STATE SOVEREIGNTY

Southland Times, Issue 18834, 29 May 1920, Page 5

STATE SOVEREIGNTY

A QUEENSLAND CONTROVERSY,

SUGGESTED FUNCTION OF THE PRIVY COUNCIL.

By Telegraph.—Press Assn.—Copyright ) (Australian and N.Z, Cable' Association.! LONDON, May 27. Mr Berriedalc Keith, late of the Colonial Office, writing in connection with Queensland labour enactments, suggests that the Judicial Committee of the Pi ivy Council provide the nucleus of an arbitration council of the highc.it standing and impartial.ty as it includ.es i.oni'iiton judge:-'. British investors wou.d benefit by the substitution for the present precarious possibility of disallowance of legislation unfairly affecting their rights of an assurance of impartial tietermination of compensation due to them owing to a change in the terms of their contracts with overseas Governments. BREACH OF CONST 11 JTIONAL RULES. BRITISH AUTMuniTY’B VIEW. REPLY BY MR THEODORE. LONDON. May 27. (Received May 28, S p.m.i Mr 1 iu'Oiiovp, the Queensland Prank r, interviewed, expressed ,-uipra-e (iuit a great authority like Mr Berrictiale Keith should allege that UK re was a breach of constitutional rules in connection with (he appointment of a partisan as Acting-Governor, the nvamping ot the Upper House, and the tact that the Acting-Governor had not exercised

his right ol rtverving a Bill because- tt prejudiced the rights of British subjects outside the State. Mr Theodore said that if the Govern inent acted unron;a it r.i ionclly the point might easily be te-tc : . IP: added: “Even Governors invariably hold definite pol.ticol ■pinions prior to appointment. Therefore they may all be classed ns politic.til partisans. The appointment of new members.

;•-.••• tt to the extent of swamping, has never Twit considered uaconstituiiomd. It hn« occurred in t event veers in New South Wales and New Zealand.” Mr Theodore admitted that the refereniiiii provides Queensland with a menus of tattling disputes, but it involves great de ay and expense. He does not. regard Keith’;; suggestion to establish an Imperial ■■bit ration tribunal as practicable, as it nvolvrs the reactionary principle of liniila•fou of sov-t reign rights. “It will not find solitaiv supporter in the Dominions," said Mr Thtni’ore. ‘‘Non-interference is the ■■■'Test doctrine.” FORMER GOVERNOR’S OPINION. SOME RESTRAINT KKCE-SARV. LONDON, May 27. (R'" , e'’ved M-v 29, PL.S a.m.t Sir Grra ■’ Strickland, late Governor rri Mew South Wales, •■taps t'<at Tori Mdiv--■■nnot lie axp-atad to disallow tlv* arts of the Queensland Governin'-nt. but Mr B'U' -irdale Keith’s remedy is oprn I" grave •'ldeation. The Austral!-!-, ipglt Court is •ha pr'-oer authority to decide such sob Data. P i;iiH be made plain to investors tiiat appeals on loaa.i matt; rs to a distant B<--i at ary o f sna.-. re futile. The future ■ la-as; of democratic government appears •o require that every executive should ha I’abla to sonv* control. •■V-i- experience in Tia-m "niti. Western A■ ■--( —din. an- 1 New Sooth Walrs !-a ad-tv, ••Glows t'i-l a.-though Mini-tars di-dike it, the .-lealnrs a-'nie-iale (he exercise o' a.n im guthotjty in their behalf. Governors honl-1 1" able to deter M’nh'tar? from flagrant breaches of th-* r-n--(|ti:tion by forcing p.j'petils' to the rle-tori: on rare occasions.”