DOCSLIB.ORG

SUPREME COURT of INDIA Page 1 of 181 PETITIONER: H

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
SUPREME COURT of INDIA Page 1 of 181 PETITIONER: H http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 1 of 181 PETITIONER: H. H. MAHARAJADHIRAJA MADHAV RAO JIWAJI RAOSCINDIA BAHADUR Vs. RESPONDENT: UNION OF INDIA DATE OF JUDGMENT: 15/12/1970 BENCH: SHAH, J.C. BENCH: SHAH, J.C. HIDAYATULLAH, M. (CJ) SIKRI, S.M. SHELAT, J.M. BHARGAVA, VISHISHTHA MITTER, G.K. VAIDYIALINGAM, C.A. HEGDE, K.S. GROVER, A.N. RAY, A.N. DUA, I.D. CITATION: 1971 AIR 530 1971 SCR (3) 9 1971 SCC (1) 85 CITATOR INFO : R 1972 SC 202 (7) RF 1973 SC1461 (186,700,703,1100,1609,2152,21 RF 1975 SC2299 (275,637) E 1976 SC1207 (46,546) D 1977 SC1361 (192) R 1978 SC 803 (30,34) R 1981 SC1284 (1) RF 1982 SC 710 (25) RF 1986 SC1126 (47) D 1987 SC 522 (51) R 1987 SC1010 (71) RF 1989 SC1534 (11) ACT: Constitution of India, 1950-Article 366(22)-Scope of- Recognition of Rulers by President-Order by President "derecognising" all Rulers--Validity of order-Power, if political-If exercise of paramountcy rights. Constitution of India 1950-Article 291-Article if creates an obligation to pay Privy Purse-Repudiation of obligation if act of State--"Charged on .... the Consolidated Fund of India", meaning of-Article if a provision relating to" covenant within the meaning of Article 363. Constitution of India, 1950-Article 363-Exclusion of jurisdiction of Courts-Scope of exclusionary clauses- Determining the meaning of articles 366(22), 291, 362 and 363, if within bar of Article 363-"Dispute arising out of provision of the Constitution relating to covenant", meaning Artic le if "recreation" of paramountcy. Constitution of India, 1950-Article 362-If a provision "relating to" Covenent etc. within the meaning of Article 363. Constitution of India, 1950-Articles 19(1)(f) and 31 and Article 32-Order of President under Article 366(22)--Order http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 2 of 181 of President under Article 366(22) "derecognising" Rulers- Repudiation of liability to pay Privy Purse and denial of rights and privileges-If violation of fundamental rights- Maintainability of petition-Privy Purse-If property. HEADNOTE: On the promulgation of the Indian Independence Act, 1947, the Princely States adjoining the Dominion of India merged with the Dominion of India. The instruments of merger provided for_the integration of the States and guaranteed to the Rulers the Privy Purse, succession according to law and custom to the gaddi of the State and personal rights, privileges, dignities and titles. These instruments were concurred in and guaranteed by the Dominion of India. Later, the States integrated with the Union of India under the Constitution of India, 1950, the Rulers abandoning all authority in regard to their territories. Special provisions were enacted in the Constitution regarding Privy Purses and the rights and privileges of the erstwhile Rulers. By article 291, the sum-, guaranteed by the Dominion of India to any Ruler as Privy Purse under any covenant or agreement was to be charged on and paid out of the Consolidated Fund of India and the. sums so paid were to be exempt from all taxes on income. By article 362 the Parliament, the State Legislatures and the executive of the Union and the States were enjoined to have due regard to the guarantees and assurances under the covenants and agreements between the Governments of the Dominion of India and the heads of the former Indian States. Also, provisions were made in various statutes conferring on the "Rulers" certain privileges and benefits. By Art. 366(22) a "Ruler" was defined to mean the prince, chief or other person by whom covenant and agreements. were entered into and who "for the time being" was recognised by the President as the Ruler and included any person who "for the time being" 10 was recognised by the President as the successor of such Ruler. Article 363 excluded the jurisdiction of the Supreme Court and all other courts "in respect of any dispute arising out of any provision of a treaty, agreement, covenant etc." or in any dispute "in respect of any right accruing under or any liability or obligation arising out of any of the provisions of the Constitution relating to any such treaty, agreement, covenant" etc. On September 2, 1970, a Bill intituled the