package), 5 Wall. (U.S ) 475 ... ... 555
Philadelphia Steamship Co. v. Pennsylvania ^commerce — tranportation — Stat«
tax on receipts), 122 U.S. 3C6 .. ... 517,849,856
Philip V. Philip (access to children), 41 L.J. Prob. 89 612
Philipps I'. Rees (construction - statute), 24 Q.B.D. 17 365
Phillips V. Eyre (Crown— colonial legislature^privileges), L.R. 6 Q.B. 1 309, 310, 355 Phipps w. London and N.W.R. Co. (competitive rates - undue preference —
question of fact) (1892), 2 Q.B. 229 745,906,907,908-10,915,916,918
Pickard i'. Pullman Car Co. (tax on inter-state commerce), 117 L'.S. 34 ... 846, 856
Pisani r. Lawson (alien— libel right to sue), 6 Bing. N.C. 90 600
Pittsburg Coal Co. v. Bates iState tax on sales), 156 U.S. 577 848
Plumley v. Massachusetts (police power— sale of oleomargarine), 155 U.S. 461 851
Polgla.ss r. Oliver (legal tender), 2 Crompt. and Jar 15 . ... 575
Pollard V. Hagan (federal territory— government), 3 How. (U.S.) 212 658, 970
Pollock V. Farmers' Loan and Trust Co. (direct taxes requiring apportionment),
157 U.S. 429 ; and 158 U.S. 601 549,556
Pound r. Turck (dam across navigable stream), 95 US. 459 ... 525, 532, 858, 885
Powell r. Pennsylvania (police power— sale of oleomargarine), 127 U.S. 678 ... 850
Presser o. Illinois (right to bear arms), 116 U S. 252 564, 796
Preston v. Finley (State tax to exclude obscene paper), 72 Fed. Rep. (U.S.) 850 518, 851 Prigg V. Pennsylvania (Constitution — construction implied powers), 16 Pet.
(U.S.) 539 652, 796
Prince v. Gagnon (Privy Council - special leave to appeal), 8 App. Ca. 103 ... 753
Provident Institution i\ Massachusetts (federal securities exempt from State
taxation), 6 Wall. (U.S.) 611 559,949
Provincial Fisheries, /le ( regulation of fisheries), 26 S.C.R. (Can.) 444 ... 569
Pullman's Palace Car Co. v. Pennsylvania (inter-state commerce — State tax on
railroad stock), 141 U.S. 18 849
Pumpelly v. Green Bay Co. (eminent domain — compensation), 13 Wall. (U.S.)
166 641,642
Queen, The (see Regina)
Quirt V. The Queen (winding-up ; private bill legislation), 19 S.C.R (Can.) 510 590
Rahrer, i?e (Federal and State laws— harbour dues), 140 U.S. 545 853,946
Railroad Co. v. Baldwin (federal power to authorize railway construction), 103
U.S 426 ... ... 972
Railroad Co. v. Fuller (posting railway rates— State law), 17 Wall. (U.S.) 560 856
Railroad Co v. Husen (police power— State law restricting importation of
cattle), 95 U.S. 465' 518,533,847,857
Railroad Co. 1-. Johnson (legal tender), 15 Wall (U.S.) 195 575
Raih-oad Co. r. Peniston, 18 Wall. (US.) 5 (nee Pacific Railroad Co. v.
Peniston) Railroad Co. r. Richmond (commerce — bridges across navigable rivers), 19
WaU. (U.S.)584 541,856
Railroad Co. r. Tennessee (jurisdiction— suit against State), 101 U.S. 337 ... 774
Railroad Co. (Morgan L. and T.) r. Board of Health (inspection laws), 36
Louisiana Annu. 666 ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... 944
Railroad Companies v. Schutte (statute unconstitutional in part), 103 U.S. 118 796
Railway Co. v. Ramsey (federal jurisdiction -admission), 22 Wall. (U.S.) 322 785
Ralston I'. Smith (patent), 11 H.L. Cas. 223 597
Ransome v. Eastern Counties R. Co. (competitive rates — undue preference),
26L.J.C.P. 91 907
TABLE OF CASES.
Ransome v. Eastern Counties R. Co. (group rates -undue preference), 27
L.J.C.P. 166 907
Ransome r. Eastern Counties R. Co. (trainload— undue preference), 29
L.J.C.P. 329 908
Ratclifff. Ratcliff (divorce-domicile), 29 L.J. Mat. 171 611
Ray V. McMackin (inter-colonial extradition), 1 V.L.R. (L.) 274 ... 355, 617, 630
Reade w. Conquest (copyright). 30 L.J.C.P. 209 593
Reading Railroad Co. v. Pennsylvania (see State Freight Tax Co. )
Reed V. Cosden (election returns), Cl. and Hall (U.S.) 353 438,440,475
Regina v. Amer (justice in territories), 42 Upper Canada Q.B. 391 973, 983
V. Anderson (British ship— offences on board), L.R. 1 C.C. 161 ... 358
V. Armstrong (British ship — offences on board), 13 Cox, C.C. 185 ... 358
V. Bay ley (Crown— when bound), 4 Ir. Eq. R. 142 321
V. Bortrand (prerogative of appeal), L.R. 1 P.C. 520 ... ... ... 750, 752
V. Boiler Explos. Act Commr-s. (interpretation clause) (1891), 1 Q.B.
703 365
Regina v. Bowell (Provincial tax on federal officer), 4 Brit. Columbia Reps.
498 553
Regina «. Brierly (extra-territorial laws), 14 Ont. Reps. 525 ... ... ... 602
V. Burah (plenary legislative power), 3 App. Cas. 889 .. 509
V. Call, Ex parte Murphy (extra-territorial jurisdiction), 7 V.L.R. (L.)
113 354,614,618
Regina v. Carr (British ship — offences on board), 10 Q.B. D. 76 ... 358
V. Chapman (fraud upon public officer), 18 L. J.M.C. 152 809
V. College of Physicians (meaning of "exclusive"), 44 Upper Can. Q.B.
564 350, 656
Regina z'. Cruise (Crown — priority), 2 Ir. Ch. R. 65 ... ... ... ... 322
1). Dudley (British ship — offences on board), 14 Q.B, D. 273 358
V. Fredericton (City), 19 N. Bruns. (3 Pugs, and Burb.) 139 (see
Fredericton City v. the Queen)
Regina t'. Hall (misdemeanour) (1891), 1 Q.B. 747 470
V. Hertford College (construction of statutes — extrinsic evidence), 3
Q.B.D. 693 796
Regina u, Keyn (Territorial waters). 2 Exch. D. 63 ... 355, 359
V. King's County Justices (Liquor Licenses — provincial control), 15 N.
Bruns. (2 Pugs.). 535 542,544
Regina w. Lancaster (bribery of public officer), 16 Cox 737 ... ... ... 809
V. Leslie (British ship — oflences on board), 8 Cox, C.C, 269 358
V. Local Government Board (prohibition to public bodies), 10 Q.B.D. 309 783
V. London (Bishop), (Construction— Statute), 24 Q.B.D. 213 365
V. Lopez (British ship - foreigner on board), 27 L.J. M.C. 48 .. ... 358
V. Lords Commissioners of Treasury (mandamus to officers of Crown),
L.R. 7Q.B. 387 781
Regina V. Mallow Union (Title— Statute), 12 Ir. C. L.R. 35 365
i>. Most 'Construction— Statute) 7 Q.B.D. 244 365
V. Pearce (Interiiretation clause), 5 Q.B.D. 386 366
V. Powell (no mandamus to sovereign), 1 Q.B. 352 .. ... ... 781
w. Robertson (Fisheries), 6 8. C.R. (Can.) 52 569
V. Sattler (British ship— foreigner on board), 27 L.J. M.C. 48 358
r. Slator (indictment— information), 8 Q.B.D. 267 808
V. Taylor (exclusive legislative power), .36 Upper Can. Q.B. 183 ... 349
V. Walker (misdemeanour — common law), L.R. 10 Q.B. .355 470
V. Wellington County, (Insolvency laws— provincial and federal —
conflict), 17 Ont. Reps. 615 591
Regina I'. Williams (liability of Crown for tort), 9 App Ca. 418 805
V. VVim»)ledon Local Board (Construction— Statute), 8 Q.B.D. 459 ... 365
V. Wing Chong (Chinese License Case), 1 Brit. Col. Rep., Part II., p.
150 ; Wheeler, C.C. 122 628
Renaud, Exp. (Imperial legislative control over colonies), 14 N. Bruns. 273 ;
1 Cart. 445 349
Rex V. Cowle (mandamus- jurisdiction of Court of King's Bench), 2 Burr. 834 781
V. Fuller (procuring base coin). Russ. and Ry. 308 809
V. Johnson (Preamble), 29 St. Tr. .303 285
V. North Curry Inhabitants (Residence defined), 4 Barn, and Cres, 959 ... 960
V. Robinson (Preamble), 2 East P.C. 1113 285
V. Sainsbury (breach of sUtute— indictable offence), 4 T.R. 451 ... ... 810
V. Button (possession of coining tools), 1 East P.C. 172 809
TABLE OF CASES. xxxiii.
Rex p. Wilkes (Judicial discretion), 4 Burr. 2539 759
«. Williams (Title— Statute), 1 W. BL 93 ... ... - ... 281
Re^-nolds r. Stockton (State judgment — when enforced in other States), 140
* U.S. 254 963
Reynolds v. United Sutes (Territorial Court - polygamy), 98 U.S. 145 ... 953 Rhode Island v. Massachusetts (construction— exceptions to a grant— juris- diction), 12 Pet. (U.S.) 6.57 •; 578,775,796
Rhodes r. Iowa (State liquor law— The Wilaon Act — operation), 170 U.S. 412 947
Rhymney R. Co. r. Rhymney Iron Co. (undue preference), 25 Q.B.D. 146 ... 921 Richards' Case (election returns — certified — qualification), CI. and Hall (U.S.)
95 438,440,475
Richards r. Butcher (trademark) (1891), 2 Ch. 522 598
V. McBride (construction of statutes— extrinsic evidence), 8 Q.B.D.
119 ._. ^ 796
Riel r. The Queen (justice in territories), 10 App. Cas. 675 350, 514, 973
Ringfret r. Pope (quarantine). 12 Quebec L. Reps. 303 ... ... ... ... 567
Robb V. Connolly (extradition -" officer of the United States"), 111 U.S. 624 620, 784 Robbins v Shelbv Taxing District (Stat« tax on commercisil travellers —
invalid). 120 U.S. 489 517,519,847
Roberts r. Reilly lextradition — inter-state — conditions), 116 U.S. 80 620
c. United States (mandamus to public officer), 176 U.S. 221 ... ... 782
Robertson, Exp. : Re Oovemor-General of N.S.W. (removal of judges),
11 Moo. P.C. 288 730
Robertson r. Pickrell (faith and credit), 109 U.S. 608 963
Robinson r. Barton-Eccles Local Board (interpretation clause), 8 App. Cas.
798 366
Robinson r, Campbell (common law — federal jurisdiction), 3 Wheat. (U.S.)
212 788
Romney ». United States (federal territories — government), 136 U.S. 1 ... 972, 973
Rooke's Case (judicial discretion), 5 Coke Rep. 100a ... ... ... 759
Rothes V Kirkcaldj' Waterworks (construction — statute), 7 App. Cas. 694 . . 365
Rouanet, Exp. (treaty— interpretation of), 15 N.S. W.L.R. 269 ; 11 W.N. 55 770 Routledge r. Low (copyright — colonies — aliens), L.R. 1 Ch. 42 ; 3 H. L. 100
348, 594, 595, 6U0, 602, 958 Ruggles 1-. Manistee River Improvement Co. (commerce— improvement of
river), 123 U.S. 297 532
Russell V. The Queen (federal control over liquor traffic), 7 App. Cas. 829 ... 512, 545
Ryall V. Kenealy (influx of criminals), 6 W.W. and aB. (Vic.) 193 630
Ryan r. Carter (inter-state privileges and immunities), 93 U.S. 78 ... ... 960
Ryder f. Ryder (custody of children), 30 L. J. Mat. 44 612
St. Louis r. McCo}- (police powers— quarantine), 18 Missouri 238 854
r. Telegraph Co. (reasonableness of wharfage rates), 1.39 U.S. 463 ... 854
p. Wiggins Ferrj' Co. (vessels — when not taxable by a State), 11
Wall. (U.S. 423) 847, 854
Salkeld f. Johnson (statute -title), 2 Exch. 256 281,284
Sandhurst (Lady) r. Beresford Hope («e Beresford Hope v. Sandhurst) Sands r. Manistee Improvement Co (river whoUv within a State), improve- ment), 123 U.S. 288 ' 532. .540. 850, 885
Sa\-ings and Loan Assoc, v. Topeka, 20 Wall. (U.S.) 655 [see Loan Association
V. Topeka)
Scholey r. Rew (federal succession tax), 23 Wall. (U.S.) 331 556
Schollenberger r. Pennsj'lvania (State tax on imports — original package —
oleomargarine), 171 U.S. 1 ... 846,851
Scott r. Donald, 165 U.S. .58 [see Donald c. Scott)
Searl v. Lake County School District (just compensation), 133 U.S. 553 641
Severn v. The Queen (brewers' licenses^provincial control), 2 S.C.R. (Can.) 70 544, 547
Shaw r. Gould (divorce— legitimacv), 37 L J. Ch 433 611
F. Ruddin (title— statute), 9* Ir. C.L.R. 214 281
Sherlock r. Ailing (marine torts), 93 U.S. 99 542
Shively r. Bowlby (federal control of na\ngable waters), 152 U.S. 1 883
Siebold. Eocp. (imprisonment under unconstitutional law — habeas corpus), 100
U S. .371 470, 471, 472, 965
Simpson r. Fogo (civil process - service), 32 L.J. Ch. 349 616
Sinclairs Divorce Bill (divorce— domicile) (1897), App.. Cas 469 611
Sinking Fund Cases, 99 U.S. 700 {see Doggett r. Railroad Co.)
Sinnot r. Davenport (commercial marine — federal control). 22 How. (U.S.) 227 542
Slaughter House Cases (privileges and immunities of federal citizenship), 16
WaU. (U.S.)36 850,961
xxxiv. TABLE OF CASES.
Slingsby's Case (suspension of judges), 3 Swanst. 178 733
Smiles v. Belford (copyright in colonies), 1 Ont. App. Reps. 436 ;i49, 5fl5
Smith, Ji-xw. (federal jurisdiction). 94 U.S. 455 784
V. Goldie (patent— tribunal), 9 S.C.R. (Can ) 46 598
V. Merchants' Bank, 8 Ont. App. Reps, 15 (see Merchants' Bank of
Canada v. Smith)
Smyth V. Ames (State regulation of internal commerce), 169 U.S. 466 520, 874, 921 Society for Savings v. Coite <State tax on federal corporation), 6 Wall (U.S.)
