CO129-534-9 Law of Piracy- case of Rex v. Chung Tam Kwong 1-4-1931 - 20-4-1932 — Page 86

86

It would on

powers obtained from two authorities which might at any time be found to be conflicting. that view in certain circumstances be conceivable that a court might act legally in defiance of the limitat-

The ions imposed upon it by its own constitution. competence of a court is derived from its sovereign. Judicial functions are a portion of sovereignty.

Unless it receives the jurisdiction from the sovereign, a court is without power to act. An acquiescence by the sovereign in a usurpation by the

court of any

portion of sovereign power would not mount to a sufficient authority. Jurisdiction cannot depend

on any form of ratification.

I note in passing that the contention of the learned Attorney General has the support of Jir willism Blackstone who, in his "Commentaries on the laws of England" 1857 Ed., volume IV, at p. 62, in a chapter headed "üf offences against the law of nations" states his opinion in these words -- "In arbitrary states this law, (i.e. international law) wherever it contradicts or is not provided for by the municipal law of the country, is enforced by the royal power: but since in England no royal power can introduce a new law, or suspend the execution of the old, therefore the law of nations (wherever any question arises which is properly the object of its jurisction) is here adopted in its full extent by the common law, and

is held to be a part of the law of the land; and those acts of Farliment which have from time to time been made to enforce this universal law, or to facilitate the execution of its decisions, are not

to