Slike strani
PDF
ePub

liquors within, the importation thereof into or the exportation thereof from, the United States and all territory subject to the jurisdiction thereof for beverage purposes is hereby prohibited.

"Section 2. The Congress and the several States shall have concurrent power to enforce this article by appropriate legislation.

[ocr errors]

Section 3. This article shall be inoperative unless it shall have been ratified as an amendment to the Constitution by the Legislatures of the several States, as provided in the Constitution, within seven years from the date of the submission hereof to the States by Congress."

The resolution was passed by the Senate, 65 to 20, on August 1, 1917, and by the House, 282 to 128, on December 17, 1917. Mississippi was the first State to ratify the Amendment, its Legislature acting on January 8, 1918.

Up to January 16, 1919, the Legislatures of thirty-six States— the required three-fourths had ratified the Prohibition Constitutional Amendment, Nebraska being the thirty-six, on the date named. Ratification was completed January 15, 1919, by the Legislatures of five States-Iowa, Colorado, Oregon, New Hampshire, and Utah-making a total of twelve in two days.

The Amendment, under its provisions, became effective one year after the date of its final ratification. Additional legislation by Congress is necessary to make it operative, and ground work for this already has been laid. This legislation will prescribe penalties for violations of the Amendment and determine how and by what agencies the law shall be enforced.

On 10th October 1919, Congress passed the Prohibition Enforcement Bill. President Wilson's signature only is required to complete it. Wide authority is given to the States to suppress the liquor traffic.

PROPOSED AMENDMENTS OF THE CONSTITUTION OF THE COMMONWEALTH.

In the House of Representatives on 1st October 1919, the Prime Minister, Mr. W. M. HUGHES re-introduced in a modified form, the scheme of constitutional amendments, contained in his Bill of 15th July 1915, supra, page 618.

The following tabulated statement shows in one column the Constitution as it stands at present and the parallel column the effect of the proposed alterations :

PRESENT CONSTITUTION.

LEGISLATIVE POWERS.

Sec. 51 (1.). Trade and Commerce with other countries and among the States.

Sec. 51 (xx.). Foreign corporations and trading or financial corporations formed within the limits of the Commonwealth.

Sec. 51 (xxxv.). Conciliation and arbitration for the prevention and settlement of industrial disputes extending beyond the limits of any one State.

L. P.

PROPOSED CONSTITUTION.

LEGISLATIVE POWERS.

Sec. 51 (1.). Trade and Commerce, provided that the alteration of this paragraph by Constitution Alteration (Legislative Powers) 1919 shall not be construed to empower the Parliament to make laws with respect to the control or management of railways the property of a State, or the rates or fares on such railways."

Sec. 51 (xx.). Corporations, including-

(a) the creation, dissolution, regu; lation and control of corporations;

(b) corporations formed under the law of a State, including their dissolution, regulation, and control; but not including municipal or governmental corporations, or any corporations formed solely for religious, charitable, scientific, or artistic purposes, and not for the acquisition of gain by the corporation or its members; and

(c) foreign corporations, including their regulation and control.

Sec. 51 (xxxv.). Industrial matters, including

(a) labour;

(b) employment and unemployment;

(c) the terms and conditions of labour and employment in any trade, industry, occupation, or calling;

(d) the rights and obligations of employers and employees;

(e) strikes and lock-outs ;

(f) the maintenance of industrial peace; and

(g) the settlement of industrial disputes.

Sec. 51 (XL.). Trusts, combinations, monopolies, and arrangements in relation to-

(a) the production, manufacture, or supply of goods, or the supply of services; or

(b) the ownership of the means of production, manufacture, or supply of goods, or supply of services.

Sec. 51A. The Parliament shall have power to make laws for carrying on by or under the control of the Commonwealth, the industry or business of producing, manufacturing, or supplying any specified goods, or of supplying any specified services and for acquiring for that purpose on just terms the assets and goodwill of the industry or business, where each House of the Parliament has in the same session, by resolution passed by

60

an absolute majority of its members, referred to the High Court, for inquiry and report by a Justice thereof the question whether the industry or business is the subject of a monopoly, and where, after the report of the Justice has been received, each House of the Parliament has, in one session, by majority of its members, declared that the industry or business is the subject of a monopoly.