594 - 949
Soon Hing v. Crowley (regulation of Chinese labour), 113 U.S. 703 623, 853
Sottomayoru. De Barros (marriage — domicile), 3 Prob. D. 1 ... ... 609
South Carolina v. Georgia (federal control over navigable waters), 93 U.S. 4
516, 540, 878, 883
Southey r. Sherwood (copyright), 2 Mer. 435 593
Spaulding v. Mead (qualification of members), CI. and Hall (U.S.) 157 438, 440, 475 Speaker of the Leg. Ass. (Vic.) v. Glass (parliamentary privilege), L.R. 3 P.C.
560 506
Spraigue v. Thompson (pilotage compulsory — State regulation), 118 U.S. 90 541, 796
Spratt V. Spratt (custody of children), 1 Sw and Tr. 215 ... ... ... 612
Springville u. Thomas (trial by jury), 166 U.S. 707 ... ... ... ... 810
State V. Engle (Goods in transit not subject to State taxation), 34 New Jersey
L. 435 519
State f. Illinois Central R. Co. (navigable waters — obstruction), 146 U.S. 387 885
V. Rhodes (Liquor law — State control — the Wilson Act) 90 Iowa (U.S.)
496 946
State V. Steamship Constitution (Police power— exclusion of immigrants), 42
Calif. 578 ; 10 Amer. Rep. 303 853
State Freight Tax Case (State tax on freight passing through- invalid) 15
Wall. (U.S.) 232 ... 516,532,796,846,848,855
State Tax on Railway Gross Receipts Case (Inter-state commerce) 15 Wall.
(U.S.) 284 â– 542,849,855
State Tonnage Tax Cases, 12 Wall. (U.S.) 204 858,944
Stead V. Course (Power to tax includes means to enforce) 4 Uranch^U.S.) 403 668 Steamship Co. v. Joliffe (Pilots— State control subject to federal law -State
portdues), 2WalL (U.S.)450 541,853
Steamship Co u. Port Wardens (Pilotage -compulsory — State regulation), 6
Wall. (U.S.) 31 641,847,854
Steamship Co, v. Tugman (jurisdiction citizenship of corpoi-ation), 106 U.S.
118 ... 777
Stepney Election Petition, Be {see Isaacson v. Durant)
Stevenson v. The Queen (Customs duties coUeotioB - resolution of Assembly),
2W.W. anda'B. (L.)(Vic.)143 506,859
Stillman v. White Rock Manuf. Co. (boundary breams - riparian law), 3 Wood
and M. (U.S.) 5.38 889
Stockdale v. Hansard (Parliamentary privilege), 9 Ad. and El. 1 503
.Stockton V. Baltimore R, Co (federal control of navigable waters), 32 F«d.
Rep. (U.S.) 9 „ 883
Stoutenburgh v. Hennick (Federal territory— governm«it—Stat« tax on com- mercial travellers), 129 U.S. 141 „ 658,847,941
Straudert). West Virginia (trial by jury), 100 U.S. 303 810
Strawbridge r. Curtiss (jurisdiction - c-itizens of different States^, 3 Cra»ch
(US.) 267 ... 777
SturgcB V. Crowninshield (Bankruptcy— State law— Uniform), 4 Wlieat. (U.8.)
122 427,557,587
Sturtevants v. Alton City (Post Offices— federal pow*!-), 3 McL. <U-S.) 393 ... 560
Supervisors v. Stanley (statute unconstitutional in part), 105 U.S. 305 ... 796
Sussex Peerage Case (Preamble - construction), 1 1 O. and Firm 85 ... 285, 364
Sutton V. Sutton (Preamble - Marginal note), 22 Ch. 1). 511 .. 285
Swan, .ffe (Judicial power— independence), 150 U.S. 637 382
Swanton t», (ioold (construction of statute), 9 Ir.C. L.R. 234 ... 365
Tai Singjp. Macguire (sovereignty of British Pari.), 1 Brit. Uol. (Irvng) 107... 350
Tarble s Case (Naval and Military power). 13 Wall. (U.S.) 397 564
Taylor, i?c (Judicial discretion), 4 Ch. D. 157 759
— V. Barton, 6 N.S.W. L.R. 1 ; 11 App. Ca. 1«7 t«ec Bartciii v. Taylor)
Telegraph Co. v. Texas (State tax on interstate commerce), 105 U.S. 460
. r 541,846,848,855
Temple, Axp. (Witness— privilege), 2 Ves. and B. *ll 321
TABLE OF CASES.
PAGE.
Tennant f . Union Bank of Cana<la (Banking— warehouse receipts) (1894) App.
Cas 31 .••• 578,597
Tennessee r. Davis (jurisdiction— civil, criminal, »nd territorial — " arising
under the laws''), 100 U.S. 257 3^' "?I
Tennessee v. Pullman Southern Car Co. (State t^Ls on cars), 117 U.S. 51 ... 856
Texas v. White (once a State always a State), 7 Wall. U.S. 7tH> ... 293, 370, ft29
Texas and Pacific R. Co. v. Inter-State Commerce Commission (wholesale rate
— undue preference — objects of Inter-State Commerce Act), 162 U.S. 197
745, 898, 900, 905, 911-2, 914, 915 Texas and Pacific R. Co. v. Inter-State Transportation Co. (na\igable watere —
obstruction), 155 U.S. 585 •■■884,886
Theberge v. Laudry (controverted provincial election law — prerogative of
appeal), 2 App." Cas. 102 497,498,747,761
Thompson r. Utah (trial by jury), 170 U S. 343 810
V. Whitman (State judgments— faith and credit), 18 Wall. (U.S.) 457 963
Thomson r. Union Pacific R R. Co. (State tax on railway employed by Federal
Government), 9 Wall. (U.S.) 579 552,554
Thormann v. Frame (judgment — faith and credit), 176 U.S. 350 ... .. 963
Thurlow t,-. Ma-ssachusetts (State control over liquor tratfic), 5 How. (U.S.) 586
(and «ee License Cases) ... ... ... ... ... ... 542
Tiernan r. Rinker (inter-state commerc-e— State licenses), 102 U.S. 123 847, 848, 856
Tomlinson ». Bullock (time in statute), 4 Q.B.D. 230 331
Toronto (City) r. Virgo (regulation and prohibition distinguished) (1896) App.
Cas. 88 548
Trade Mark Cases (statute uncoastitutional in part), 100 U.S. 582 796
Train r. Boston Disinfectant Co. (police powers — quarantine), 144 ^ass. 523 ;
.jQAmer. Rep. 113 ^ 854
Transportation Co. i\ Fitzhugh (admiralty jurisdiction), 1 Black (U.S.) 574 ... 800 V. Parkersburg (wharfage rates — State regulation), 107 U.S.
691 536,850,853
Transportation Co. r. Wheeling (State tax on vessels), 99 U.S. 273 ... ... 858
Trumbull's Case (Senators— qualification), 1 Cong. El. Cas. (U.S.) 618 440, 475
Tua {-. Carriere (bankruptcy — State la w^s), 117 U.S. 201 ... ... ... ... 587
Turner r. Maryland (inspection and branding — State stamp fee), 107 U.S. 38 .. 849, 944 Turney r. Marshall (qualification of members), 1 Cong. El. Cas. (U.S.) 167 ... 440, 475 Turpin c. Burgess (State stamp fee — export stamp on goods), 117 U.S. 504 539, 846, 849
Tj'ler, T^e (judicial power —independence), 149 U.S. 164 ... . 382
Union Bank v. Tuttle (insolvencv in one colon}' — effect in another), 15 V. L.R.
258 ' 592
Union Collierj' Co. of Brit. Columbia i;. Bryden (Chinese — in mines), (1899)
App. Ca. 580 603
Union Pacific R. Co. v. Peniston, 18 Wall. (U.S.) 5 («ce Pacific Railroad Co. r.
Peniston) Union Steamship Co. of N.Z. v. Melbourne Harbour Trust (statute — headings),
9App. Ca. 365 281
United States v. Angell (Federal tax on employments), 11 Fed. Rep. (U.S.) 34 556
«'. Arjona (Coinage and currency— offences), 120 U.S. 479 ... 573
r. Bainbridge (Naval and military power), 1 Mason (U S.) 71 ... 564
V. Bellingham Bay Boom Co. (Navigation -rivers), 176 U.S. 211 883
ex rel. Boynton v. Blaine (mandamus to United States), 139
U.S 306 ... 782
United States v. Britton (federal jurisdiction — common law offences^, 108
U.S. 199 787
United States v. Coolidge (federal jurisdiction — common law offences), 1
Gallison (U.S.) 488 ; 1 Wheat. 415 786,787
United States v. Cornell (Offences in federal territory— federal jurisdiction),
2 Mason (US) 91 ... 660
United States r. Cruikshank (Implied powers — conspiring to prevent free
exercise of federal rights), 92 U S 542 652
United States r. Curtis (trial by jury), 4 Mason (U.S.) 2.32 808
e-r rel. Dunlap v. Black (mandamus to federal oflHcer), 128
U.S. 40 782
United States v. Eaton (federal jurisdiction— common law offences), 144
_ U.S. 677 787
United States o. Fisher (incidental and implied federal powers), 2 Craoch
(U.S.) 358 .. ... 652
United States v. Forty-three Gallons of Whisky (treaty— law of the land), 93
U.S. 1S8 ... ;.. ^ ... 769
TABLE OF cases;
PAGE.
United States v. Gale (federal suffrage — protection), 109 U.S. 65 470
V. Gay, 163 U.S. 427 {See United States v. Realty Co.)
V. ex rel. Goodrich v. Guthrie (mandamus to federal officer), 17
How. (U.S.)284 782
United States v. Great Falls Manufg. Co. (Private property taken for federal
purposes), 112 U.S. 645 642
United States v. Harris (Implied powers conspiracy to deprive citizens of
legal rights), 106 U.S. 629 796,961
United States v. Hartwell (" officer of the United States"), 6 Wall. (U.S.) 385 784 V. Hudson and Goodwin (jurisdiction over common law offences),
7Cranch(U.S.)32 786,787
United States t;. Jones (eminent domain), 109 U.S. 513 ... .. ... 640,641
V. Lee (jurisdiction — suits against federal officers), 106 U.S. 196 773
V. Marigold (Currency offences — implied federal powers), 9 How.
(US.) 560 573 574,652,796
United States r. Maurice (jurisdiction— suits by and against United States),
2 Brock (U.S.) 109 ... 773
United States v. Ortega (Minister —case " affecting), 11 Wheat. (U.S.) 468 ... 771
V. Rauscher (treaty— law of the land), 119 U.S. 407 769
r. Realty Co (Federal appropriating power), 163 U.S. 427 ... 666
ex rel. Redfield v. Windom (mandamus to federal officer), 137
U.S. 636 782
United States v. Reese (rights and immunities — coustruction), 92 U.S. 214 468, 472, 796
- V. Rhodes (naval and military power), 1 Abb. (U.S.) 28 ... 564
". Rio Grande Damandlrrig. Co. (river navigation — irrigation),
51 Pac. R. 674 880,890
United States v. Rio Grande Dam andlrrig. Co. (river navigation— irrigation),
174 U.S. 690 881,882,883,884,888,891,894
United States v. Russell (eminent domain- compensation), 13 Wall. (U S.) 623 642
V. Singer (federal excise tax), 15 Wall. (U.S.) Ill ^o'o
V. Tappan (taxes and imposts), 11 Wheat. (U.S.) 419 ... ... 550
V. Van Buskirk (federal excise tax), 15 Wall (U.S.) 123 ... 556
Williams (federal territory — judicial authoritj'), 4 Cranch,
C.C. (U.S.)393 ... - ()59
United States v. Wilson (bankruptcy— discharge by State law— efTect), 8
Wheat. (U.S.) 253 587
United States v. Worrall (federal jurisdiction— common law offences), 2 Dall.
(U.S.) 384 ' 785
Unity V. Barrage (statute unconstitutional in part), 103 U.S. 447 796
Uriah Tracey, Taft's Election Cases 3 437
Valin V. Langlois (disputed election — Privy Council — special leave to appeal)
5App. Las. 115 ... 497,752
Van Allen v. Assessors (delegation of power — State tax on shares in national
bank), 3 Wall. (U.S.) 573 949
Vance v. Vandercook Co. (State liquor laws— the Wilson Act), 170 U.S. 438... 947
Van Wyck i>. Knevals (railways in territories), 106 U.S 360 972
Veazie v. Moor (river wholly within a State— improvement), 14 How. (U.S ) 568 540
" ■" • " .^ ^ . 5^3
282
... , 1 jurisdiction),
7V.L.R. (L.)248 355,360
Vidal 17. (Jirard's Executors (Christian religion recognized bv courts), 2 How.
(U.S.) 127 *'... ...^ ... ^ ... 951
Virginia, Exp (discriminating legislation— invalid), 100 U.S. 339 623
Virginia v. West Virginia (jurisdiction— disputed boundaries) 11 "Wall.
(U.S.) 39 ... *^ 775
Virginia Coupon Cases (statute unconstitutional in part), 114 U.S. 269 ... 796
Voiulit ». Wright (inspection laws— discrimination), 141 U.S. 62 944
Wabash, St Louis and Pacific R. Co. v. Illinois (State regulation of extra- state railway rates— void), 118 U.S. 557 516, 520, 856, 857, 904
Waldeni'. Skinner (jurisdiction— citizens of different states), 101 U.S. 577 ... 777
Walker r. New Mexico and S.P.R. Co. (trial by jury), 165 U.S. 593 810
Wall's Case (alien— disability), 6 Moo. P C. 216 600
Wallace and Co. Exp. (customs duties collection— resolution of Assembly),
13N.S.W.L.R 1 •; 859
Walling V. Michigan (State licenses to sell imported liquor), 116 U.S. 446
519, 846, 847, 856
TABLE OF CASES.
PAGE.