Constitution (Twenty Fourth Amendment) Bill 1970, and providing that "Articles 291 and 362 of the Constitution and clause (22) of article 366 shall be omitted" was introduced in the Lok Sabha. The Bill was declared passed. On September 5, 1970, the motion for consideration of the Bill did not obtain in the Rajya Sabha the requisite majority of not less than two-thirds of the members present and voting as required by Art. 368 of the Constitution. The motion for introduction of the Bill was declared lost. A few hours thereafter the President of India, purporting to exercise power under cl. (22) of Art. 366 of the Constitution signed an instrument withdrawing recognition of all the Rulers. A communication to the effect was sent to all Rulers in India who had been previously recognised under art. 366(22) of the Constitution. The petitioners moved this Court under Art. 32 of the Constitution challenging the order of the President "derecognising" them as unconstitutional, ultra vires and http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 3 of 181 void. They contended that the President had no power to withdraw recognition of Ruler once recognised; that assuming the President had such power, exercise of the power was coupled with duty to recognise his successor; that the order of the President "derecognsing" all the Rulers en masse amounted to arbitrary exercise of power for a collateral purpose; that the Order violated the constitutional mandates in articles 291 and 362; that article 291 created an obligation in the Union of India to pay the Privy Purse and Privy Purse was property; and that the Order being one without authority of law infringed the guarantee of the fundamental rights under Arts. 19(1)(f), 21 and 31 of the Constitution. The Union of India contended, inter alia, that the petition was not maintainable, because, the source of the right to receive the Privy Purse and to be accorded the privileges claimed was a political agreement and the privy purse was in the nature of a political pension; that in recognising or derecognising a ruler the President exercised a political power which was a sovereign power and that the rights and obligations were liable to by varied or repudiated in accordance with "State policy"; that the jurisdiction of the Courts to enforce rights and obligations arising out of the covenant was excluded, because, the rights and obligations arose out of act of state; that the concept of paramountly of the British Crown was inherited by the Union of India and therefore recognition of Rulership was a "gift of the President"; and further that the petitioners stood excluded by article 363, for, they were seeking either to enforce the covenants and agreements or were seeking to enforce the provisions of the Constitution "relating to" such covenants. HELD: Per Hidayatullah, C.J. Shah, Vaidialingam, Hedge, Grover and Dua, JJ. (Mitter and Ray, JJ. dissenting). The Order of the President "derecognising" the Rulers is ultra vires and illegal. [69 G; 100 C] (Per Hidayatullah, C.J. (1) The action of the President withdrawing recognition of all Rulers is ultra vires article 366(22) and a nullity. Article 366(22) neither expressly nor by implication places the power in the hands of the President to say that although a Ruler is in existence or 11 a successor is available there shall be no ruler of any particular state. The definition contemplates the existence of the Ruler "for the time being". The phrase "for the time being" cannot mean that any person can be appointed who has no claim whatever or that temporary appointments may be made or that no appointment need be made. The continuity of a Ruler of an Indian State is obligatory so long as the Ruler is alive or a successor can be found. The obligation to recognise a Ruler is bound up with the other guarantees contained in articles 291 and 362 and the definition in article 366(22) is merely the key to find a particular Ruler. The withdrawal of recognition from all the Rulers renders the guarantees, as also the relevant articles of the Constitution, inoperative. [58 A-H] (ii) The right to recognise a ruler, from out of several claimants, is not an act of paramountcy. The selection has to be in accordance with law and custom. The Constitution gave the right to the President to recognise a Ruler for the time being; but it cannot be stretched