7414.
No. 720.
(TASMANIA.)
PUBLIC
RECORD OFFICE
Reference :-
| ༣། ། ......................C.O. 885
61
ALLY WITHOUT PERMISSION OF THE BE REPRODUCED PHOTOGRAPHIC- COPYRIGHT PHOTOGRAPH-NOT TO
11 PUBLIC RECORD OFFICE, LONDON
MY LORD
LAW OFFICERS to COLONIAL OFFICE.
Temple, July 28, 1871.
We are honoured with your Lordship's commands signified in Mr. Holland's letter of the 22nd instant, stating-
1st. That he was directed by your Lordship to transmit to us copies of a Despatch addressed to the Governor of Tasmania, with reference to the reservation of à Bill 9 Jan. 1871. passed in that Colony amending the electoral franchise, and of the Governor's Dospatch received in reply, enclosing an opinion of the Attorney General upon the point, whether the reservation of the Bill in question was or was not necessary.
2nd. That the Act of 5 & 6 Vict. c. 76. applies, with the exception of the 53rd section, to the Colony of New South Wales only. That section makes permanent the provisions of 9 George IV. c. 83., but it might be observed with reference to that earlier Act, that there is no clause in it requiring the Governor to reserve Bills for Her Majesty's pleasure thereon. The other Acts mentioned in the margin of the 53rd section merely continue the Act of 9 Geo. IV. c. 83,
3rd. That by the later Act of 13 & 14 Vict. c. 59. providing (inter alia) for the establishment of legislative councils in the Australian Colonies, it was provided by section 12 that the provisions of 5 & 6 Vict. c. 76., as to the reservation of Bills for Her Majesty's pleasure and the Bills so reserved, should apply to the legislative councils established under that Act.
4th. That in the case of Tasmania the legislative council established under that
Act was abolished by the Tasmanian Constitution Act (a copy of which was annexed 18 Vic. No.
for reference) and a Legislative Council and House of Assembly were constituted, 17. which were to have "all the powers and functions of the said existing legislative council."
The latter words, it would be observed, were adopted from the 32nd section of 13 & 14 Vict. c. 59., by virtue of which the Tasmanian Act was passed.
5th. That there could be no doubt then that the new legislative bodies had all the powers of the former Legislative Council, but the question arises whether a restriction as to passing certain Acts affecting the election to and constitution of the Legislative Councils to be established under that Act, and in terms confined to those councils, attaches to Bills passed by the very differently constituted Council and Assembly now in existence.
"
29
279.
New South
6th. That, as bearing upon that question, Mr. Holland was to observe that Electoral and Electoral District Acts and Acts to amend the electoral law had been passed in Victoria and New South Wales, without being reserved since the establishment of Victoria. new constitutions under the powers given by the 32nd section of 13 & 14 Vict. c. 59., 22 Vict. No 64. and he was to direct our attention to the Imperial Acts (18 & 19 Vict. c. 54. and 18 & 19 Vict. c. 55.) by which the new constitutions were established, and especially Wales. to the 3rd section in each Act, in which, as would be seen, the words "and the Bill a0 Act-20 of 1858. reserved," which are found in the 12th section of 13 & 14 Vict. c. 59. are omitted.
7th. That, on the other hand, in South Australia where the Constitution Act passed in 1856 very much resembled the Tasmanian Constitution Act laws affecting the electoral districts had been reserved.
8th. That the question was one of considerable importance and Mr. Holland was to request that we would favour your Lordship with our opinion upon the following questions :-
lst. Whether, it is necessary that Bills passed by the present legislative bodies of Tasmania, altering or affecting the electoral districts which are represented in those legislative bodies, or establishing new and other divisions of the same, or altering the numbers of members to be chosen by such districts, or increasing the whole number of those legislative bodies or of either of them, should be reserved?
2nd. Whether, if such reservation is necessary, the restriction can be removed, as suggested by the Attorney General of Tasmania, by local legislation or whether an Imperial Act would be necessary?
L
In obedience to your Lordship's commands we have taken the questions submitted to us into our consideration, and have the honour to
16728.-658.
25-5/06.
2
Report