Want r. Moss (injunction -jurisdiction), 12 N.S.W.L.R. Eq, 101 783
Ward V. Marj'land (inter-state privileges and immunities), 12 Wall. (U.S.) 418 960
Ware r. Hylton (treaty - enforced by legislation), 3 Dall. (US.) 199 .^36
Waring v. Clarke (admiralty jurisdiction), 5 How. (U.S.) 441 ... ... ... 800
Waterhouse v. Gilbert (appeal — " final and conclusive" ), 15 Q.B.D. 569 ... 746
Wayman r. Southard (judicial power), 10 Wheat. (U.S.) 1 ... ... ... 719
Welton V. Missouri (State peddler tax — when invalid), 91 U.S. 275
515, 518, 520, 532-3, 847, 856, 857 Western Union Tel. Co. ?■. Alabama State Board (telegraphic mes.'>agcs —
inter-state commerce), 132 U.S. 472 ... ... ... ... . . 516,518,541
Western Union Tel. Co. v. Massachusetts (intcr-state commerce — State tax
on property), 125 U.S. 5.30 849
Western Union Tel. Co. r. Pendleton (telegraphic messages— inter-state),
122 U.S. 347 515,541
Western Union Tel. Co. v. Taggart (inter-state commerce— State tax on
property), 163 U.S. 1 849
Western Union Tel. Co. v. Texas, 105 U.S. 460 {see Telegraph Co. v. Texas)
West Ham Overseers v. lies (preamble), 8 A pp. Cas. 386 ... .. ... 284
Westminster Bank, Be (House of Lortls may submit questions to judges),
2 CI. and Fin. 191 766
Weston V. Charleston City (State tax on federal stock — void), 2 Pet (U.S.)
449 559, 949
We\-mouth Corporation v. Nugent (Crown prerogatives), 34 L.J. M.C. 81 ... 321
Wheaton r. Peters (no federal common law), 8 Pet (U.S.) 591 ... .. ... 593, 785
Wheeling Bridge Case, 18 How. (U.S ) 421 {see Pennsylvania r. Wheeling
Bridge) White's Bank r. Smith (regulation of ships — commerce), 7 Wall. (U.S.) 646
518, 540, 874
Whitney v. Robertson (treaty— law of the land), 124 US. 190 769
Wiggins Ferrv Co. r. E^ast St. Louis (ferries over navigable streams), 107
U.S. .365" ... 852,856
Willamette Iron Bridge Co. v. Hatch (river wholly within a State — State
and federal power), 125 U.S. 1 ... ... ... ... ... - ... 540,541
Willard r. Presbury (federal territory— improvements), 14 WalL (U.S.) 676... 659
V. Tayloe ("legal tender), 8 Wall. (U.S.) 557 575, 581
Williams »' Peyton (|X)wer to tax — means to enforce), 4 Wheat. (U.S.) 77 ... 668 Willson o. Blackbirfl Creek Marsh Co. (commerce — na^^gation — obstruction —
police power), 2 Pet. (U.S.) 245 ... 516, 525-6, 527, 531, 852, 885
Wilson r. Crossfield (fishery), 1 Times L.R. 601 569
Wilts and Berks Canal Co. i'. Swindon Waterworks Co. (riparian rights —
reasonable use), L. K 9 Ch. 451 892,894
Wind V. Her (State tax on imports -original package), 93 Iowa 316 ... ... 846
Windsor, Town of r. Commercial Bank of Windsor (Pro\incial tax on
Dominion notes), 3 R. and G. (Nova Scotia) 420 554
Winn V. Mossman (preamble), L R. 4 Exch. 292 ... ... ... ... 284
Winona and St. Peter Co v. Blake (railroads— State regulation), 94 U.S. 180 857
Wiscart y. Dauch^- (jurisdiction of federal courts), 3 Dall. (U.S.) 321 ... ... 738
Wisconsin v. Duluth (navigable rivers— federal authorit}' to improve), 96 U.S.
379 852,883
Wisconsin v. Pelican Ins. Co. (federal jurisdiction — suits bv States), 127 U.S.
265 ' ...518,775,777,778,963
Withers v. Buckle}- (navigable waters— shores and soil), 20 How. (U.S.) 84 .. 532, 970
Withipole's Case (indictment includes inquisition), Cro. Car. 134 808
Wong Yung Quy, Be (corpse not property), 6 Sawj'. (U.S.) 442 518 Woodrufi" V. Parham (imports and exports State tax on auction sales), 8
Wall. (U.S.) 123 ... 845,943
WooUey r. Ironstone Hill Lead Co. (appeal from State courts to Privy
Council), 1 V.L.R. Eq. 237 738
Worcester v. Georgia (national and fedei-al principles), 6 Pet. (U.S.) 515 ... 336
Works V Junction Railroad (bridges over navigable rivers), 5 McL. (U.S.) 425 541
Worms, Exp. (treaty— extradition), 221xiwer Can Jur. 109 ; 2Cartwright 315 770
Yarbrough, Ex parte (protection of federal voters), 110 U.S. 651 471
Yelverton r. Yelverton (divorc-e — domicile), 1 Sw. and Tr. 574 611
Yick Wo I'. Hopkins (discriminating legislation against particular races), 118
U.S 356 ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... 622, 623
ZoUverein, The (British ship — laws), 1 Sw. Adm. 96 .. 355
^1^
By the QUEEN.
A PROCLAMATION.
YlC'TOKIA R.
XXTHFiKEAS by an Act of Parliament passed in the ^ Sixty-third and Sixty-fourth Years of Our Reign intituled, *'An Act to constitute the Commonwealth of Australia" it is enacted that it shall be lawful for the Queen, with tiie advice of the Privy Council, to declare by Proclamation, that, on and after a day therein appointed, not being later than One Year after the passing of this Act, the people <)f New South Wales, Victoria, South Australia, Queensland, and Tasmania, and also, if Her Majesty is satisfied that the people of Western Australia have agreed thereto, ol Western Australia, shall be united in a Federal ConimoHwealth under the name of the Commonwealth of Australia.
And whereas We are satisfied that the |>eot»le of Western Australia have agreed thereto accordingly.
We therefore, by and with the advice of Our Privy Council, have thought fit to issue this Our Boyal Proclama- tion, and We do hereby declare that on and after the First day of January One thousand nine hundred and one, the people of New South Wales, Victoria, South Australia, Quee7island , Tasmania, and Western Australia shall be united in a Federal Commonwealth under the name of the Commonwealth of Australia.
Given at Our Court at Balmoral this Seventeenth day of September, in the Year of our Lord One thousand nine hundred, and in the Sixty-fourth Year of Our Reign.
God Save the Queen.
ERRATA.
PAGE.
50, line 17. For " 30 Vic. c. 11, s. 38," read " 32 and 33 Vic. c. 11, s. 8 " 213, line 9, For " 10,000 " read " 80,000."
298, line 15 from bottom. For " 48 Vic. No. 3 " read " 48 and 49 Vic. c. 23." 318, line 11. For " (1640) 16 Char. I. c. 10" read " (1679) 31 Char. II. c. 2." 322, line 8. For " 3 and 4 Will. 4" " read 5 and 6 Will. IV." 548, line 3 from bottom. For " import " read " export." 949, line 23 from bottom. For " Bank Tax Cases," read " Van Allen v. Assessors "
ADDENDUM.
New Ministry in Victoria. — On the loth November, 1900, in consequence of a no-confidence vote by the newly-elected Legislative Assembly in Victoria. Mr. Allan McLean tendered the resignation of his Ministry (see p. .374, injra), which was accepted. Sir George Turner formed a new administration, consisting of the following members, who were sworn in on 19th November :- Premier, Treasurer, and Commissioner of Customs, the Right Hon. Sir George Turner, P.C., G.C.M.G. ; Attorney-General, the Hon. I. A. Isaacs ; Chief Secretary and Minister of Labour, the Hon. A. .J. Peacock ; Minister of Public W^orks and Railways, the Hon. W. A. Trenwith ; Minister of Agriculture, the Hon. J. Morrissey ; Minister of Lands, the Hon. D. J. Duggan ; Minister of Mines and Water Supply, the Hon. J. B. Burton ; Postmaster-General and Minister of Public Instruction, the Hon. W. Gurr ; Solicitor- General, the Hon. A. Wynne, M.L.C. ; Minister of Defence and Health, the Hon. W. McCuUoch, M.L.C. : Ministers without portfolio, the Hon. E. J. Crooke, M.L.C, the Hon. P. Phillips, M.L.C., the Hon. S. Gillott, M.L.A., the Hon. R. McGregor, M.L.A.
HISTORICAL INTRODUCTION.
P^RT I. ANCIENT COLONIES.
(1) HELLENIC CITY-STATES.
Colonies and Plantations. — The terms "Colouy" and ''Planta- tion " were originally applied to English settlements abroad, or small communities of English subjects established in foreign parts, princi- pally for the purpose of raising produce. They were never extended to English dominions in Europe, such as Dunkirk, Toulon, and Calais, whilst those places belonged to the kingdom, nor were they, nor are they at the present time used in reference to Jersey or Guernsey, or other islands in the English Channel. For some years the terms colony and plantation were used indiscriminately. In the reign of Charles 11. " Colony " came into general use, to denote the relation of dependence in which American Plantations stood to the Crown. A colony then came to mean a plantation which had a Governor and civil establishment subordinate to the mother country. In the statute 7 and 8 William III. c. 22, declaring void Colonial Laws repugnant to English Law applicable to the colonies, and in the Navigation Acts afterwards passed, the two names are used without distinction. — Petersdorff's Abridgment, vol. V., p. 540.
In connection with a new instrument of Government Avhich marks the transition from the colonial system planted in Australia over one hundred 3'ears ago to a new order of thing's, a higfher and more complex political organization, a larger measure of self-government, and a more matured social development, it will be fitting to draw attention to the origin and growth of British colonies, and to some of their leading characteristics and achievements, and to compare them with the colonies of antiquity with which they in some respects agree, but from which they in more respects differ. They agree in having, like the older types, sprung from a parent stock, but they differ materially in the circumstances and motives which led to their establishment, in their primary structure, and in their relations with the mother country, as well as in their career and progress.
Greek Colonies. — Various tribes and divisions, of which the ancient Hellenic race was composed, participated in the settlements known as Greek colonies. The causes which led to these migra- tions were the pressure of population on the means of subsistence within the narrow limits of crowded cities ; internal dissensions conse- 1
HISTORICAL INTRODUCTION.
quent on class domination and party faction ; and a love for maritime exploration and discovery.
Among the first recorded of these settlements were the Ionian colonies. After the death of Codrus (b.c, 1100, according to the early legends of Greek history), Ionian adventurers sailing eastward and northward from Attica, established themselves in that part of Asia Minor along the shores of the ^gean sea from Phocaea to Miletus. Twelve cities were built, the principal of which were Ephesus and Miletus. They were severally independent of the States from which their founders had emigrated, but they formed a mutual association for common purposes known as the Ionic Confederacy. From this new centre expeditions went forth and planted commercial emporiums on the shores of the Black Sea, including one from Miletus which established Sinope, the greatest and most important of the colonial stations fronting the Euxine. Trebezus (Trebizond) was afterwards settled from Sinope.
Whilst the lonians were thus engaged, another body of Greeks, ^olians, proceeding from Thessaly and Boeotia, founded ^olian colonies on the northern islands of the ^gean sea, and on the northern part of the Avestern coast of Asia Minor. They also were united in a confederacy of twelve cities, called the ^olian Con- federacy, the chief of which were Lesbos and Tenedos.
In like manner the Dorians, another Hellenic tribe, settled in the southern islands and in the southern part of the western coast of Asia Minor. Six of these cities formed themselves into the Dorian Confederacy. In 658 B.C., Greek emigrants from Megara established a colony at Byzantium, commanding an entrance to the Euxine, which grew into an important centre, and in after ages became Constanti- nople. The Dorians and other Greeks sailing along the Mediterranean westward and southward from their central home reached Sicily, Italy, Gaul (South France), and even Africa; planting in Sicily, Syracuse and Agrigentum, two of the most splendid cities of the ancient world; in the forked peninsula of Italy, cities such as Tarentuni, Sybaris, Croton, Metapontum, Ehegium, Cumje, and Neapolis (Naples), in which Greek civilization became so advanced and the colonists so numerous that Lower Italy was known as Grtecia Magna or Great Greece ; in the south of Gaul, Massilia (Marseilles), whicli for centuries was one of the most important commercial centres of the Meditei-ranean ; and on the northern shore of Africa, between the Nile and Carthage, Cyrene, occupying a fine maritime situation wliich developed into a city rivalling the Phoenician capital in wealth and splendour.
The very name " Apoikia," by which these primitive communities were known, indicated their true character and origin. A Greek colony was not a mere plantation retaining its connection with the parent state from which its pioneers had emigrated ; it was literally a going-away-from-home, a parting, a complete separation. These colonial groups went away from their old city-states, like swarms from old hives, to cluster in new hives, to cultivate new lands, to found new cities, to establish new centres of trade and commerce. Following, in their tiny ships, the ebbs and flows of the great tidal
ANCIENT COLONIES.
sea, they, for the most part, clung to its coastal regions. They explored what was to them a new world of strange waters, and here and there on the narrow fringes of the seaboard they made camps which grew into towns and bustling cities, pulsating with new life and new energy. The situations selected afforded convenient sites within communication, by sea, with their ancient seats, and at the same time they were accessible to an avenue of retreat from the invasions of barbarous hordes, should they emerge from the interior.
Greek colonization was not promoted by state-aid or state- patronage. It was in some instances prosecuted in spite of the opposition of Greek cities, from which the migrating swarms went forth. From small beginnings these insignificant groups, whilst pre- serving the laws, customs, and institutions of their mother-cities, which they regarded with respect and reverence, grew in power, influence, and importance, and became autonomous political com- munities. With one or two exceptions each of them enjoyed the unfettered right of self-government. Until they became subject to local despots, or were crushed by foreign conquest, the people of each colony exercised perfect freedom in the management of their own affairs ; they appointed their own leaders and magistrates, and, even in their foreign relations, they were independent of their mother-city ; they could declare war and make peace with her public enemies. In every respect, therefore, these small Greek societies were free and sovereign commonwealths, having the obligation to maintain that freedom and sovereignty against external attacks, by their own prowess and with their own resources. They owed no allegiance to any distant hereditary king, nor were they under subjection to any political state except their own. The mother-cities from which they had migrated regarded them as emancipated children over whom they exercised no direct authority or jurisdiction ; guaranteed them favours and assistance in times of difficulty and danger, and expected nothing in return except filial respect and gratitude.
In the course of time some of these Greek colonies equalled if they did not surpass the mother-cities in wealth, population, art, philosophy and poetry, and in all the achievements of culture and civilized life. The only ties tending to draw them together in sym- pathy were those of common language, common religion and common blood ; vital forces which seldom fail to yield tremendous results in the history of mankind. This community of sentiment led in some instances to something like a federal union between the original states and their colonial offshoots ; such as the defensive league between Imperial Athens and the powerful Ionian cities of the JEgean sea and Asian shore, known as the Confederation of Delos. — Adam Smith's Wealth of Nations, pp. 249, 252, 454. Conversations Lexicon, vol. VI., p. 768.
