denote not conquest, but independence; they made use of it in their titles, not to indicate any claim to imperialistic tendencies but to assert their own freedom from external control. The origin of this use goes back to the days of the Roman Empire in Britain. Southern Britain had formed an integral part of that Empire, and the claims of Rome had never been formally abandoned. The mission under St. Augustine sent out by Pope Gregory to Kent and the subsequent success of that mission in converting many of the English to Christianity, had brought the country once again within the spiritual jurisdiction of the Imperial City and had revived the semi-dormant Roman tradition. By the re-creation of the Roman Empire itself under Charlemagne in the year 800, the idea of Latin domination was still further emphasized and it became an issue of prac tical politics. Although Charlemagne himself did not attempt to exercise any authority over Britain, the pretensions to such jurisdiction were implicit in his titles and his office. But in the next century some of the successors to Charlemagne were inclined to make explicit what had been considered heretofore as only implicit. Thus, to repudiate this idea, at the time when the powerful Saxon King of Germany had been crowned as Emperor in Rome as a true successor in the imperial line of Honorius, -Edgar the Peaceable, King of Wessex asserted his own independence and the autonomy of his kingdom by proclaiming himself "Totius Albionis Imperatur Augustus." This high sounding title to which, I take it, Mr. MacKenzie refers, seemingly ridiculous when used by a ruler whose kingdom extended only from the Thames to the Channel, takes on a new meaning when it is considered that it was meant to show, not only a superiority over the other kings in Albion, but also the proclamation of a sovereignty independent of and equal to that of the German overlord of Continental Christendom.

Even in later history, the theory that England was a part of the dominion of the Holy Roman Empire still appeared. Edward II. took the precaution to declare formally that "regnum Angliæ ab omni subjectione imperiali esse liberrimum"; and Edward III. found it necessary formally to repudiate the claim to superiority of Lewis the Bavarian.

But as time went on, the power of the Holy Roman Empire waned. Its place of influence, however, was taken by the secularized and triumphant Papacy. By 1300 the Church had humiliated and well-nigh overthrown the Empire and claimed not only spiritual but temporal authority as well. The climax came in the great Jubilee of 1300, when Boniface VIII. appeared before the Roman multitude in full armour and proclaiming: "I am not only Pope, but Cæsar." These claims to universal empire aroused the rising national spirit of the Teutonic peoples and it was the passion for insular independence which enabled Henry VIII. to defy the Papacy in the Sixteenth Century. It is interesting to note that, in repudiating the Papal supremacy in the Sixteenth Century, Henry VIII. used precisely the same term as that employed in the Tenth Century by Edgar to show his independence of the Holy Roman Empire. Henry asserted that his Kingdom was an empire and he explained that he had no thought of conquest or external dominion, but that he was merely concerned to maintain the autonomy of his monarchy and the authority and supremacy of his throne. The preamble to the Act of Supremacy-24 Henry VIII., ch. 12-begins "Where by divers sundry old authentic histories and

chronicles, it is manifestly declared and expressed that the nation of England is an Empire, and so hath been accepted in the world; governed by one supreme head and King, and having the dignity and royal estate of the imperial crown of the same, unto whom a body politic, compact of all sorts and degrees of people, divided in terms and by names of spirituality and temporality, been bounden and owen to bear, next to God, a natural and humble obedience," and so forth.

Again in the Eighteenth Century, we find Blackstone in his Commentalies — Vol. I., page 242, asserting that "The legislature uses Empire' to assert that our King is sovereign and independent within these his dominions."

Thus, the term "empire" or "imperium" and its personal correlative of "emperor" or "imperator" is really a declaration of independence. It proclaims freedom from foreign jurisdiction and not a claim to exercise authority over foreigners. It is a statement of insular autonomy and not an assertion of imperialistic tendencies. It was used in respect of England herself, and had no reference to any overseas or European territory. It was rather a term to denote liberty and self-determination and not conquest or subjugation. In this sense, it is a political term, the use of which we may well cherish.

Yours very truly,

Toronto.

H. M. CODY.

CURRENT EVENTS.

DALHOUSIE LAW SCHOOL.-This is the first year at Dalhousie Law School when students have been required to take two years of Arts before beginning the study of Law. Accordingly it was expected that the regis tration would be much smaller than in former years. In spite of the increase of the entrance standards the first year class consists of nineteen students, most of them being Bachelors of Arts or Science and all of them having at least two years of preliminary University training. Dalhousie Law School suffered a great loss when Dr. D. A. MacRae resigned the Deanship and joined the staff at Osgoode Hall. The duties of the office are being carried on by Professor J. E. Read, who has been appointed as Acting Dean. Professor Read is giving Dr. MacRae's course in Constitu tional Law. Angus L. Macdonald, B.A., LL.B., who for several years has been Assistant Deputy Attorney-General for the Province of Nova Scotia, has now joined the staff of the Law School and is giving the courses in Torts, Criminal Law, Corporations and Conflict of laws. George H. Fielding, Esq., K.C., who for many years was Stipendiary Magistrate for the City of Halifax, is giving the course in Evidence to the third year students. M. B. Archibald, LL.B., is giving the course in Practical Statutes and Interpretation of Statutes to the third year students.

The course in the History of English Law which was formerly given by Dr. MacRae to the first year students is now being given by J. Willis Godfrey, Esq., B.A., B.C.L. (Oxon.), Rhodes Scholar. Mr. Godfrey studied legal history under Dr. MacRae when he was a student at Dalhousie, and also under Dr. Holdsworth and Sir Paul Vinogradoff.

