CO129-532-7 Anti-piracy guards- China Navigation Company v. H.M. Attorney General 19-1-1931 - 20-4-1932 — Page 45

44

obligation, as I understand it, which comes within the purview of

the Courts of law. I do not mean to say it is something which

being of the same kind the courts of law are excluded from con-

sidering. It is a different sort of thing; it is in a different

region altogether. It is merely what I ventured to call a

political duty, using the word "political" in its proper original

sense. It is what any good Government would be expected to do

for its people, but the courts cannot examine it. Nobody can come

to the court and ask it whether the Government

any Government

had or had not performed what one

in any country I should think

may call for want of a better word its duty in that respect. That

confusion, that duplicate use of the word "duty", I think lies at

the bottom of the whole of the argument in this case and makes it

clear to my mind that the Plaintiffs case is based on a complete

fallacy. It is not a question of the Crown doing anything of the

kind which the Officers in the cases which I have been referred to

were found to have done.

It is said that what is done here is that they raised money

without the consent of Parliament. That is the way the position

is brought into line or is said to be brought into line with the

principle. But it has not been raising money. Of course, if

there was the duty which I have indicated then it might be said;

if there was a duty comparable to the duty of an officer, something

of that sort might be said. But get rid of that and there is

nothing left. What is called raising money is no more than render-

ing services. The charge has not been imposed as the price of

something which they were entitled to without a charge. In the

case of the officers the party was entitled to an unbiased

decision, a judicial decision I think it is called in one of the

cases, of the officer concerned. He had to pay for it in order

that it might be obtained. The Company here has nothing whatever

to say.

It cannot call for a decision in this court at all. It

cannot be recognised in this court that they can call for the

decision of the Crown upon the question of whether there should

be soldiers or sailors in ships or not at all, It is a mere

A.