" The Greek colonist, citizen of a city, planted a city. Severed from his native city, severed perhaps by such a world of waters as that which parts Euboia from Sicily or by such a wider world of waters as parts Phokaia from Gaul, he could no longer remain a citizen of his own city ; he could no longer discharge the duties of citizenship on a distant spot ; he could no longer join in the debates
HISTORICAL INTRODUCTION
of the old agore ; he could no longer join in the worship of the old temple ; but he must still have some agore and some temple ; he must still have a city to dwell in, a city in which still to dwell the life of a free Greek, when he could no longer live that life in the city of his birth. So he planted a city, a free city, a city that knew no lord, that knew no ruling city, a city furnished from the first with all that was needed for the life of a Greek commonwealth, a city free and independent from its birth. And he dAvelled in the new city as he once dwelled in the old ; he gave himself to .make the new worthy of the old, the daughter worthy of the mother. But did he thereby deem that he had ceased to be a Greek ? Did he deem that he had severed himself from Greece ? Did he even deem that he had broken off from all duty and fellowship towards the city from whence he had set forth ? No ; dw^ell where he might, the Greek remained a Greek ; wherever he went he carried Hellas with him ; in Asia, in Libya, in Sicily, in Italy, in Gaul, far away by the pillars that guarded the mouth of Ocean, far away in the inmost recesses of the Inhospitable Sea, wherever he trod, a new Hellas, if we will, a Greater Hellas, sprang into being ; on those new shores of Hellas he kept his old Hellenic heart, his old Hellenic fellowship ; he still kept the tongue and customs of his folk ; he ciave to the gods of his folk ; he could go to the old land and consult their oracles, he could claim his place in their sacred games, as freely as if he still dwelled by the banks of the Spartan Eurotas or under the shadow of the holy rock of Athens. And how fared he towards the city of his birth, the metropolis, the mother-city of his new home, the birthplace and ci-adle of himself and his fellow-citizens of his new city ? Political tie none remained ; no such tie could remain among a system of cities. Parent and child were on the political side necessarily parted ; the colonist could exercise no political rights in the mother-city, nor did the mother-city put forward any claim to be lady and mistress of her distant daughter. Still the love, the reverence, due to a parent was never lacking. The tie of memory, the tie of kindred, the tie of religion, were themselves so strong that no tie of political allegiance was needed to make them stronger. The sacred fire on the hearth of the new city was kindled from the hearth of its mother; the parent was honoured with fitting honours, her gods were honoured with fitting offerings; her citizens were welcomed as elder brethren when they visited the younger city. And when the child itself became a parent, when the new city itself sent forth its colonies, the mother- city of all was prayed to share in the work and to send forth elder brethren of her own stock to be leaders in the enterprise of her children." — Freeman's Greater Greece and Greater Britain, pp. 26-29.
(2) ROMAN COLONIC.
Roman Colonies. — The Roman system of colonization differed materially from the autonomous settlements of the Greeks. A " Colony," as its derivation from the Latin " Colonia " denotes, was originally a plantation of coloni, or farmers, under the protection of the central government ; it was not an apoikia or a separate state.
ANCIENT COLONIES. 5
Roman colonies "svere established by the Roman government as a matter of national policy, and for political and military considerations. In the early history of the Republic, as the Romans gradually sub- jugated the various Italian races with whom they came into contact, lands of the conquered people were divided among Roman citizens, who were distributed in groups under military protection.
AVhen the Etruscans were finally vanquished, numerous military garrisons, which developed into colonies, were founded in various parts of Etruria. The national character of the surviving Etruscans was in that way gradually destroyed, and they were ultimately Romanised. Florentia, one of the towns of Etruria, thus became a leading Roman colony; its greatness under the name of Florence dates from the Middle Ages. So when the Samnites were finally conquered Samnium was laid waste and most of the inhabitants were sold into slavery ; their places were supplied by Roman citizens clamouring for land. After the conquest of Cis- Alpine Gaul, Yenetia became a Roman dominion ; military stations were formed, and the land was divided among the victors, as in the case of Etruria and Samnium. When Trans Alpine Gaul was brought under the Roman yoke it was divided into four provinces, in each of which was established a military colony. The name and identity of one of them, Lugdunum, situated at the confluence of the Rhone and Saone, still survives in the name of Lyons. Similarly the name and identity of another, Colonia Agrippina, on the Rhine, settled by the Emperor Claudian, is preserved in the modern city of Cologne.
For over three hundred years Britain, like Gaul, was subjected to the dominion of the Roman Empire. At the maturity of Roman occupation (304 A.D.) there were five divisions or provinces. Each of these provinces had a separate local ruler, subject to the Governor- General of Britain, who was appointed by the Emperor under the title of Prefect. This Prefect exercised all but sovereign authority, ha^'ing supreme military and judicial power. Under the Prefect was a Pro- curator or Qutestor, who levied taxes and administered the revenue. The chief military and civil power of the Roman Government was centralised in about one hundred cities ; the principal being London, Colchester, Bath, Gloucester, Chester, Lincoln, and Chesterfield. Most of these were built on lands which the Emperor had granted to the veterans of the conquering legions. The descendants of these warriors formed the greater part of the population of the cities. The ten largest cities enjoyed a special privilege, called the Jics Latii, an incomplete citizenship, which conferred on them the right to elect their own magistrates. The inferior ones, called Stipendiaries, were governed by ofiicers under the Prefect's authority, and paid tribute to the Emperor. — Cassell's History of England, Vol. L, p. 19.
HISTORICAL INTRODUCTION.
F-A.RT IT. MODERN COLONIZATION
(1) IN AMERICA, AFRICA AND ASIA.
Spanish and Portuguese Colonies. — It was a great day in the world's history when Christopher Columbus, a Genoese pilot, set sail from Spain with a small fleet of three vessels bound on that memor- able voyage which resulted in the discovery of America, and in the opening of new regions for the industrial activity and enterprise of civilized man. After years of endeavour he had convinced Ferdinand and Isabella of Spain that the realms of Indian wealth and treasure could be reached by sailing in the direction of the setting sun ; that, the earth being round, the countries of the east could be attained by sailing to the west, so that communication could be established over the whole world across the sublime highway of the ocean. Bold mariner was he, indeed, in that age, when the lamp of science burnt dimly, to gaze across the wild Avaves of the Atlantic, and, beyond its primeval darkness, to see the light of promise with its glimmering rays leading on to modern civilization. How transported with delight he was when, after tossing about in strange seas for twenty-one days, without sight of land, he saw grass floating on the waves, and birds appeared on the western horizon as the gentle messengers of a harbour of safety. It was on the night of the 12tli October, 1492, that Columbus from the deck of his vessel descried a dim light flickering across the waves ; and at 2 o'clock in the morning a cannon shot from the Pinta announced that a sailor had discovered land.
That light was a spark that has since illuminated the whole world, and the cannon shot will be heard echoing through all time. To Christopher Columbus is due the immortal honour of having discovered the continent of America. He was the first of a long line of maritime pioneers and discoverers who lifted the curtain of the trackless deep — who ploughed their way from sea to sea, from ocean to ocean, from continent to continent, until the great work of circumnavigating the globe, so daringly begun, was duly accomplished.
The second great voyage which largely assisted to expand the dominion of European civilization was that performed six years after the discovery of America, by Vasco da Gama, a Portuguese navigator. To that distinguished man was entrusted the execution of the project of sailing from Portugal to India round the continent of Africa. It may seem strange that both the expedition of Columbus and that of Vasco da Gama were launched for the purpose of reaching India. But the fact is that the nearest and safest route to the riches of Cathay and the trade of India was, to the commercial nations of the south- west of Europe, a problem of vital importance; they wished to com- pete with Venice and Genoa, which long enjoyed the monopoly of that trade by way of eastern caravan routes. Hence it was that the
MODERN COLONIZATION.
Portuguese were endeavouring to explore the western coast of Africa, with a view to reaching India by passing round its most southern promontory, many years before Cokimbus conceived the daring idea of sailing westward to India, in essaying which he was stopped by the Isthmus of Panama.
The Cape of Good Hope was discovered by Bartholomew Diaz in 1486. It was doubled by Vasco da Gama's fleet in November, 1497, and subsequently he arrived at Calicut, on the Malabar coast of India, the goal of his enterprise, where he established a trading station which marked the beginning of the European conquest of India. In comparing the achievements of Columbus and Da Gama as pioneers of oceanic exploration, it may be noted that whilst Columbus crossed a wild waste of waters, upon which man had never previously ventured, Da Gama, in circumnavigating Africa, followed the track of Pharoah Necho, an Egyptian king, whose ships had sailed round Africa more than 2,000 years before. But, for supreme grandeur, no exploit in the history of the human race is equal to the voyage of Fernando Magellan, a Portuguese mariner, who inaugurated an expedition which first sailed round the world, demonstrating beyond all doubt the rotundity of our planet, and leading the way to the discovery of new islands and a new continent in the Southern Hemi- sphere. In September of the year 1519 Magellan was entrusted by Charles Y. of Spain with the command of a fleet of five ships fitted out for the purpose of exploring the southern seas. Magellan succeeded in discovering the famous straits which bear his name, running between the southern headland of South America and Terra- del-Fuego; thence he passed into the broad expanse of the Pacific Ocean, to which he gave its present name. Continuing his voyage, he sailed on, and on, month after month, undergoing pi'ivations and encountering perils, until at last, in the year 1521, he arrived at the Philippine Islands, north of Australia, where he was killed in a skirmish with the natives. His vessel, conveying his records, charts and observations, was brought back to Spain by way of the Cape of Good Hope. The circumnavigation of the globe was thus completed after a three years' voyage of unparalleled difliculty and danger; the saddest event of the expedition being the loss of its intrepid com- mander before he had seen the accomplishment of his world-wide enterprise. It must be admitted that this voyage was the most triumphant in the whole record of navigation, ancient or modern. It was Magellan who burst through the gates of the American continent ; it was he who first navigated the majestic Pacific, with its numerous islands and its mighty highway from America to the Indian Ocean, preparing the way for much that was to follow in the fulness of time. Well has Dr. Draper written of Magellan — " He impressed his name on earth and sky ; on the straits connecting two oceans, and on clouds of starry worlds seen in the southern sky." — The Intellectual Development' of Europe, Vol. II., p. 169.
Pioneers of Modern Colonization. — Christopher Columbus, Vasco da Gama and Fernando Magellan were the first great pioneers of modern colonization to whom reference must necessarily be made in any account of the beginning and expansion of England's empire
HISTORICAL INTRODUCTION.
beyond the seas ; for, although theii- expeditions and discoveries were conducted in the interests and at the expense and direction o£ Spain and Portugal, the time came when England obtained possession of most of the countries which they added to the inheritance of civilized man. They prepared the way for Sir Francis Drake's circumnavigation of the earth in 1578, and for James Cook's voyage in 1769-70. The nation and the generation who sow the seed of progress do not always gather in the harvest, but sooner or later the human race, as a whole, enjoys and profits by what has been planted " with the blood and tears of a few." So it was in the case of those renowned navigators. Where now is the colonial empire of Spain ? Nothing remains; her provinces were lost in the hurricane of revolution and conquest. Where is now the colonial empire of Portugal ? Not an island of any consequence remains to speak of departed fame.
To England fell the greatest and richest share of the glorious result of those three great voyages which " broke the night of ages ; " which ushered in modern times with all their bustling activity ; which directed the course of civilization from the east to the west — from rivers such as the Nile, the Tiber, the Euphrates, the Danube and the Rhine, and from inland seas, such as the Black, the Baltic and the Mediterranean, to the broad Atlantic and the far-reaching stretches of the Pacific Ocean. From that time the nations of the Medi- terranean were destined no longer to monopolize the commerce of the world. Egypt ceased to be the avenue to India ; Europe was startled by the intelligence brought in quick succession from the new world, and an impetus of an unprecedented character was given to the spirit of adventure and discovery. Then began the mighty race for slices of the new world. England, of the sixteenth century, was not behindhand ; she now began to lead the vanguard of nations in that grand struggle. See Seeley's "Growth of British Policy."
In many respects the English at that time were peculiarly qualified for the work to be done. For over a thousand years the people of the island had been going through various stages of preparation and apprenticeship calculated to fit them for the arts of navigation and colonization. In the first place, England itself had been for many centuries a colony belonging to different and successive nations. The Phoenicians, the Romans, the Danes, the Saxons and the Normans, had, in successive periods, planted colonies in British soil, which left enduring traces in the country and in the character of the inhabitants. Then, again, the main element of the amalgamated
Population of Britain was composed of a sea-faring people, having abits and instincts which attached them to the sea and its associations. Under these cii'cumstances it is hardly surprising to see the English come to the front in this remarkable epoch of geo- graphical discovery and maritime enterprise.
North American Discoveries. — Four years after Columbus had discovered America, and whilst Vasco da Gama was preparing to circumnavigate Africa, John Cabot, a Venetian pilot, with his son, Sebastian, a native of Bristol, obtained from King Henry VII. letters patent authorizing them to proceed on a voyage of exploration towards the north-west, in order, if possible, to find, conquer and
MODERN COLONIZATION.
settle unknown lands for the English crown. The King supplied one ship, and the merchants of Bristol and London placed a few smaller ones at their disposal, and with this meagre fleet ihe Cabots, father and son, sailed forth on their dangerous enterprise. The result of this and succeeding voyages made by John and Sebastian Cabot were most momentous ; they laid the foundation of England's trans-Atlantic colonial empire. In June, 1497, they reached the coast of Newfound- land, or, as some think, of Labrador. Afterwards they sailed southwards along the eastern coast of the American continent as far as Cape Florida, near the Gulf of Mexico. They were the first Europeans who sighted and surveyed the coastline of the vast territory which was subsequently occupied by the thirteen original colonies, and which now belongs to the United States Republic. The discoveries of the Cabots gave England an international claim to the whole of North America, and that claim, although allowed to remain dormant for nearly a century, was eventually asserted in an emphatic and practical manner.
The Spanish devoted their energies and resources to the conquest of Central America, and a part of South America, together with the adjacent islands known as the West Indies, whilst the Portuguese took possession of Brazil ; but neither of these nations explored or asserted a right to North America. Whilst the Spaniards and Portu- guese were plundering and enslaving the defenceless natives of the south, committing unspeakable outrages, and spreading unutterable ruin wherever the lust of gold induced them to extend their devasta- ting sway, the English by slow and cautious steps explored the apparently poor and inhospitable coast of North America. Many disasters and failures delayed the work of settlement. For many years after the Cabots, expeditions were sent across the Atlantic by English enterprise, for the purpose of finding what Columbus failed to discover — a north-west passage to India. At last these attempts were for the time given up ; the route of Yasco da Gama round the Cape of Good Hope was resorted to, and trading factories were established on the shores of the Indian Peninsula, which were the feeble beginnings of our Indian empire.