to give a paramountly of the same character as that enjoyed by the British Crown. To claim such a paramountcy one has to, ignore completely the arrangements by which the Rulers parted with their territories and ruling rights and were assured of their privy purses and privileges. The rights became consti- http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 4 of 181 tutionally protected rights which so long as the Ruler's line was not extinct belonged to the Ruler "for the time being. In short, when the guarantees were given by the Constitution, paramountcy if any, went out. Article 362 is the converse of paramountcy inasmuch as it compels the two limbs of government to have "due regard"' to the guarantees and assurances given to the Rulers. Nor can article 363 be said to "recreate" paramountcy. That article was intended to keep certain matters outside the jurisdiction of the courts.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • E:\Review\Or-2021\Or Feb-March
    ISSN 0970-8669 Odisha Review Political Evolution in Ex-Princely State of Patna Under the Dynamic Leadership of Maharaja Rajendra Narayan Singh Deo Dr. Suresh Prasad Sarangi Abstract: (The ex-princely State of Patna was ruled by Maharaja Rajendra Narayan Singh Deo from 1931 to 1948. During his tenure as Maharaja, Sri Singh Deo tried to introduce a number of democratic reforms for the smooth working and good governance of Patna State. This article is a modest approach to unravel the dynamic administration unleashed by Maharaja Sri Singh Deo in ex-princely state of Patna during his tenure as Maharaja) Keywords: (Governance, Political identity, Suzerain Powers, Democratic set up, feudatory state) Introduction: Deo and Rajendra Narayan Singh Deo were most The history of Patna State dates back to popular and benevolent ruler of the ex-princely Ramai Deo, the real founder of the state who state of Patna. History always remembers founded the Chauhan dynasty in 1320 A.D. Chauhan dynasty of Patna State for their own approximately. But special identity and heroism. It Ramachandra Mallick could maintain its own special argued that the real state of identity in the history of Patna came into exist in the contemporary era and year 1159 A.D. Prior to the particularly out of twenty-six rule of Ramai Deo, the State feudatory states of Odisha of Patna was ruled by the whose existence was found at eight Mullicks or Pradhan. the time of their merger into the This system came to an end Indian Union. Thus, Patna state when Ramai Deo killed all was one of the premier states the Pradhans and declared of all the princely states in himself as the king of Patna.
    [Show full text]
  • Ancient Hindu Rock Monuments
    ISSN: 2455-2631 © November 2020 IJSDR | Volume 5, Issue 11 ANCIENT HINDU ROCK MONUMENTS, CONFIGURATION AND ARCHITECTURAL FEATURES OF AHILYA DEVI FORT OF HOLKAR DYNASTY, MAHISMATI REGION, MAHESHWAR, NARMADA VALLEY, CENTRAL INDIA Dr. H.D. DIWAN*, APARAJITA SHARMA**, Dr. S.S. BHADAURIA***, Dr. PRAVEEN KADWE***, Dr. D. SANYAL****, Dr. JYOTSANA SHARMA***** *Pt. Ravishankar Shukla University Raipur C.G. India. **Gurukul Mahila Mahavidyalaya Raipur, Pt. R.S.U. Raipur C.G. ***Govt. NPG College of Science, Raipur C.G. ****Architectural Dept., NIT, Raipur C.G. *****Gov. J. Yoganandam Chhattisgarh College, Raipur C.G. Abstract: Holkar Dynasty was established by Malhar Rao on 29th July 1732. Holkar belonging to Maratha clan of Dhangar origin. The Maheshwar lies in the North bank of Narmada river valley and well known Ancient town of Mahismati region. It had been capital of Maratha State. The fort was built by Great Maratha Queen Rajmata Ahilya Devi Holkar and her named in 1767 AD. Rani Ahliya Devi was a prolific builder and patron of Hindu Temple, monuments, Palaces in Maheshwar and Indore and throughout the Indian territory pilgrimages. Ahliya Devi Holkar ruled on the Indore State of Malwa Region, and changed the capital to Maheshwar in Narmada river bank. The study indicates that the Narmada river flows from East to west in a straight course through / lineament zone. The Fort had been constructed on the right bank (North Wards) of River. Geologically, the region is occupied by Basaltic Deccan lava flow rocks of multiple layers, belonging to Cretaceous in age. The river Narmada flows between Northwards Vindhyan hillocks and southwards Satpura hills.