This section shall not apply to any industry or business conducted or carried on by the Government of a State or any public authority constituted under a State.”

The alterations made by this Act shall remain in force

(a) until the expiration of three years from the assent of the Governor-General thereto; or

(b) until a convention constituted by the Commonwealth makes recom mendations for the alteration of the Constitution and the people endorse those recommendations, whichever first happens, and shall then cease to have effect. Provided that if no such convention is constituted by the Commonwealth before the thirtyfirst day of December, one thousand nine hundred and twenty, the alterations made by this Act shall cease to have effect on the said thirty-first day of December, One thousand nine hundred and twenty.

"No law passed by the Parliament by virtue of the powers conferred by this Act shall continue to have any force or effect, by virtue of this Act, after the alterations made by this Act have ceased to have effect."

The arguments advanced in favour of and objections raised against the proposed amendment of the commerce power are stated, supra, page 305.

The case for and against the proposed amendment relating to corporations are stated, supra, page 500.

The case for and against the proposed amendments relating to the industrial power is stated supra, page 588.

The proposed amendment relating to trusts and combines is discussed, supra, page 606.

The proposed amendment relating to monopolies is referred to supra, page 613.

The whole of the proposed alterations were carried in the House of Representatives and the Senate and were ordered to be submitted to the people by referendum in December 1919.

OUTLINE INDEX OF CASES.

à Beckett v Backhouse (special leave to appeal), (1907) 4 C.L.R., 1334
Adam, In re (doctrine of necessary implication), (1837) 1 Moo.
P.C.C., 460

..

Adair v. United States (membership of trade unions), (1908) 208
U.S. 161

Adelaide Municipal Tramway Trust, Ex parte, No. 1 (original or
appellate jurisdiction; prohibition), (1913) 18 C.L.R. 54

No. 2 (dispute extending organization-prefer-

ence to unionists), (1914-15) 19 C.L.R. 43 ..

; Australian Tramway Employees' Association

v. (union badge), (1913) 17 C.L.R. 680

PAGE.

687

176, 910

296

709, 719

577

65, 575

Adelaide Steamship Co. Ltd. and others; The King and Attorney-
General (Commonwealth) v. (trusts, combines, monopolies
inter-state trade), (1911-12) 14 C.L.R. 387. Per ISAACS, J... 267, 285
(appellant) v. The King and the Attorney-General
(Commonwealth). High Court on appeal from ISAACS, J.,
(1912) 15 C.L.R., 65
60, 285, 287, 609

Adelaide Steamship Co. Ltd.; Attorney-General of the Common-
wealth v. (restraint of trade and monopoly-appeal to Privy
Council-dismissed-High Court judgment sustained), (1913)
18 C.L.R. 30; (1914) A.C. 781

..

Adelaide Steamship Co. Ltd. v. Wells (lawsin Northern Territory),
18 S.A.L.R. 111
Addystone Pipe and Steel Co. v. United States (anti-trust laws
intention), 175 U.S. 211 ..

Ah Sheung v. Lindberg (forbidden immigrant), (1906) V.L.R. 332 ..
Ah Yick v. Lehmert (Federal jurisdiction), (1904) 2 C.L.R. 593

287, 609

922

152
419

676, 679, 711, 715

Allen Taylor, Ex parte; R. v. Merchants Service Guild of Austral-
asia (dispute substantial-persisting-letter demand), (1912)
15 C.L.R. 586 ..
Amalgamated Society of Engineers v. Australian Institute of Marine
Engineers (shipping industry), (1909) 9 C.L.R. 48
Ambrosini v. United States (State immunities affirmed), (1902) 187
U.S. at p. 1

581, 583

563

198

Amos v. Fraser (appealable amount), (1906) 4 C.L.R. 78 ..
Appleton v. Moorehead (corporation-inter-state combines), (1908)
8 C.L.R. 330