First English Colonies in America. — After John and Sebastian Cabot, Sir Humphrey Gilbert and Sir Walter Raleigh were two of the most famous pioneers of English colonization in North America. Sir Humphrey Gilbert, an English navigator and maritime discoverer, obtained from Queen Elizabeth, in 1578, a patent empowering him ta discover and colonize any unsettled lands which he might reach. This was the first charter granted by an English monarch to found colonies. Two expressions from this remarkable instrument may be quoted : He was to take possession of " all remote and barbarous lands " and to govern them, subject to the proviso that " all who settled there should have and enjoy all the privileges of free citizens and natives of England." In his first voyage, in pursuance of this authority, he sailed for Newfoundland, but returned home unsuccess- ful. He sailed again in 1583, landed on the shores of Newfoundland, took possession of the harbour of St. Johns, and shortly afterwards lost his life in a storm whilst exploring the coast. In 1585 Sir Walter
10 HISTORICAL INTRODUCTION.
Raleigh, one of the most brilliant figures in the reign of Queen Elizabeth, promulgated a scheme for the settlement of those parts of North America not appropriated by Christian powers. Through his great influence with the Queen he obtained an extensive patent for that purpose, and by the assistance of wealthy friends and relatives two ships were fitted out for the expedition. It is interesting to observe that one of the clauses of Raleigh's first patent, like that of Sir Humphrey Gilbert, provided that the English subjects who accompanied him should have a guai'antee of the '' continuance and enjoyment of all the rights which they enjoyed at home." It was a maxim of the common law that, if an uninhabited country were dis- covered and peopled by English subjects, they were supposed to possess themselves of it for the benefit of their sovereign, and that such of the laws of England as were applicable and necessary to their situation and the conditions of an infant colony were immediately in force ; that wherever an Englishman went he carried with him as much of English law and liberty as the nature of his circumstances required. — Petersdorff's Abridgment, vol. Y., p. 540. Thus earl}^ was it recognised that Englishmen carried their political birthright with them over the broad surface of the earth ; that the charters of freedom for which their ancestors fought were not left behind, but accompanied them to their new homes beyond the sea. This was the fundamental principle of English colonization, and it presents a imarked contrast to the colonizing systems of Spain, Portugal and France.
In this expedition Sir Walter Raleigh founded a settlement on Roanoke Island, in what is now North Carolina. A few years pre- viously a party of French Huguenots had settled at Port Royal, in what is now South Carolina, and had built a fort which they called " Arx Carolina " in honour of Charles IX. of France. They had, however, been murdered by the Spaniards from the adjoining tei'ritory of Florida. Raleigh's settlement was not successful and was soon broken up. His vessels brought to England some natural productions which proved the great value of the resources of the country, and another expedition was sent out under the command of Sir Richard •Grenville, a kinsman of Sir Walter Raleigh. This was more success-, ful, and resulted in the foundation of the colony of Virginia, so named in honour of the Virgin Queen Elizabeth. It was the first and greatest of the thirteen colonies established under the protection of the English flag. It is said that to Sir Walter Raleigh's expedition is due the introduction of the potato and tobacco plant into Europe. In these ■early attempts at colonization failure and success were blended together, and it was not until about, the year 1606, in the reign of James I., that anything like safe and permanent settlement was •effected in these strange and distant regions.
England's struggle with Spain had been long and deadly, but it ended with the defeat of the Spanish Armada in the year 1588. England became mistress of the sea, having only the Dutch as powerful rivals ; and thus there were no longer serious dangers in •the way of maritime discovery and adventure.
The reign of the Stuarts, disastrous as it was to themselves,
MODERN COLONIZATION. 11
prolific as it was in civil war and revolution at home, was above all things distinguished by the growth and expansion of England's first colonial empire in Xorth America. Herein can be seen the vitality and energy of the people of whom we are the descendants, and whose political birthright we now enjoy with the fullest measure of freedom. During the tyrannical government of Charles I., the disorder and uncertainty of the Commonwealth under Cromwell, and the perse- cution and proscription of the Restoration under Charles II., thousands of Englishmen and Englishwomen fled from their land to seek for liberty and safety in the wilds of Xorth America, and these were the pioneers of that great development of emigration and colonization which paved the way for the establishment of a greater Britain in the new world. And here one general remark must be made as to the character of these momentous movements to which is mainly owing the stability and success of the early colonies of America. These colonies were founded by private enterprise, not with the assistance, but only with the official sanction of the Crown. This will be best understood by a brief reference to examples.
In the year 1606, the year in which Torres passed through the straits, which now bear iiis name, and sighted the Australian coast, two companies were formed for the purpose of colonizing America — the London Company and the Plymouth Company. To the London Company was assigned by King James I. South Virginia, which extended from Cape Fear to the Potomac River; to the Plymouth Company was granted Xorth Virginia, which extended from the Hudson River to Xewfoundland. The country between the Hudson and Potomac was declared neutral territory. This division of Virsrinia, Xorth and South, included nearly the whole of the eastern fringe of Xorth America, but that divisional nomenclature was not long maintained. The London Company was the first in the field, and began the work of colonization in a practical manner, though at first with limited success. It was followed by the Plymouth Company, which also proceeded to distribute grants of land to actual settlers. The title of each of these companies was a charter from the Crown. The charter of the Loudon Company contained provision for the creation of governing councils ; one in London, appointed by the King, having power to appoint a colonial council, endowed with the absolute power of Government. The soil was vested in the Company by grant from the Crown. There was no mention made of repre- sentative assemblies in either charter, but each contained a clause somewhat similar to that of Raleigh's first patent, to the effect that " all British subjects who shall go and inhabit within the said colony and plantation, and their children and posterity, which shall happen to be born within the limit thereof, shall have and enjoy all the liberties, franchises, and immunities of free denizens and natural subjects within any of our dominions, to all intents and purposes, as if they had been abiding and born within their own realms of England or in any of our other dominions." This contained the germ from which afterwards sprang the system of representative self-government in the American colonies. In none of the charters, with the exception of that of Jamaica, to which allusion will presently be made.
12 HISTORICAL INTRODUCTION
was there an express grant of representative government, but the right was asserted as inherent to and necessarily a part of those liberties, franchises, and immunities granted in the charters.
In 1607 Thomas Gates and Company sent out, under the leader- ship of Christopher Newport, three ships containing 105 emigrants, who were landed at Chesapeake Bay; and on the 13th May of that year the Commonwealth of Virginia was established by the building of Jamestown on the James River, which was so named in honour of the King. This party consisted of gentlemen of fortune, labourers, and other persons of no occupation, and without families, who were picked up in London. The friendly Indians sold them land and pro- visions, and they struggled along, clearing the wilderness and attempting to cultivate the soil. Owing to misgovernment and internal dissensions the infant colony was several times on the verge of starvation and dissolution. In 1609 the London Company super- seded Gates' Company in the management of the colony and sent out Captain John Smith, who by his prudence and good counsel saved the struggling community from destruction. It was next reinforced by fresh arrivals from England under the direction of Lord Delaware. By this time the permanent establishment of the new settlement was assured. Gradually a liberal element began to prevail in the manage- ment of the London Company, and in 1619 the first representative p,ssembly came into existence. In the quaint language of an old chi'onicle, "a House of Burgesses broke out in that year." The charter of James I. contained no provision for the creation of such an institution as "a House of Burgesses; " nevertheless that House was legally acknowledged by the Government of the mother country as being in strict accordance with the principles of Sir Walter Raleigh's patent, and with the general scope of the clause of the Company's charter.
In the same year which saw the forerunner and type of all American assemblies, convicts were sent out to the colonies from England, and negro slaves were introduced by the Dutch. The element of convictism and slavery did not spread to any very large extent in the early history of America, but they afterwards became the plague spot of England's colonial empire. The practice of negro slavery and the transportation of convicts was first introduced by the Portuguese and the Spaniards. And the system was too readily followed by other nations.
In 1624, the London Company surrendered its charter to the Crown, but the House of Burgesses elected by the people survived the surrender of the charter, and maintained the power of legislation and taxation, subject to the veto of the Governor. We have referred to the preliminary history of Virginia at some length, because it was the earliest settled, and the largest, richest, and most populous of all the original thirteen states. It was afEectionately called the " old Dominion," and also the "mother of Presidents," because four out of live Presidents who ruled the Republic up to the year 1824 were natives of Virginia. It was the birthplace of George Washington, Thomas Jefferson, Richard Henry Lee, and Patrick Henry, who became the leaders of the revolution.
MODERN COLONIZATION. 13
Before passing from Virginia, reference should be made to four other colonies adjacent to it which were carved out of the original grant of territory to the London Company. In 1623, Sir George Calvert, afterwards the first Lord Baltimore, received a grant of land forming part of Virginia from Charles I. for the purpose of forming a proprietary colony. It was called Maryland by way of compliment to Queen Henrietta Maria. The first Lord Baltimore died before the letters patent were sealed, but the second Lord Baltimore carried out the scheme in 1632. The Baltimores were Eoman Catholics, and Maryland was settled by Catholic gentry and others belonging to that Church, who were driven from England during the fierce persecutions of these times. Maryland became the "land of sanctuary ,'' and claimed the proud distinction of being a refuge for the toleration of all religious denominations. Its form of administration was by a Governor having a patent right to veto acts of the legislature, which consisted of an [Jpper House nominated by him, and a Lower House elected by the people. The colony, according to the patent, belonged to the proprietors, who nominated an administrative council and granted governmental privnleges, for which they received certain consideration.
In 1662 the southern part of Virginia was granted as a proprietary colony to Lord Clarendon and others by Chai'les II. under the name of " Carolina." Its early population consisted for the most part of emigrants from Virginia. The young colony obtained a representative assembly in 1667, but its form of government was similar to that of the proprietary colony of Maryland. However, in 1717 the pro- prietors surrendered their patent to the Crown, and Carolina became a royal colony by purchase. In 1729, Carolina was divided into two separate and independent districts. North and South Carolina, which afterwards became two of the most important states of the union.
Georgia, which was organised into a colony in 1732, was the fifth distinct settlement carved out of the Virginia foundation.
Passing now to the northern group of colonies which were formed out of the territory assigned to the Plymouth Company, we find a record of progress and cultivation of the soil proceeding in the teeth of trials and obstacles as extraordinary as those experienced in the history of Virginia and its offshoots in the south. Under the direction and with the license of the Plymouth Company, a settlement was, during the year 1620, formed at Massachusetts Bay by the famous and heroic " Pilgrim Fathers," who were compelled to leave England on account of the persecution to which they were subjected for their non-conformity to the Church of England. The sailed from South- ampton for America to the number of 102 persons, in the Mayfloicer, a little vessel of 160 tons burden, and landed on 21st December, 1620, at a place which they named New Plymouth, where they long had a desperate struggle for existence owing to the coldness of the climate, the poverty of their circumstances, and attacks by the Indians. They were afterwards joined by a society of Puritans, who also sought refuge there from the ecclesiastical policy of Charles I. Massachusetts became the centre and leader of four important colonies which in a few years sprang into existence in the North, between the Hudson
U HISTOEICAL INTRODUCTION.
River and Newfoundland. They were known as the New England Colonies, New England being the designation applied to the whole of that region by Captain John Smith, who explored the coast in the year 1614.
Settlers went to the south of Massachusetts, and formed the colonies of Connecticut and Rhode Island, which received separate charters from the Crown. A fishing village to the north of Massa- chusetts, established under a grant of land to one John Mason, became the nucleus of the colony of New Hampshire.
Such were the four important plantations formed out of New Eng- land, the territory of the Plymouth Company. The Plymouth Company finally surrendered its charter, and Massachusetts received an inde- pendent charter from Charles I. in 1629, whilst Connecticut and Rhode Island received separate charters from Charles II. in 1662. These were the famous New England colonies, in which there was a larger measure of political freedom and local self-government than in any of the North American plantations. They were chartered colonies, in which the sovereign parted with his rights and preroga- tives either wholly or in part to the settlers, who elected their own representative assemblies, having the power of legislation without appeal to the Crown, there being no royal governor or royal agent within the colonies. They elected their own governors, as well as their Parliamentary representatives in the Upper and Lower Houses. The Home Government did not interfere with them in any way. They were, in fact, simple democracies, if not veritable republics, the highest achievement in the way of political organisation, and the nearest approach to independent states attained by any of the thirteen colonies before the revolution. The only terms and conditions under which these colonies held their charters of colonization were, first, allegiance to the Crown, and, secondly, that one-fifth of the gold and silver found within their jurisdiction should be paid to the King. In the year 1665, only 40 years after the foundation of Massachusetts, and 100 years before the Declaration of Independence, we find the people of that settlement asserting that they did not regard themselves as subject to England, and maintaining that as long as they paid one- fifth of all the gold and silver according to the terms of their charter " they were not obliged to the king, but by civility." These advanced ideas of colonial independence and autonomy received a startling development and a determined assertion during the subsequent con- flict with England, for it was in Massachusetts that the battles of Lexington and Bunker's Hill were fought.
We have now referred to two groups of colonies, that of Virginia and that of Massachusetts, which are described as the original foun- dations of British colonization in North America. There remains a third group, which grew up in the neutral zone between the Potomac and the Hudson rivers, between Virginia and New England. Whilst settlement was proceeding in the vast country to the north and the south, this central territory was explored by the Dutch, who established a trading station at Manhattan, the site of the present city of New York. The Dutch Government assigned this locality to the Dutch West India Company. It was named New Netherlands, and the town
MODERN COLONIZATION. 15
which sprang into existence at the mouth of the Hudson, a river discovered by Henry Hudson, an Englishman in the service of the Dutch, was called New Amsterdam. The Dutch, however, had a very precarious title and tenure of this country, and they were soon cleared out of North America. After the restoration of Charles II. in 1660, England and Holland went to war, and a fatal blow was struck at the colonial possessions of the Dutch. An English fleet under Colonel Nichols proceeded to New Amsterdam and conquered it, driving out the Dutch, and converting it into an English settle- ment. It was granted as a proprietary colony by Charles II. to his brother, the Duke of York, after whom it received the name of New York. The Duke granted a part of the territory of New York to Lord John Berkeley and Sir George Carteret, who formed out of it the colony of New Jersey.
In 1681, the square tract of country to the west of New Jersey was granted by Charles II. to William Penn, the celebrated English Quaker and philanthropist, in satisfaction of a monetary claim against the Crown. Here arose another proprietary colony under the never- to-be-forgotten name of Pennsylvania. Penn had been unjustly persecuted for his religious faith ; and his great desire was to establish a home for himself and his co-religionists in the distant wilderness of the west where they might enjoy religious and political liberty ; where they might preach and practice according to their convictions in peace and quietness. Penn planned and named the great city of Philadelphia, and framed a liberal constitution for the young settlement, which became what Maryland was to the Catholics, and New England to the Puritans — a refuge and a sanctuary for the persecuted brethren, hunted out of their native land. Penn also- purchased from the Duke of York a small strip of New York territory which was added to Pennsylvania until the revolution, w^hen it was erected into a separate State called Delaware.
