CO885-(15-16) — Page 122

#

23887.

No. 90.

(CANADA.)

SIR,

LAW OFFICERS to COLONIAL OFFICE.

Royal Courts of Justice,

July 11, 1901. We were honoured with your commands signified in Sir M. F. Ommanney's letter of the 2nd instant stating that he was directed by you to request us to report upon cer- tain questions which had arisen with respect to the power of the Government of the Dominion of Canada to adhere to the Convention between the United Kingdom and the United States of America relative to the disposal of real and personal property, which was ratified on the 28th July, 1900.

That Sir M. Omnianney was to transmit to us a copy of a telegram received from the Governor-General of Canada from which it appeared that the Province of New Bruns- wick did not desire to adhere to the Convention, and that the Dominion Government were in doubt whether Canada could adhere without New Brunswick.

That it would be observed that by section 132 of the British North America Act, 1967, power was given to the Parliament and Government of Canada to perform the obligations of Canada, or of any Province of Canada arising under Treaties between the Empire and Foreign Countries, and that under section 91 of the same Act exclusive power was reserved to the Dominion Government to legislate in respect of aliens. That that connection Sir M. Ommanney was to refer us to the case of the Union Colliery Company of British Columbia v. Bryden.

That it appeared, however, that the Dominion Government was doubtful as to the propriety of exercising any powers it might possess of adhering to the Convention and legislating to enable its provisions to be carried out in view of the objections of the Province of New Brunswick, and that Sir M. Omnmanney was, therefore, to request us to report :-

1. Whether the Dominion Government could adhere to the Convention without New Brunswick becoming bound by it?

2. Whether the Dominion Government had power

(a) to adhere on behalf of New Brunswick notwithstanding the refusal of New

Brunswick to adhere and

(b) to legislate, if necessary, for that Province so as to enable the provisions of

the Convention to be carried out?

3. Generally.

We have taken the matter into our consideration, and, in obedience to your com-

mands, have the honour to

Report,-

1. That we think the Dominion Government can only adhere to the Convention on

the terms of New Brunswick being bound by it as well as the other Provinces.

2. We are of opinion that the Dominion Government has power to adhere on behalf of New Brunswick, and to pass such legislation for the whole Dominion, including New Brunswick, as will enable the Convention to be carried out there. This can, we think, be done under the exclusive power to legislate as to aliens conferred by section 91 (25), though it touches ou rights of property in the Province. (See Tennant v. Union Bank of Canada—1894 A.C. 31 at p. 47.)

3. Nothing further occurs to us. We, of course, do not enter into questions of policy which

may arise on the course suggested in the second question.

་

1

The Right Honourable J. Chamberlain, M.P.,

&c., &c.

&C.,

9548-25-7, 1901 W 352

D&S &

We have, &c.,

R. B. FINLAY. EDWARD CARSON,

། ?། ། ། །

PUBLIC RECORD OFFICE

9

Reference :-

C.O. 885

15 PUBLIC RECORD OFFICE, LONDON

ALLY WITHOUT PERMISSION OF THE BE REPRODUCED PHOTOGRAPHIC- COPYRIGHT PHOTOGRAPH-NOT TO