The statutes available at the time of preparing this report are as follows:

Canada, to 1923; Alberta, to 1924; British Columbia, to 1923; Manitoba, to 1923; New Brunswick, to 1923; Nova Scotia, to 1923; Ontario, to 1924; Prince Edward Island, to 1923; Quebec, to 1924, and Saskatchewan, to 1924.

In dealing with the subject referred to your committee it will be convenient to begin with Federal legislation.

Appeals in Criminal Cases.

During the session of 1923 an important change was made in the Criminal Code by an amendment providing for appeals from convictions on indictment. Previously to this enactment there was a limited right of appeal by way of case stated. Either the prosecutor or the accused might apply to the court to reserve any question of law for the opinion of the Court of Appeal, and if the application were granted a case was stated accordingly, under which only questions of law could be raised. The trial judge might, however, refuse the application.

The new sections permit the person convicted to appeal on any ground which involves a question of law alone; or, with leave of the Court of Appeal or upon the certificate of the trial court, on any ground involving a question of fact alone or a question of mixed law and fact; and, with leave of the Court of Appeal, on any other ground which appears to the court to be sufficient. Further, either the Crown or the person convicted may, with leave, appeal against the sentence passed by the trial court unless that sentence is one fixed by law. The prerogative of mercy is not interfered with, and the Minister of Jus

1

Report of the Committee to the Canadian Bar Association.

5-C.B.R.-VOL. III.

tice may advise that the sentence be remitted or commuted or he may direct a new trial.

Under the former state of the law, the Court of Appeal might order a new trial, or the Minister of Justice might order a new trial on an application for the mercy of the Crown, or the Minister of Justice might recommend a pardon, but there was no means by which a conviction could be judicially set aside. An examination of the evidence in the Department of Justice by officials, without judicial responsibility and without the means of calling witnesses or hearing fresh evidence and the reasons for whose conclusions were not made public, was open to many obvious objections and unsatisfactory in result.

The new provisions are largely a transcript of The Imperial Act of 1907, 7 Edw. VII., c. 23, passed after and largely in consequence of the case of Adolf Beck, who had been imprisoned for many years for a crime which he had not committed, a case which was made the subject of parliamentary inquiry. But, while the Imperial Act established a Court of Criminal Appeal, the administration of the new sections of the Criminal Code is left with the Courts of Appeal of the various provinces.

The motives which prompted legislation in England were, no doubt, those expressed by Lord Denman in 1848 before a select committee of the House of Lords, namely, "the extreme horror which is justly felt at the bare possibility of a person suffering either death or any other punishment who may not be guilty." Similar reasons operated to some extent to bring about the change in our code, but there was also dissatisfaction with the occasional pardoning of persons found guilty after trial where the reasons for clemency were not apparent. Applications to the Minister of Justice should now become comparatively rare. In any event, the new sections will remove from Canada the bad preeminence of being the only country in the civilised world in which there was no appeal, in the usual sense, in criminal cases.

Anti-Combine Legislation.

An important measure passed in the session of 1923 is The Combines Investigation Act, which is intended to prevent certain practices considered detrimental to the public interest, such as mergers, trusts and monopolies, and contracts for limiting production, fixing prices, raising prices, preventing or lessening competition in production or "otherwise restraining or injuring trade or commerce." Provision is made for the appointment of registrars and commissioners, with extensive powers, who may investigate and report upon any case of an

alleged combine. The Minister is given the right to publish the report of a commissioner if he thinks fit, and provisions are also made for reducing or abolishing customs duties upon any articles supposed to be the subject of an illegal combine and for revocation of a patent which is being used for objects comprised in that term.

Section 498 of the Criminal Code enumerates a list of offences almost identical with those set forth in section 2 of the Act now under consideration, but the section proved ineffective in the absence of any means of discovering and proving the existence of the prohibited combinations. Accordingly, a statute was passed in 1910 for the investigation of combines, monopolies, trusts and mergers, only to give way in 1919 to The Board of Commerce Act and The Combines and Fair Prices Act of that year. These Acts came before the Privy Council and was declared ultra vires, (1922) 1 A.C., p. 191, as dealing with property and civil rights and thus trenching upon provincial jurisdiction. It was to fill the gap thus created that the statute of 1923 was passed. The substantial purpose of this measure is to make effective the provisions of section 498 of the Criminal Code by bringing to light through inquiry the practices there condemned; but section 26 creates a new offence, namely, knowingly assisting in the formation or operation of a combine in the comprehensive sense given to that word by the definition. The new Act has been severely criticised as involving an unwarranted interference with business, but so far as is known its constitutional validity has not been questioned. The Department of Justice, at all events, is satisfied that the pitfalls have been avoided in which earlier legislation was wrecked.

A Lien for Dominion Income Tax.

By section 10 of chapter 52 of the statutes of 1923 a new section was added to The Income War Tax Act, 1917, which, it is not too much to say, created consternation among those engaged in the investment business and met with the general condemnation of the legal profession. The amendment in question is in these terms:

"25. All taxes, interest and penalties payable under this Act shall constitute a lien upon the assets of the taxpayer both real and personal. This lien shall be deemed to attach or to have attached on the first day of May, immediately succeeding the taxation year in respect of which the tax is payable or to which the interest and penalty relate, and notwithstanding lack of notice, registration or publication, shall have priority over any mortgage, charge, lien or hypothec or any assignment or conveyance, including any security taken under section eighty-eight of The Bank Act, executed or created after the said first