Classification of the Original Colonies. — Having sketched the thirteen original provinces of North America we are now in a position to consider generally their peculiar distribution and classification. First, as regards their location ; the southern group consisted of five — Virginia, Maryland, North Carolina, South Carolina and Georgia ; the northern group consisted of four — Massachusetts, New Hampshire, Connecticut and Rhode Island ; the central group consisted of four — New York, New Jersey, Pennsylvania and Delaware.
The political constitutions, or forms of government of these colonies comprised three classes. First came the royalist colony of Virginia, which was always subject to the influence of the Crown more than in any other, even from the first, when the Executive Government was vested in a prerogative-created Council. Virginia became a thoroughly royalist colony in 1620, when the London Company decided to surrender its charter to the Crown. So New York, which began as a proprietary colony, was converted into a royalist colony when its proprietor, the Duke of York, became King as James II. Virginia may be regarded as the type and model of modern colonies, in which representative and responsible government
16 HISTORICAL INTRODUCTION.
is the prevailing system, with a Governor appointed by the Crown as the agent of the sovereign to watch imperial interests.
The proprietary colonies were Maryland, New Hampshire, Penn- sylvania, Delaware, Carolina, New Jersey, Georgia, and, in its early career, New York. In this class of colonies the soil Avas granted to and vested in certain proprietors or companies, who exercised the governmental powers which, in royalist colonies, were enjoyed by the king; they appointed administrative Councils to conduct public business; and sometimes they nominated their Governors, who had by charter the right of veto on the legislation of the colonial assemblies. This plan of colonization, which may be compared to that adopted by the East India Company, was found not to work satisfactorily as the population increased, and as conflicts between private and public interests arose. In time the proprietors became tired of continual quarrels and dissensions with the colonists, and one by one they either surrendered or lost their charters, until by degrees all the colonies assumed the royalist form of government, with the, exception of two. The chartered, colonies were Massachusetts, Connecticut and Rhode Island, in which, by their original title deeds from the Crown, the people had the right of choosing their own Governors, their own magistrates, and their own representatives, to make, interpret, and administer their own laws. They could repeal and abrogate the common law of England, except the general law of allegiance and dependence, without the danger of a veto by the Home Government. They could also repeal and abrogate the statute law of England, except such Acts as were expressly applicable to the whole empire. Massachusetts, however, lost its charter in consequence of proceedings taken against it in England by Charles II. After that it became a quasi-royalist colony. At the time of the revolution in 1770, Con- necticut and Rhode Island were the only chartered colonies. It may be observed that the chartered colonies had a much larger instalment of constitutional liberty and local independence than any existing dependency of the British Crown.
Speaking generally of this survey of the political organization of the early North-American settlements, it is to be remarked that in their matured history they had local autonomy, self-government, self- taxation, and political equality, and that there was no State Church and no official aristocracy to become an incubus or a source of strife and bitterness. The transplanted institutions and franchises of the old country took root and flourished in the new country under the guidance and protection of bold and hardy bands of pioneers, who laid the foundations of a mighty Anglo-Saxon empire along the coast of the Atlantic. They carried with them the traditions and charters of their ancestors ; Magna Charta, the Petition of Rights and the Bill of Rights formed a part of their political inheritance as much as those muniments of title were the birthright of those of their fellow countrymen whom they left behind them.
We are now in a position to notice the truth and importance of the statement with which this account of the American colonies was introduced. They were established not by Government agency, assistance or direction, but by private adventurers, who left their
MODERN COLONIZATION. 17
native land in search of that freedom denied them at home. The Anglican Cavaliers of Virginia, the Puritans of New England, the Quakers of Pennsylvania and the Catholics of Maryland emigrated from the land of their forefathers, and fought their way in the waste wilderness of the new world in order that they might escape political proscription and religious persecution ; that they might establish hearths, homes and hamlets where they would be far away from tyranny, spoliation and martyrdom. In other words, these colonies were places of refuge from the fierce political and ecclesi- astical domination which prevailed in England in the seventeenth century, during the reigns of James I. and Charles I., the Protect- orate, and the Restoration under Charles II. and James II.
West Indian Colonies. — Leaving the thirteen provinces of the mainland, let us now glance at the progress of English colonization in other parts of the globe during the later half of the seventeenth century. Barbadoes is the oldest discovered British colony in the West Indies. It was taken possession of in 1605, when a party of roving Englishmen planted a cross on the island, and inscribed the words "James, King of England;" but no actual settlement was effected on it until 1624, when a patent for the island was granted to the Earl of Carlisle, as sole proprietor. A large number of royalists emigrated to Barbadoes during the civil war between Charles I. and his Parliament, and it became a prosperous and populous sugar- producing colony. Bermuda, another of the earliest West India plantations, was colonized from Virginia and England shortly after 1609. Jamaica, the largest and wealthiest of our West Indian pos- sessions, was taken from the Dutch by an expedition sent out by Oliver Cromwell during his protectorate in the year 1655. Charles II., after the restoration of 1660, sent a Governor to Jamaica, and provided for the creation of an elective Council to legislate for the colony. This has been described as the first representative colonial Constitution granted by the Crown of England to any of its posses- sions and plantations abroad; for it will be remembered that there was no express grant of elective assemblies by the Crown to any of the American colonies. In the eighteenth century Jamaica became the greatest sugar-producing country in the world, but it afterwards declined through the exhaustion of the soil and the competition of new sugar countries.
Canadian Colonies. — Glancing northward of the New England colonies, we come to Newfoundland, which was discovered by Cabot in 1497 ; but England had a very doubtful title and precarious possession of that territory up to the end of the sixteenth century, as it was claimed by powerful and persistent French rivals. Newfound- land was not permanently settled by English emigrants until 1624, fourteen years after the planting of Bermuda. Though it was not that part of the American soil which was first settled from England, Newfoundland claims to be the earliest of existing British colonies from the fact that it was first discovered ; and in the Colonial Confer- ence held in London, in 1887, the representatives of Newfoundland were held entitled to the precedence attached to seniority.
At the time when Newfoundland was first colonized. Nova Scotia,
18 HISTORICAL INTRODUCTION.
New Brunswick and Canada belonged to France by priority of occu- pation. Although the coast of Canada was discovered by Sebastian Cabot in 1497, its interior was not explored by Europeans until 1541, when Jacques Cartier, a French navigator, sailed up that great arm of the sea which penetrates into the lake country, to which he gave the name of the River St. Lawrence. Jacques Cartier founded the first settlement at St. Croix's Harbour, but little progress was made for nearly 100 years. In 1603, Samuel Champlain, a French naval officer and marine explorer, was commissioned to initiate colonizing establish- ments in the New World, and he is justly celebrated as the pioneer of French exploration in North America. In his first voyage Champlain ascended the St. Lawrence to the part where Jacques Cartier had been stopped. In his second voyage he visited the coast of Nova Scotia. In his third expedition, in 1608, he fixed the site of the town of Quebec on the heights of Abraham, overlooking the St. Lawrence, and he also ventured as far as Lake Ontario and Lake Champlain, to which he gave his name. Quebec was founded and French settle- ment began in Canada a few years before the voyage of the Mayflower, The French possessions were gradually extended westward and south- ward from the St. Lawrence to the Mississippi, and down that river to its mouth. The whole of the country at the back or westward of the thirteen states of America, the Hinterland, including the valley of Ohio and all Canada, was in the beginning of the eighteenth century claimed by France, which contended that the Alleghanies were the western limits of the British dominions.
British Possessions in India. — Before proceeding to show how France lost that vast colonial empire, we may draw attention to the march of British influence and the planting of British trading stations in Africa and Asia. After many fruitless attempts to find a north- west passage to East India, English merchants, traders and adven- turers adopted the route discovered by Vasco da Gama, and sent their vessels to India by the Cape of Good Hope. In 1585, Queen Elizabeth granted a patent to a company to trade to Gambia, on the West Coast of Africa, but no settlement of any consequence was effected in that region until 1625. In its subsequent history Gambia became a notorious centre of the slave trade.
In December, 1600, Queen Elizabeth granted a charter to a com- pany formed for the purpose of carrying on a trade with countries beyond the Cape and the Straits of Magellan. This company, which was the beginning of the famous East India Company, established a few trading factories in India, but their commerce was for many years very meagre. By the end of the eighteenth century the progress of the East India Company in the Peninsula of Hindostan had not advanced beyond the factory stage. The Company were simply leaseholders under the great Indian Princes, by whose leave they established trading stations in various localities along the sea coast. In the struggle for commercial ascendancy the East Indian Company had to contend with powerful rivalry from the French and the Dutch. But the Company, which was incorporated by Royal Charter and vested with sovereign powers by the Crown, ultimately became master of the whole of India. The history of its struggles and final triumph
MODERN COLONIZATION. 19
in laying the foundation of the British Empire in India is one of the most romantic and extraordinary in the whole record of colonization and conquest. These momentous events must be briefly summarised,
Madras, the present capital of the presidency of that name, situated on the Coromandel (south-east) coast, was founded in 1639 by the Company, who obtained from the Rajah of Chandgerry a grant of a piece of land for the erection of a town and fort. Fort St. George, built in this district, was the first place where the British obtained a permanent footing. Madras soon grew into a flourishing city and became the central station of the Company along the Coromandel Coast.
Bombay is, next to Madras, the oldest British possession in India. It was granted to the Portuguese by an Indian chief in 1530, ceded by Portugal to England in 1661, and transferred to the East Indian Company by King Charles II. in 1668.
The first factory established by the Company in Bengal was built on the HoogJy in 1664. The Company's representative, Job Charnock, was driven thence in 1686, and in 1690 he founded another settlement on the Hoogly, which expanded into the town of Calcutta. The site of the settlement was granted to the Company by the Nabob of Bengal, and the grant was confirmed by the Emperor Aurengzebe, the last of the Moguls. Fort William was built at Calcutta in 1699, and it was so named after William III.
Such were the early and humble beginnings of the British East India Company. After the death of Aurengzebe, in 1 707, the native princes who owed feudal allegiance to the Mogul Empire began to quarrel among themselves, and the French and English interfered to quell the disturbances. It was then evident that the political organization of India was thoroughly rotten, and that only a strong arm was required to conquer and possess the whole country, and reduce the native princes to subjection. Then began the great con- test between the French and British in India for the ascendancy and empire. At first the French maintained their superiority, but in the end they were defeated and driven out of India by the Company's forces, and the victory of Lord Clive at the Battle of Plassy on 26th June, 1756, established the exclusive sovereignty and supremacy of the British in India.
South African Colonies. — The Cape of Good Hope was first discovered in modern times by Bartholomew Diaz in the year 1486-7. The heavy seas which rolled along the coast prevented him from landing, and hence he named it the ''Cabo doz tormentos," the "Cape of Storms," but King John II. of Portugal altered the name to " Cabo da Bona Esperanza," the Cape of Good Hope. Yasco da Gama doubled the Cape a few years afterwards on his voyage to India. The Portu- guese, however, never formed any permanent establishment there. The Dutch took possession of it in 1650, and it became a powerful station for them in their journeys to and from their trading factories in India and Batavia. It was captured by the British in 1795, was restored to Holland at the Peace of Amiens in 1802, and was again captured in 1806. At the Congress of Vienna, in August, 1814, the Dutch colonies at the Cape of Good Hope, and in South America,
-20 HISTORICAL INTRODUCTION.
were ceded by the Netherlands Government to Great Britain, six millions sterling being paid as part consideration for the transfer. On 11th March, 1853, Cape Colony was granted a Representative Legislature, composed of two elective chambers, followed in 1872 by the concession of Responsible Government. Between 1861 and 1870, British Kaffraria was added to the colony, and in 1880 Fingoland and Griqualand West were similarly incorporated. In 1894 and 1895, West Pondoland and British Bechuanaland became part of the same growing Dominion. Dutch farmers or Boers, who left the colony shortly after 1835, established the Republics known as the Orange Free State and the Transvaal.
In May, 1843, Natal, where the Boers were prevented from forming a republic, was proclaimed a British settlement and remained a part of Cape Colony until 1856, when it became a separate colony under a Royal Charter, authorized by statute, with a Governor and a Legislative Council partly elective and partly nominated. In 1 893, a new Constitution, embodying a bi-cameral legislature and accompanied by Responsible Government, was granted. In 1897, Zululaud was made a province of Natal.
Through the enterprising operations of the British South Africa Company, led by Mr. Cecil Rhodes, the vast regions south of the Zambesi, known as Southern Rhodesia, formerly Mashonaland and Matabeleland, and north of the Zambesi known as Northern Rhodesia, including Nyassaland, have been, since 1888, added to the Empire. They are destined in course of time to be partitioned into a group of self-governing colonies.
Conquest op Canada. — From this survey of the progress of the British flag in Asia and Africa, we return to our review of the march of events in the New World during the eighteenth century. The Seven Years War with France, which terminated in the Peace of Paris, 1762, left Great Britain the first State in the world, with the equivocal reputation of the " Tyrant of the Seas." It was in this war that she completely established her supremacy on the ocean, which she first began to assert upon the defeat of the Spanish Armada. It was in this war, so vigorously prosecuted by the first William Pitt, after- wards Lord Chatham, that England obtained possession of the whole of North America, and drove the French out of Canada as they had been driven out of India. The story of the invasion of Quebec by a British expedition sent up the St. Lawrence under the command of General Wolfe, the scaling of the Heights of Abraham by our troops in the dead of night, the fierce battle which followed on the plateau, the gallant defence of the French under General Montcalm, the victory of the attacking party, and the death of both noble and heroic commanders in the midst of the fight, is one of the most thrilling in the whole range of naval and military history. This event was followed by the surrender of all Canada to the British, and the French power in that quarter of the globe was thus absolutely annihilated. But France had her revenge on Great Britain at a later date, when she assisted the American colonies in their revolt against the mother country.