683

59, 193, 284, 301

Arnold v. The King Emperor (appeal in criminal cases), (1914) A.C.
644

Arndel; The King v. (postal laws), (1906) 3 C.L.R. 557

Ashbury v. Ellis (service beyond jurisdiction), (1893) App. Cas. 339

694

370

506

Ashton & Parsons Ltd. v. Gould (appealable amount), (1909) 7
C.L.R., 598

Associated Northern Collieries; The King and the Attorney.
General (Commonwealth) v. (trusts, combines and monopolies
-inter-state trade), (1912) 14 C.L.R. 387. Per ISAACS, J.

PAGE.

683

267, 285, 607

Attorney-General (Commonwealth) v. Collector of Customs of New
South Wales (taxation of State imports), (1908) 5 C.L.R. 818, 298, 335, 348
v. Ah Sheung (immigrant habeas corpus), (1907)

4 C.L.R. 949

v. Adelaide Steamship Co. (restraint of trade-
appeal to privy Council dismissed), (1913) 18 C.L.R. 30; (1914)
A.C. 781

v. Colonial Sugar Refining Co. Ltd. (appeal from
High Court to Privy Council-Royal Commission Act-in-
validity, (1913) 17 C.L.R. 644; (1914) A.C. 237

(1906) A.C. 542

515

609-

69, 93, 96, 134, 192, 270, 602, 605
(Canada) v. Cain and Gilhula (extra-territorial),
137, 176, 487, 488, 596-
v. Attorney-General (Ontario), (1898) A.C. 700 ..
(Queensland) v. Attorney-General for the Com-
monwealth (Commonwealth taxation of leasehold estates in
crown lands), (1915) 20 C.L.R., 148; 22 C.L.R. 322 70, 345, 347, 634,

832

889, 893, 909

(Ontario) v. Attorney-General (Dominion) (con-
flict of Dominion and Provincial powers), (1896) A.C. 348, at p.
363

[ocr errors]

v. The Attorney-General (Canada) (conflict of
Dominion and Provincial powers), (1912) A.C. 571 ..

110, 112

145, 146, 796

(New South Wales) v. Jackson (appeal in criminal
cases), (1906) 3 C.L.R. 730

694

(New South Wales) v. Brewery Employees' Union
of New South Wales (union workers' trade mark-invalidity),
(1908) 6 C.L.R., 469
60, 69, 83, 185, 202, 268, 300, 370, 478, 901
v. Collector of Customs (New South Wales)
(federal taxation of State imports), (1903) 3 S.R.N.S.W. 115 ..
v. Collector of Customs (State to pay customs

duties on State imports), (1908) 5 C.L.R., 818 ..

906

58, 907

155

150

(Manitoba) v. Manitoba Licence Holders Associa-
tion (conflict of Dominion and provincial powers), (1902) A.C. 73
(Quebec) v. Queen Insurance Co. (substance of
law regarded rather than form), (1877) 3 App. Cas. 1090
Australian Builders Labourers' Federation; The King v.; Ex parte
Jones & Cooper (dispute extending), (1914) 18 C.L.R. 224
Australian Boot Trade Employees' Federation v. Whybrow & Co.
(No. 1) (Federal awards and State wages boards), (1910) 10
C.L.R. 266
63, 75, 103, 186, 203, 270, 549
(No. 2) (common rule), (1910)

v.

66, 585, 701

64, 187, 543, 553

11 C.L.R., 311 ..
Australian Agricultural Co. v. Federated Engine-Drivers' and Fire-
men's Association of Australasia (industrial agreement-con-
ditions of validity), (1913) 17 C.L.R., 261 ..
65, 545, 546, 665-
Australian Steamship Company v. Malcolm (inter-state shipping),
(1915) 19 C.L.R. 298

V.

(1915) 19 C.L.R. 298

214. 868

(navigation and shipping),

68, 291, 304

« PrejšnjaNaprej »