    [Show full text]
  • What the Crown May Do
    WHAT THE CROWN MAY DO 1. It is now established, at least at the level of the Court of Appeal (so that Court has recently stated)1, that, absent some prohibition, a Government minister may do anything which any individual may do. The purpose of this paper is to explain why this rule is misconceived and why it, and the conception of the “prerogative” which it necessarily assumes, should be rejected as a matter of constitutional law. 2. The suggested rule raises two substantive issues of constitutional law: (i) who ought to decide in what new activities the executive may engage, in what circumstances and under what conditions; and (ii) what is the scope for abuse that such a rule may create and should it be left without legal control. 3. As Sir William Wade once pointed out (in a passage subsequently approved by the Appellate Committee2), “The powers of public authorities are...essentially different from those of private persons. A man making his will may, subject to any rights of his dependants, dispose of his property just as he may wish. He may act out of malice or a spirit of revenge, but in law this does not affect his exercise of power. In the same way a private person has an absolute power to release a debtor, or, where the law permits, to evict a tenant, regardless of his motives. This is unfettered discretion.” If a minister may do anything that an individual may do, he may pursue any purpose which an individual may do when engaged in such activities.
    [Show full text]
  • Statute Law Revision Bill 2007 ————————
    ———————— AN BILLE UM ATHCHO´ IRIU´ AN DLI´ REACHTU´ IL 2007 STATUTE LAW REVISION BILL 2007 ———————— Mar a tionscnaı´odh As initiated ———————— ARRANGEMENT OF SECTIONS Section 1. Definitions. 2. General statute law revision repeal and saver. 3. Specific repeals. 4. Assignment of short titles. 5. Amendment of Short Titles Act 1896. 6. Amendment of Short Titles Act 1962. 7. Miscellaneous amendments to post-1800 short titles. 8. Evidence of certain early statutes, etc. 9. Savings. 10. Short title and collective citation. SCHEDULE 1 Statutes retained PART 1 Pre-Union Irish Statutes 1169 to 1800 PART 2 Statutes of England 1066 to 1706 PART 3 Statutes of Great Britain 1707 to 1800 PART 4 Statutes of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland 1801 to 1922 [No. 5 of 2007] SCHEDULE 2 Statutes Specifically Repealed PART 1 Pre-Union Irish Statutes 1169 to 1800 PART 2 Statutes of England 1066 to 1706 PART 3 Statutes of Great Britain 1707 to 1800 PART 4 Statutes of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland 1801 to 1922 ———————— 2 Acts Referred to Bill of Rights 1688 1 Will. & Mary, Sess. 2. c. 2 Documentary Evidence Act 1868 31 & 32 Vict., c. 37 Documentary Evidence Act 1882 45 & 46 Vict., c. 9 Dower Act, 1297 25 Edw. 1, Magna Carta, c. 7 Drainage and Improvement of Lands Supplemental Act (Ireland) (No. 2) 1867 31 & 32 Vict., c. 3 Dublin Hospitals Regulation Act 1856 19 & 20 Vict., c. 110 Evidence Act 1845 8 & 9 Vict., c. 113 Forfeiture Act 1639 15 Chas., 1. c. 3 General Pier and Harbour Act 1861 Amendment Act 1862 25 & 26 Vict., c.
    [Show full text]
  • Ielrc.Org/Content/E1111.Pdf
    State of Himachal Pradesh Vs. Union of India (UOI) and Ors., 2011 Supreme Court of India, Judgment of 27 September 2011 This document is available at ielrc.org/content/e1111.pdf Note: This document is put online by the International Environmental Law Research Centre (IELRC) for information purposes. This document is not an official version of the text and as such is only provided as a source of information for interested readers. IELRC makes no claim as to the accuracy of the text reproduced which should under no circumstances be deemed to constitute the official version of the document. International Environmental Law Research Centre [email protected] – www.ielrc.org JUDGMENT A.K. Patnaik, J. 1. This dispute between the State of Himachal Pradesh (Plaintiff), on the one hand, and the Union of India (defendant No. 1), State of Punjab (defendant No. 2), State of Haryana (defendant No. 3), State of Rajasthan (defendant No. 4) and Union Territory of Chandigarh (defendant No. 5), on the other hand, under Article 131 of the Constitution of India relates to the power generated in the Bhakra-Nangal and Beas Projects. The Case of the Plaintiff (State of Himachal Pradesh) in the plaint 2. The Bhakra dam across the river Satluj was proposed in the year 1944 in the Bilaspur State. The construction of Bhakra dam was to result in submergence of a large territory of the Bilaspur State but would benefit the Province of Punjab. Hence, the Raja of Bilaspur agreed to the proposal for construction of the Bhakra dam only on certain terms and conditions detailed in a draft agreement which was to be executed on behalf of the Raja of Bilaspur and the Province of Punjab.