MODERN COLONIZATION. 21
Loss OF THE American Colonies. — To those coloniee we must now once more refer^ and see how it came about that Britain lost the brightest jeweJ in the crown of a thousand years. During the first half of the eighteenth century the American colonies along the eastern coast of what is now the territory of the United States made enormous progress in settlement and internal prosperity. Neglected and uncared for in the early years of struggle, they sprang into importance and commanded attention from the people and govern- ment of England when their trade increased and their resources were developed. Whilst they enjoyed the amplest measure of local autonomy and local self-government, there was one serious exception and limitation to their legislative power. The Home Government claimed the right of regulating their external trade and commerce. Their export and imr»ort trade was watched with jealousy, and hedged about with hampering restrictions. They could not amend or repeal the slightest fiscal regulations, however obnoxious or oppressive. Apart from this, they had absolute freedom and independence ; but in matters of trade, the British Parliament asserted its supremacy. The Navigation Laws passed during the Commonwealth under Cromwell, and mainly directed against the Dutch, with a view to ruin Dutch commerce, and the Dutch mercantile marine, were the basis of the colonial policy which subsequently pressed so heavily on the colonies. The main provisions of these laws were that no commodities of Asia, Africa, or America could be imported into Great Britain or her colonies except in British ships. This restricted the markets of the colonies, as they could not trade directly with other nations. On the other hand, Great Britain imposed high protective duties on the goods of foreign countries in favour of her colonies. Then there was a restriction on the manufacture of their raw products by the colonies and on the direct importation of the goods of foreign countries. This constituted what is called the old " colonial system," which was at the root of the quarrel and the war which led to American separation.
We are now brought down to the reign of George III., a period well described as " the most eventful in the history of the human race," marked by two thrilling tragedies — the War of American Inde- pendence and the French Revolution. It was in the year 1764, that George Grenville, the Chancellor of the Exchequer, nicknamed " The Gentle Shepherd," induced the House of Commons to take the fatal step of attempting to draw a revenue from America by the taxation of the colonies. By the Stamp Act, 5 Geo. III. c. 12, he secured the imposition of duties on certain commodities imported into America from other European colonies, and also stamp duties similar to those contained in our own Stamp Acts. This was a violation of the funda- mental principle of Constitutional Government — that there should be " no taxation without representation."
The news was received in America with indignation, and with a stern determination to resist. Virgfinia took the lead in orsranizinsr
-rrr
confederate resistance. In the House of Burgesses at Williamsburg, Patrick Henry spoke against the Stamp Act with burning eloquence. " Cjesar had his Brutus,'^ he cried, "Charles I. had his Oliver Crom- well, and George III. " "Treason! Treason!" interposed the
22 HISTORICAL INTRODUCTION.
Speaker. "And George III. may profit by their example," replied Patrick Henry. "The torch of confederate opposition 'was carried through every colony like a fiery cross." — Casseirs History of Eng- land, vol. v., pp. 58-71.
In October, 1765, the first Congress of Delegates was held in New York, at which resolutions were adopted, denying the right of the mother-country to tax the colonies without representation. The Stamp Act was repealed in the following yeai', by the Act 6 Geo. III. c. 11, but the British Parliament carefully avoided any appearance of a surrender of its rights. Indeed, it passed a Declaratory Act (6 Geo. III. c. 12) affirming the subordination of the colonies and the supreme authority of the Crown and Parliament of Great Britain. The mad policy inaugurated by George Grenville was followed, in 1767, by his successor, Charles Townshend, who as Chancellor of the Exchequer proposed the reduction of the Land Tax to relieve the country gentlemen, and, in order to make up the resulting deficiency in the revenue, determined to impose new taxes on goods imported into America, including tea. This scheme was carried in the Commons with the utmost indifference, and with hardly any debate. These Customs duties rekindled the fires of revolution in the colonies. The Republican party increased in power and influence. Non-importation societies were formed. Resistance and rebellion were openly advo- cated. The storm gathered in every quarter, and at last broke out in the seizure and destruction of several cargoes of dutiable tea in Boston Harbour. The Declaration of Independence was signed by the representatives of the thirteen colonies on the 4th July, 1776. The die was cast, and the great American catastrophe was brought about by the ruinous policy of " an infatuated King, a stone-blind Cabinet and a corrupt Parliament." The battle of Bunker's Hill, the surrender of General Burgoyne's army at Saratoga, the surrender of Lord Cornwallis' army at Yorktown, the mismanagement of British generals, the bravery of British soldiers, the pluck and patriotism of the colonial forces under George Washington, the recognition of the Independence of America in 1783, and the adoption of the federal constitution in 1787, are stirring events which can be only alluded to here for the purpose of urging a closer study. — Cassell's History of England, Vol. V., pp. 71-100.
Britain's Second Colonial Empire. — During one of the exciting debates which took place in the British Parliament on the subject of the American War, Lord Shelburne exclaimed, " When the Inde- pendence of America is admitted, the sun of England will have set for ever." That prediction was doomed to be falsified. No doubt the loss of her American colonies was a fearful blow to the Britain of 1783. But the world was wide, and colonization was still young. Canada, a vast tract of country extending from the Atlantic to the Pacific Ocean, still belonged to Britain. Many loyalists fled from the southern colonies during the revolutionary wars and commenced the foundation of new settlements in Canada, which promised to be as great in wealth and population as some of the colonies that were lost.
In 1791, by the Act 31 Geo. III. c. 31, Canada was divided into two provinces, Upper Canada, afterwards Ontario, and Lower Canada,
MODERN COLOXIZATION. 23
afterwards Quebec. In each province representative institutions were established, but the Executive was vested exclusively in the Crown. This system lasted until 1840, when the Canada Union Act, 3 and 4 Vict. c. 35, was passed. (R. R. Garran, The Coming Common- wealth, p. 81.) Under this Act the two provinces were united in one Constitution. A new Parliament, consisting of a Legislative Council, nominated by the Crown, and a Legislative Assembly, elected by the qualified inhabitants, coupled with Responsible Government, was constituted for the United Provinces. The new machinery of govern- ment was brought into operation under the Governor-Generalship of Mr. C. Powlett Thompson (afterwards Lord Sydenham) on 30th June, 1841. By the British North America Act, 1867 (30 and 31 Vict.c. 3) the two Canadas, Nova Scotia and Xew Brunswick, were federally united in one Dominion by the name of Canada. The new Constitu- tion was proclaimed on the 1st July, 1867, Lord Monck being Governor-General. The new province of Manitoba joined the Union in 1870, British Columbia and Vancouver Island in 1871, and Prince Edward Island in 1873. Newfoundland is the only British colony in North America which has not joined the Dominion.
The southern hemisphere was destined to present to Great Britain a new Colonial Empire to replace the one that was lost. The same year, during which the Americans were welded " into a more perfect union" by their federal constitution of 1787, saw Captain Arthur Phillip, with the " first fleet," on his way to the Southern Ocean in order to establish a settlement on the eastern shores of Australia, which had just been discovered and explored by Captain Cook.
(2) IN AUSTRALASIA.
From Magellan to Cook. — No one man, no one nation, can exclusively claim the honour of having discovered Australia. Justice demands the acknowledgment that many brave mariners and the Governments of several pioneering and exploring countries assisted in the gradual unfolding of the situation and outlines of the great con- tinent. See Barton, ''History of New South Wales," Vol. I., pp. 25-39. In his interesting work, " The Discovery of Australia " (1895) Mr. George CoUingridge (Sydney) propounds the thesis that either Spaniards or Portuguese discovered and charted the continent as early as 1508. He publishes a copy of what purports to be a French map of the world by Oronce Fine, dated 1531, in which "Terra Australis " is represented as forming part of an extensive ant-arctic land, and another, dated 1546, in which it is described as Java-la- Grande, with a small channel dividing it from the true Java. In an article in the Geographical Journal, October, 1899, Mr. George Heawood expresses the opinion that there is no authentic evidence that Australia was discovered before 1606. A number of events and incidents have, however, been commonly associated with the history of Australian discovery prior to 1606 ; these cannot be passed over or disregarded ; they may be here mentioned with the observation that the evidence on which thev are based is vagme.
24 HISTORICAL INTRODUCTION.
It is said by some writers that in 1527 a Portuguese mariner named Menezis penetrated the Southern Ocean and touched at a group of rocky islands to which he gave the name of Abrolhos, and which may now be seen marked on the map, lying to the westward of Champion Bay, Western Australia. (Australian Hand Book, 1897, p. 363.) From maps and documents in the British Museum and the War Office of Paris, it would appear that a Provencal navigator, named Gillaume le Testu, a native of the French city of Grasse, dis- covered some portion of the Australian continent in the year 1531. Early in the year 1542 an expedition was despatched from Spain under the command of Luis Lopez do Yillalobos to follow up the voyage of Magellan in the Pacific Ocean. He took possession of the Philippines for Spain, and coasted along a large island to which he gave the 7iame of New Guinea, and which was then thought to be a part of the Great Unknown Southern Land, which Ptolemy, the geographer, supposed to exist south of the Indian Ocean. The next record is that in 1598, a Portuguese mariner named Houtman reached the Abrolhos, with which his name became associated. In 1605, Pedro de Quiros was despatched by the Court of Spain to the South Sea in command of a fleet of three vessels. On April 20th, 1606, he discovered one of the islands of the New Hebrides, which he believed formed part of the Southern Continent, and to which he gave the name of " La Austrialia del Espiritu Santo." In a memorial to Philip III. of Spain (the head of the house of Austria) de Quiros explained that he had named it " for the happy memory of your Majesty and for the sake of the name of Austria, because on your bii'thday I took possession of it." — Collingridge, Discovery of Aus- tralia, p. 248. One of his ships, commanded by Luis Vaez de Torres, became separated from the rest, and sailing westward he saw land which he believed to be the eastern extremity of New Guinea. He skirted along its southern coast and saw land to the south as he pro- ceeded westward and passed through those straits which now bear his name. Torres was probably the European who first caught sight of the continent, afterwards to be known as Australia. The stories with respect to Menezis and Houtman are unsatisfactory. — Story of Geographical Discovery, Joseph Jacobs (1899), p. 158.
Other Avriters have, however, claimed for Dutch mariners the credit of being the first Europeans to sail in Australian waters. Wliilst the Spaniards and Portuguese were engaged in exploring the South Seas the Dutch were not idle. From Batavia, the central station of their Indian trade, they sent out ships in search of islands and commerce. On 18th November, 1605, the Dutch despatched the ship Duyfhen (Dove) from Bantam in Java, to explore New Guinea. It is claimed for the Duyfhen that she skirted the west and south coast of New Guinea for nearly one thousand miles, sighted Cape York, touched the eastern shore of the great indentation, afterwards known as Carpentaria; and that some of her crew landed on the shores of the Gulf and were killed by the natives. " The exact dates of the respective discoveries of Torres and the commander of the Duyfhen cannot now be ascertained; but as the Dutch vessel had arrived in the island of Banda, on her return to Bantam, in the month
MO])ERN COLONIZATION. 25
of June, 1606, while the letter of Torres, communicating an account of his vovage to the Spanish Admiralty, is dated at Manilla, in the month of August following, Captain Flinders conjectures, with everj appearance of probability, that the honour of the discovery of Australia is due to the Dutch, and that it must have taken place in the month of March, 1606, a few months before the discovery of Torres."— Lang's History of New South Wales (1875), p. 3.
Eeferring to the conflicting claims for the honour of the dis- covery of Australia, Dr. Lang wrote : — ^' Whether these allegations, however, are well founded or not, we have to console ourselves, as Britons, with the comfortable reflection that, while neither the French nor the Dutch, neither the Spaniard nor the Portuguese, ever made any account of their alleged discoveries, we, the only practical people in the lot, have already, by following and settling in the track of our own great navigator. Captain Cook, founded a whole series of noble empires of the future in the Great South Land." — History of New South Wales (1875), p. 4.
Many Dutch navigators explored the west and southern coast line of the supposed continent during the seventeenth century, and left behind them lasting evidences of their visits, in the shape of names of islands, capes, and bays, which now figure prominently on the map of Australia. The first authentic discovery of any part of the west coast of the continent is said to have been made by Captain Dirk Hartog, who sailed from Amsterdam, in the Endraaght (Concord), in 1616. To the laud en the west coast near the 25th parallel, which he visited, he gave the name of his vessel : Endraaght^s Land. To one of the islands off the main coast he gave his own name. Dirk Hartog, and to another the name of Dorre, one of his sailors. The bay adjoining the island was afterwards named by Dampier Shark's Bay. In 1619 Captain Jan Edel visited that part of the coast south of Endraaght's Land. The south-west cape was rounded by Dutch mariners in 1622, and received the name of the vessel, '^Leeuwin" (Lioness), in which the discovery was made. In 1627 Captain Van Pieter de Xuyts in the Guide Zeepaert (Golden Serpent) cruised along a considerable part of the south coast of the continent, which he called Nuyts Land. Captain Pieter Carpenter, an oflBcer in the service of the Dutch East India Company, in 1627, explored and gave his name to the Gulf of Carpentaria. In 1628-9 Captain Pelsart, in command of the Batavin, was wrecked on the west coast at the spot known as Houtman's Abrolhos. The most important discovery made by the Dutch navigators, in the seventeenth century, was that of Abel Janssen Tasman. In 1642, Anthony Van Diemen, the Dutch Governor- General of Xetherlands India, organized an expedition to explore the coast of Australia, which had been sighted by so many Dutch adven- turers, but which still remained a terra incognita. Tasman was placed in command. He sailed from Batavia on 16th August, 1642, proceed- ing southward until he almost reached the 44th parallel. On 24th November, 1642, land was seen, to which he gave the name of Van Diemen's Land. The land first seen by Tasman is supposed to have been Point Hibbs. He saw and named Storm Bay ; discovered and named Maria Island, and then sailed eastward. On 18th December
26 HISTORICAL INTRODUCTION.
he discovered land, which he called Staaten Land, but which after- wards acquired the name of New Zealand; he anchored in a bay in the Strait, between the North and Middle Islands. He then sailed northward, passed and named Cape Maria Van Diemen, and made for the tropics, where he discovered the Tonga Islands. Had Tasman sailed from Van Diemen's Land northward instead of eastward, he would have anticipated Cook^s discovery of eastern Australia by one hundred years. In 1664, the country, whose leading outlines were yet dimly understood, was named New Holland by the States-General, and the discoveries of Tasman were proudly inscribed on the map of the world, cut in stone upon the New Staathaus in Amsterdam.
In 1683, William Dampier, one of a company of bold buccaneers, started off on a voyage round the world. After passing through many wild adventures, Dampier obtained the command of a vessel called the Cygnet, in which he reached the Philippines, and thence he proceeded on a voyage to New Holland. He reached the west coast in latitude 16° 50' on 4th January, 1688. In his narrative he said : *'New Holland is a very large tract of land. It is not yet determined whether it is an island or a main continent, but I am certain that it joins neither Asia, Africa or America." Dampier returned to England on 2nd September, 1691. In 1699, King William III. organized an expedition for the discovery of unknown lands. Dampier was placed in command, the name of the ship in which he sailed being the Roebuck. He reached the coast of New Holland on 4th July, 1699, and on the 1st August his ship struck the Abrolhos rooks, but escaped being wrecked. A harbour was found, which proved to be that of Dirk Hartog, who had anchored there in 1616. To this harbour Dampier gave the name of Shark's Bay. Afterwards Dampier sailed northward, passing in his course the archipelago which now bears his name. The coastline traced by him was apparently sterile and inhospitable. Dampier was the first Englishman who landed on the shores of New Holland. By some historians he has been styled the "prince of voyagers'' and "the Cook of a former age." European writers like Humboldt have borne testimony to his bravery, his skill, and his genius as a mariner, and to the value and accuracy of his reports concerning his discoveries. — Blair's History of Australia (1879), pp. 29-34.