    [Show full text]
  • Polity (PRE-Cure)
    Polity (PRE-Cure) April 2020 - March 2021 Visit our website www.sleepyclasses.com or our YouTube channel for entire GS Course FREE of cost Also Available: Prelims Crash Course || Prelims Test Series T.me/SleepyClasses Table of Contents Links to the videos on YouTube .................1 32. GARUD Portal ...................................18 1. Punjab Village and Small Towns Act 3 33. Samudra Setu ....................................18 2. Sections 269 & 270 IPC ................3 34. Online Summit of NAM Contact Group 3. Pradhan Mantri Garib Kalyan Yojana 18 3 35. “The Saras Collection” on the 4. New Domicile Rules for J&K .........5 Government e-Marketplace Portal 19 5. Medical Devices notified as Drugs 5 36. Dilution of Labour Laws .................20 6. NPPA ...................................................6 37. Data sharing under Arogya Setu Act 20 7. Lifeline UDAN ...................................6 38. Shetkar Committee recommendations 8. Stranded in India Portal .................6 accepted ...............................................21 9. PM CARES Fund ...............................6 39. GOAL Programme ............................22 10. PMNRF ...............................................7 40. Project Arth Ganga ..........................23 11. National Security Act .....................7 41. One Nation, One Channel- Education 12. MPLAD Scheme ...............................8 Initiatives .............................................23 13. Arogya Setu .......................................9 42. National Test Abhyaas App ...........24
    [Show full text]
  • The Kalinga Collection of Nazarana Coins Auction 41
    The Kalinga Collection of Nazarana Coins Auction 41 10 Sep. 2015 | The Diplomat Highlight of Auction 39 63 64 133 111 90 96 97 117 78 103 110 112 138 122 125 142 166 169 Auction 41 The Kalinga Collection of Nazarana Coins (with Proof & OMS Coins) Thursday, 10th September 2015 7.00 pm onwards VIEWING Noble Room Monday 7 Sept. 2015 11:00 am - 6:00 pm The Diplomat Hotel Behind Taj Mahal Palace, Tuesday 8 Sept. 2015 11:00 am - 6:00 pm Opp. Starbucks Coffee, Wednesday 9 Sept. 2015 11:00 am - 6:00 pm Apollo Bunder At Rajgor’s SaleRoom Mumbai 400001 605 Majestic Shopping Centre, Near Church, 144 JSS Road, Opera House, Mumbai 400004 Thursday 10 Sept. 2015 3:00 pm - 6:30 pm At the Diplomat Category LOTS Coins of Mughal Empire 1-75 DELIVERY OF LOTS Coins of Independent Kingdoms 76-80 Delivery of Auction Lots will be done from the Princely States of India 81-202 Mumbai Office of the Rajgor’s. European Powers in India 203-236 BUYING AT RAJGOR’S Republic of India 237-245 For an overview of the process, see the Easy to buy at Rajgor’s Foreign Coins 246-248 CONDITIONS OF SALE Front cover: Lot 111 • Back cover: Lot 166 This auction is subject to Important Notices, Conditions of Sale and to Reserves To download the free Android App on your ONLINE CATALOGUE Android Mobile Phone, View catalogue and leave your bids online at point the QR code reader application on your www.Rajgors.com smart phone at the image on left side.
    [Show full text]
  • Annual Report 2 0 1 2 - 1 3
    Annual Report 2 0 1 2 - 1 3 Ministry of Power Government of India Shram Shakti Bhawan, Rafi Marg, New Delhi-110 001 Website : www.powermin.nic.in Shri Pranab Mukherjee, Hon’ble President of India with Shri Jyotiraditya M. Scindia, Hon’ble Union Minister of State for Power (Independent Charge) at the National Energy Conservation Day function CONTENTS Sl. No. Chapter Page No. (s) 1. Performance Highlights 5 2. Organisational Set Up and Functions of the Ministry of Power 9 3. Capacity Addition Programme in the XIIth Plan 11 4. Generation & Power Supply Position 23 5. Status of Ultra Mega Power Projects 35 6. Transmission 37 7. Status of Power Sector Reforms 41 8. Rural Electrification Programme 43 9. Re-Structured Accelerated Power Development and Reforms Programme (R-APDRP) 45 10. Energy Conservation 49 11. Renovation and Modernisation of Thermal Power Stations 53 12. Private Sector Participation in Power Sector 57 13. International Cooperation 59 14. Power Development Activities in North-Eastern Region 67 15. Central Electricity Authority 75 16. Central Electricity Regulatory Commission (CERC) 79 17. Appellate Tribunal for Electricity (APTEL) 83 Public Sector Undertakings: 18 NTPC Limited 85 19. NHPC Limited 105 20. Power Grid Corporation of India Ltd. (PGCIL) 111 21. Power Finance Corporation Ltd. (PFC) 115 22. Rural Electrification Corporation Ltd. (REC) 125 23. North Eastern Electric Power Corporation Limited (NEEPCO) 133 Joint Venture Corporations : 24. SJVN Limited (SJVNL) 135 25. THDC India Limited (THDCIL) 139 Statutory Bodies : 26. Damodar Valley Corporation (DVC) 143 27. Bhakra Beas Management Board (BBMB) 149 28. Bureau of Energy Efficiency (BEE) 155 Autonomous Bodies : 29.
    [Show full text]
  • Insta Static Quiz
    INSTA STATIC QUIZ MAY 2020 WWW.INSIGHTSONINDIA.COM WWW.INSIGHTSACTIVELEARN.COM www.insightsonindia.com 1 InsightsIAS Table of Contents 1. POLITY ............................................................................................................................................... 3 2. GEOGRAPHY .................................................................................................................................... 15 3. ECONOMY ....................................................................................................................................... 25 4. ART AND CULTURE ........................................................................................................................... 34 5. HISTORY........................................................................................................................................... 43 6. ENVIRONMENT ................................................................................................................................ 50 www.insightsonindia.com 2 InsightsIAS 1. Polity 1) The Indian constitution is a written one unlike in some of the other democracies. What does it imply? 1. The form of government in India has been codified in the constitution to reduce political and administrative conflicts. 2. All the laws made by Parliament are to be written down as a part of the constitution. 3. Only because of a written constitution, citizens are able to enjoy fundamental rights. Select the correct answer code: a) 1, 2 b) 2, 3 c) 1, 3 d) 1 only Solution:
    [Show full text]
  • Riding Through Change History, Horses, and the Restructuring of Tradition in Rajasthan
    Riding Through Change History, Horses, and the Restructuring of Tradition in Rajasthan By Elizabeth Thelen Senior Thesis Comparative History of Ideas University of Washington Seattle, Washington June 2006 Advisor: Dr. Kathleen Noble CONTENTS Page Introduction……………………………………………………………………… 1 Notes on Interpretation and Method History…………………………………………………………………………… 7 Horses in South Asia Rise of the Rajputs Delhi Sultanate (1192-1398 CE) Development of Rajput States The Mughal Empire (1526-1707 CE) Decline of the Mughal Empire British Paramountcy Independence (1947-1948 CE) Post-Independence to Modern Times Sources of Tradition……………………………………………………………… 33 Horses in Art Technical Documents Folk Sayings and Stories Col. James Tod Rana Pratap and Cetak Building a Tradition……………………………………………………………… 49 Economics Tourism and Tradition Publicizing Tradition Breeding a Tradition…………………………………………………………….. 58 The Marwari Horse “It's in my blood.” Conclusion……………………………………………………………………….. 67 Bibliography……………………………………………………………………… 70 ILLUSTRATIONS Figure Page 1. District Map of Rajasthan…………………………………………………… 2 2. Province Map of India………………………………………………………. 2 3. Bone Structure in Marwari, Akhal-Teke and Arab Horses…………………. 9 4. Rajput horse paintings……………………………………………................. 36 5. Shalihotra manuscript pages……………………………………………….... 37 6. Representations of Cetak……………………………………………………. 48 7. Maharaj Narendra Singh of Mewar performing ashvapuja…………………. 54 8. Marwari Horses……………………………………………………………… 59 1 Introduction The academic discipline of history follows strict codes of acceptable evidence and interpretation in its search to understand and explain the past. Yet, what this discipline frequently neglects is an examination of how history informs tradition. Local knowledge of history, while it may contradict available historical evidence, is an important indicator of the social, economic, and political pressures a group is experiencing. History investigates processes over time, while tradition is decidedly anachronistic in its function and conceptualization.