The only voyage of consequence between Dampier's time and that of Cook was one by Willem de Vlamingh, a Dutch navigator, who, in 1699, was ordered by his Government to search for the Dutch ship Bidderschap, which was lost in 1684. In his search along the west coast, in the Geeliruk, Vlamingh discovered and entered Swan River.
Cook's Discoveries. — To Captain James Cook, one of Britain's bravest and most illustrious mariners, was reserved the immortal fame of commencing and completing a voyage of discovery next in import- ance to those of Columbus and Magellan, by which he solved the problem of the Great Southern Continent, discovered and explored the eastern shores of Australia — or New Holland, as it was then called — and took possession of it in the name of the British Crown. The immediate occasion and motive of Cook's first voyage was not a
MODERN COLOXIZATIOX. 27
thirst for gold or empire on the part of the British Government, but the conduct of a scientific expedition to the island of Otaheite, now called Tahiti, in the South Sea, for the purpose of observing the transit of the planet Venus across the sun's disc. On 26th August, 1768, Captain Cook sailed from Plymouth in the Endeavour, a barque of 360 tons, originally built for the coal trade. The barque was victualled for an eighteen months' voyage. Among those on board were Mr. (afterwards Sir) Joseph Banks, President of the Royal Society ; Mr. Charles Green, Assistant Astronomer ; Dr. Solander, a Swedish Botanist ; Zackary Hicks, lieutenant ; Robert Molineux, master ; Charles Gierke, mate ; John Guthrey, boatswain ; Stephen Forwood, gunner ; John Satterly, carpenter ; William B. Monkhouse, surgeon ; Richard Orton, clerk. Cook's instructions were to sail to Otaheite, and after the completion of the astronomical observations to proceed south as far as the 40th parallel — with a view to ascertain- ing the existence of the supposed " Terra Australis," or Great Southern Continent (quite distinct from Xew Holland) which geographers believed to exist in polar regions — and then to steer westward until lie reached New Zealand, after which he was to return to England.
The transit of Venus having been successfully observed, Cook and his party left Otaheite in the Endeavour on 13th July, 1769. He reached a latitude of 40° 12' without finding the imaginary continent, and then proceeded westward. After a run of about sixty-eight days, a lad on board the Endeavour, named Nicholas Young, saw land from the masthead, which afterwards proved to be the south-west point of Poverty Bay, New Zealand. That was on 6th October, 1769. Various parts of the island were visited, and on 10th November, 1769, Cook took formal possession of the country in the name of King George III. Having circumnavigated New Zealand and passed through the Straits which now bear his name, Cook, on 31st March, 1770, sailed from Cape Farewell towards the west, his plan being to steer westward until he should reach the east coast of New Holland, and then to follow the direction of that coast northward. On 18th April, Lieutenant Hicks caught sight of a projection of land which was named after him. Point Hicks. The name was subsequently changed to Cape Everard ; it is situated between Cape Howe and the entrance to the Snowy River. Proceeding northward, on 28th April, a bay was discovered and entered, and a landing effected. The name given to it at the time — as appears from Cook's private log — was " Sting-ray Harbour;" and its present name of Botany Bay, obviously suggested by Banks' botanical discoveries, appears for the first time in Dr. Hawkesworth's embellished narrative of Cook's voyages. See His- torical Records of N.S.W., Vol. I., p. 161. During his stay in Botany Bay Cook caused the British flag to be displayed on the shore ; and the ship's name and the date of his visit were inscribed on one of the trees near the watering place. On 6th May, 1770, the Endeavour resumed her voyage northward, and at noon on the same day Cook observed an opening in the coast which he called "Port Jackson," probably in honour of Mr. (afterwards Sir) George Jackson, one of the Secretaries of the Admiralty. See Historical Records of N.S.W., Vol. I., pp. 170-2.
28 HISTORICAL INTRODUCTION.
In the voyage northward all the prominent features of the coast were noted and named, including- Smoky Cape, Port Macquarie, Moreton Bay, Cape Capricorn, and other bays and capes. After skirting the dangerous coast for a distance of about thirteen hundred miles, the Endeavour narrowly escaped shipwreck by striking some coral rocks. On 21st October, 1770, Cape York was reached. The coast was followed in order to determine whether there was a passage between New Holland and New Guinea. A channel having been found, it was named Endeavour Straits — a name which has since been dropped in favour of Torres, the intrepid Portuguese who is supposed to have first sailed through. Cook landed and took formal possession of the whole country along which he had coasted. Cook's log, as " written up " by Hawkesworth, contains the following entry : — " I once more hoisted PJnglish colours, and though I had already taken possession of several parts, I now took possession of the whole eastern coast in right of His Majesty King Greorge III., by the name of New South Wales, with all the bays, harbours, rivers and islands situated upon it ; we then fired three volleys of small arms, which were answered by the same number from the ship. Having performed this ceremony upon the island we called it Possession Island." — Hawkes- worth, Voyages, Vol. III., p. 616.
Legend has it that Cook gave this name to the country owing to a fancied resemblance to the Welsh coast about Swansea. It is re- markable, however, that neither his official log nOr his private log, nor any of the journals of the ship's company, mentions the name of New South Wales. It seems either to have been an after-thought, or to have originated with Hawkesworth.- See Historical Records of N.S.W., Vol. I., pp. 169-70.
The first voyage of the Endeavour, and Cook's discoveries, con- stitute a story full of thrilling interest to Australians. His heroic services and his great work have not yet been adequately recognized by those of the British race who now possess and enjoy the glorious heritage, the Australian continent, which he helped so materially to bequeath to them. Whilst we are now celebrating the establishment of the Australian Commonwealth, and rejoicing at the beginning of a new era of national life which shall give us a more exalted citizen- ship, and a wider patriotism, let us not forget James Cook and his courageous comrades, who in a frail barque of 360 tons dared the storms of two oceans in search of new homes for the unborn millions of the British race. All honour to the name of Captain Cook !
Cook's second great voyage was commenced on 13th July, 1772, in the Resolution, 462 tons burthen ; he was accompanied by Captain Tobias Furneaux, in the Adventure, 336 tons. The object was to make further search for the supposed Southern Continent of the geographers. In this voyage Cook and Furneaux directed their course towards the South Pole, and penetrated beyond the Antarctic circle. On 8th February, 1773, the two vessels became separated. Cook then directed his course to Queen Charlotte's Sound, New Zealand, the appointed rendezvous. Captain Furneaux followed a more northerly course, coasted along the southern and eastern shores
jNrODERN COLONIZATION. 29
of Van Diemen's Land, and met Cook at Queen Charlotte's Sound. Subsequently Cook cruised in the Pacific, visited and named the New Hebrides group, landed on and named Xew Caledonia, dis- covered and named Norfolk Island. He returned to England on 30th July, 1775, after an absence of over three years, having conclusively proved that no Polar Continent existed in navigable seas. See Historical Records of N.S.W., Vol. I., pp. 333, 380.
In 1776 Cook commenced his third and last voyage. On this occasion he was again in command of the Besolution, and was accompanied by Captain Clarke, in the Discovery, 300 tons. On 26th January, 1777, he arrived off the coast of Yan Diemen's Land and anchored in Adventure Bay, which had been so named by Captain Furneaux. On 30th January the Resolution and Discovery left Yan Diemen's Land and sailed for New Zealand. Thence they left for the Society Islands. Cook's tragic death took place at Hawaii, one of the Sandwich Islands, on 14th February, 1779. His work was done. Australia, Tasmania and New Zealand were by his labours for ever secured to the inheritance of the British people.
Projects for Settlement. — The project of a settlement on the east coast of New Holland seems to have been due to the enthusiastic reports of Sir Joseph Banks as to the fertility and capacity of the country. Before a Committee of the House of Commons, appointed in 1779 to enquire into the question of transportation, he gave evidence that if it were thought expedient to establish a penal settlement in a distant land, " the place which appeared to him best adapted for such a purpose was Botany Bay, on the coast of New Holland." — Barton, History of N.S.W., Yol. I., p. xlv. The Committee, without recommending any particular locality, reported in favour of establishing a convict colony in some distant part of the globe.
The existing laws, however, only authorized transportation to the colonies and plantations of North America (see the Act 4 George I. c. 11) ; and as the independence of the American colonies Jiad now been recognized, further legislation was necessary. Accordingly in 1784 the Act was passed under which the first settlement of Australia took place, and which is dealt with in Part III. of this introduction.
Mention may here be made of a proposal by an Englishman, James Maria Matra, to establish in New South Wales a free settle- ment for the American loyalists who had suffered for their allegiance to the Crown during the war, and who might wish to remain under the British flag. This plan, though it received the hearty support of Sir Joseph Banks, was not favourably received by the Government, and New South Wales thus missed the opportunity of being founded as a free and settled colony. — Barton, History of N.S.W., Yol I., pp. 1-10.
From Cook to Flixders. — On 20th January, 1788, Captain Arthur Phillip arrived at Botany Bay with " the First Fleet," consisting of His Majesty's frigate Siriiis, in command of Captain John Hunter, accompanied by one armed tender, three store ships, and six trans- ports, conveying six hundred male and two hundred female prisoners, a guard consisting of one Major Commandant, three captains of marines, twelve sub-lieutenants, twenty-four non-commissioned officers.
30 HISTORICAL INTRODUCTION.
and one hundred and sixty-eight privates. There were also among them forty-two women, wives of the marines, together with their children. It was found that Botany Bay was not suitable for the proposed settlement. The ships remained in the harbour whilst Captain Phillip sailed along the coast in a boat for the purpose of examining the opening recorded by Captain Cook, and by him named Port Jackson. It was found to be a noble and beautiful harbour. In one of its many bays a site suitable for a settlement was selected, and named ''Sydney Cove" in honour of Viscount Sydney, one of the members of Pitt's administration. Eeturning to Botany Bay, Captain Phillip proceeded to make arrangements to send the ships around to Sydney Cove. Meanwhile two ships, flying the French colours, appeared on the scene. They proved to be the French exploring vessels Boussole . and Astrolabe, under the command of La Perouse ; they came there for wood and water. After delivering to Captain Phillip despatches to be forwarded to the French Govern- ment, La Perouse sailed away across the Pacific, and was never again seen or heard of, but in 1826 traces of his wrecked ship were found on the island of Vanikoro, near the Fijis. On 26th January the fleet sailed into Port Jackson. The people were disembarked at Sydney Cove. The British colours were hoisted. The Eoyal Pro- clamation and Commission constituting the colony of New South Wales were read. A salute was fired. The work begun by Cook was about to bear its fruit in the shape of Australian settlement and colonization.
In April, 1791, George Vancouver, an English navigator, who accompanied Captain Cook on his second and third voyages, made a careful survey of the south-west coast of Australia, in the course of which he inspected a harbour which he named King George's Sound in honour of the reigning sovereign.
In 1792, a French expedition, under Admiral Bruni D'Entre- casteaux in the Recherche, accompanied by Captain Huon Kermadec in the Eftperance, discovered Recherche Archipelago and Bsperance Bay, W.A., and then visited the coast of Van Diemen's Land, in search of the lost La Perouse. They passed through the channel bearing the name of the Admiral, and sailed up the Huon and the Derwent.
In 1795 Captain John Hunter arrived in New South Wales, in the Reliance, to commence his duties as Governor in succession to Captain Phillip. There came with him two young men whose names have become honoured by their association with memorable events in connection with Australian maritime discoveries — Matthew Flinders, midshipman, and George Bass, surgeon. They afterwards took a leading part in exploring previously unknown tracts in Australian waters, and in solving geographical problems of great importance. On 3rd December, 1797, whilst Flinders was engaged on a surveying voyage at Furneaux's Islands, Bass, obtaining from the Governor the use of a whaleboat, a crew of six men, and provisions for six weeks, started from Sydney, cleared the heads and sailed southwards; explored the coast, discovered Twofold Bay, passed southward beyond the great projection of land, now called Wilson's Promontory,
MODERN COLONIZATION. 31
and then proceeded further westward until he discovered the harbour now known as Western Port. He had entered the channel which runs between Van Diemen's Land and Australia, though he was not certain of its continuity. In October, 1798, Flinders, associated with Bass, sailed from Sydney in a small decked vessel named the Norfolk, 25 tons; made for Van Diemen's Land; steered along its northern coast; discovered and entered Tamar heads and anchored in Port Dalrymple ; rounded the north-west headland (Cape Grim) and eventually circumnavigated the island, for the first time deter- mining its insularity. The name of Bass is immortalized in the Straits, to which, on the recommendation of Flinders, it was given. In 1799, Flinders was sent by Governor Hunter to explore the coastline north of Port Jackson. In the sloop Norfolk he proceeded along the coast, examined Moreton Bay and afterwards went as far as Hervey's Bay.
On 17th March, 1800, Lieutenant James Grant was sent from England, in command of the surveying ship Lady Nelson, 60 tons, for the purpose of exploring the southern coast of Xew Holland. On rounding the West Australian cape, he shaped his course to reach Sydney through the Straits discovered by Bass and Flinders, instead of proceeding via Van Diemen's Land. On 3rd December, 1800, Grant sighted a part of the coast of South Australia, to which he gave the name of Cape Northumberland. He also sighted and named other points, including Cape Bridgewater and Cape Otway. The Lady Nelson was the first ship to pass through Bass Straits from the westward. Afterwards Grant, in the Lady Nelson, surveyed the coast between Wilson's Promontory and Western Port. Lieu- tenant Murray succeeded Grant in command of the Lady Nelson. On 12th November, 1801, Murray started from Sydney for the pur- pose of prosecuting a more minute exploration along the south coast. This voyage resulted in the discovery of an opening between Western Port and Cape Otway ; it was first seen on 5th January, 1802, but owing to unfavourable weather it could not be entered for several weeks. It was first inspected in a launch, by Mr. Bowen, the mate of the Lady Nelson, who entered it on 1st February. The Lady Nelson was then brought round from Western Port, and on 15th February passed through the narrow channel. This proved the gateway to what Murray described as "a noble harbour," which he named Port King, but the name was afterwards changed to Port Phillip, in honour of the first Governor of New South Wales.
At about this time Flinders was on his way back from England in the flagship Livestigator, 334 tons. He reached Cape Leeuwin on 7th December, 1801; entered King George's Sound; surveyed the coast eastward; discovered and named Fowler's Bay, Smoky