    [Show full text]
  • THE FINANCIAL SYSTEM of the UNITED KINGDOM ~~ ~.Fl'\/.\..~ 9 '
    THE FINANCIAL SYSTEM OF THE UNITED KINGDOM ~~ ~.fl'\/.\..~ 9 '. • MACMILLAN AND CO., LIMITED LONDON· BOMBAY· CALCUTTA MELBOURNE THE MACMILLAN COMPANY NEW YORK· BOSTON • CHICAGO DALLAS· SAN FRANCISCO THE MACMILLAN CO. OF CANADA, LTD. TORONTO THE FINANCIAL SYSTEM OF THE UNITED KINGDOM BY HENRY HIGGS, C.B. MACMILLAN AND CO., LIMITED ST. MARTIN'S STREET, LONDON 19 1 4 COPYRIGHT )<7. ~:NI f4 ~Lr33 PREFACE THIS volume was prepared at the suggestion of the late Sir Edward Hamilton, who had in vain cherished 'during a life~ime in the Treasury the project of publishing a connected account of our financial procedure, which he believed to be m.uch needed by members of Parliament, by Government Departments, and by the public at large. Want of leisure compelled him to defer the execution of his plan un'W- his retire­ ment from'the service, when he hoped to .treat the subject with greater freedom of comment and criticism than were permissible in an active official. But on his retirement his health was too broken for the task for• which he was so exceptionally qualified. , In attempting to observe his wishes I have limited myself, so 'far as possible, to d~scribing things as they are here li-nd now, not as they have been, as they might be, or as they are in other countries. All that is offered is a summary exposition of our financial system, its organisation, me~hods, and forms of procedure. So far as I am aware nothing is here stated which is not to be found in various official publications, the Statutes, the Standing Orders and Debates of Parliament, the Reports of Public Accounts v VI THE FINANCIAL SYSTEM Oommittees, Select Oommittees, and Royal Oommis­ sions, in papers and accounts presented to the House of Oommons, and in such works as Sir Erskine May's Treatise on the Law, Privileges, Proceedings, and Usages 'of Parliament, Sir O.
    [Show full text]
  • Modernising English Criminal Legislation 1267-1970
    Public Administration Research; Vol. 6, No. 1; 2017 ISSN 1927-517x E-ISSN 1927-5188 Published by Canadian Center of Science and Education Modernising English Criminal Legislation 1267-1970 Graham McBain1,2 1 Peterhouse, Cambridge, UK 2 Harvard Law School, USA Correspondence: Graham McBain, 21 Millmead Terrace, Guildford, Surrey GU2 4AT, UK. E-mail: [email protected] Received: April 2, 2017 Accepted: April 19, 2017 Online Published: April 27, 2017 doi:10.5539/par.v6n1p53 URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.5539/par.v6n1p53 1. INTRODUCTION English criminal - and criminal procedure - legislation is in a parlous state. Presently, there are some 286 Acts covering criminal law and criminal procedure with the former comprising c.155 Acts. Therefore, it is unsurprising that Judge CJ, in his book, The Safest Shield (2015), described the current volume of criminal legislation as 'suffocating'. 1 If one considers all legislation extant from 1267 - 1925 (see Appendix A) a considerable quantity comprises criminal law and criminal procedure - most of which is (likely) obsolete.2 Given this, the purpose of this article is to look at criminal legislation in the period 1267-1970 as well as criminal procedure legislation in the period 1267-1925. Its conclusions are simple: (a) the Law Commission should review all criminal legislation pre-1890 as well as a few pieces thereafter (see Appendix B). It should also review (likely) obsolete common law crimes (see Appendix C); (b) at the same time, the Ministry of Justice (or Home Office) should consolidate all criminal legislation post-1890 into 4 Crime Acts.3 These should deal with: (a) Sex crimes; (b) Public order crimes; (c) Crimes against the person; (d) Property and financial crimes (see 7).
    [Show full text]